User:Benwing2/small-caps-2025-01-01-dump

Beginning at Tue Jan 7 04:39:19 2025

Page 1841 give: Found match for regex: #* {{RQ:KJV|1=Deuteronomy|2=12|3=1|text=These ''are'' the statutes and judgments, which ye shall observe to do in the land, which the Lᴏʀᴅ God of thy fathers '''giveth''' thee to possess it, all the days that ye live upon the earth.}}
Page 3869 do: Found match for regex: {{coin|en|Giovanni Battista Doni|in=1635|nat=Italian|occ=musicologist}} as an easier-to-sing open-syllable revision to the solmization {{m|en|ut}} of Guido of Arezzo, from the first syllable of {{der|en|la|Dominus|t=The Lᴏʀᴅ}} (speculated by some to be an ulterior abbreviation of Giovanni Battista Doni) on the pattern of other Latinate solfège with the stated justification that God is the tonic and root of the world.
Page 7701 Wiktionary:Wiktionarians: Found match for regex: * Aɴɢʀ (originally U.S.)
Page 41920 squab: Found match for regex: |passage=So on his Nɪɢʜᴛᴍᴀʀᴇ through the evening fog / Flits the squab fiend o'er fen, and lake, and bog {{...}}.}}
Page 48633 ovate: Found match for regex: #* {{quote-book|en|year=1852|author=William Macgillivray|title=A history of British birds, indigenous and migratory|page=573|text=The Geese, Aɴsᴇʀɪɴᴁ, have the body '''ovate''', the head small, the bill stout and somewhat conical; the legs rather long; the wings of great length and breadth.}}
Page 127699 עזר: Found match for regex: * The verb {{m|he|עָזַר|t=to help|tr=ʿåzár}} is always followed by the preposition {{m|he|ל־|t=to|tr=l-}} and never followed by the definite direct object marker preposition {{m|he|]|t='''ᴏʙᴊ'''|tr=eth ha-}}.
Page 141028 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/July: Found match for regex: ::::: I once knew an Icelander who considered his father's name too ordinary, so he changed his "last name" to Mother's-name-son instead of Father's-name-son. Do transsexual Icelanders change their -son to -dóttir and vice versa? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:28, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 141028 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/July: Found match for regex: ::::::: I like the term transfolk. I was about to say we need to adopt that in English, but I see it's already a blue link. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:35, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 141028 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/July: Found match for regex: :: I think so too. I've certainly seen {{m|de|altindisch||Old Indian}} as a now old-fashioned German name for Sanskrit, and I suspect these etymologies were taken from older dictionaries that use "Old Indo-Aryan" as a name for Sanskrit. However, anything unattested can be said to be Proto-Indo-Aryan (language code inc-pro). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:38, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 141028 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/July: Found match for regex: :::: If it is, it's not a widely used one; I'm American and I'd never heard of a hall tree before this thread either. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:32, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 141028 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/July: Found match for regex: :::::::::: German has {{m|de|entsprechend||corresponding to}} and {{m|de|während||during}}, but I don't understand what sort of answer you're looking for with "how they are used". They're used like prepositions; entsprechend takes the dative (as indeed the verb {{m|de|entsprechen||correspond to}} does) and während takes the genitive (and is probably not synchronically felt to be derived from the verb {{m|de|währen||persist}} anymore). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:13, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 141028 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/July: Found match for regex: : I consider adverbs to be "pro-prepositions": just as a pronoun can stand in for a noun phrase and a pro-verb can stand in for a verb phrase, an adverb can stand in for a prepositional phrase. But I wouldn't say prepositional phrases are all adverbs any more than I would say noun phrases are all pronouns. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:33, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 355131 kasra: Found match for regex: #: Kasrahs are mainly encoded U+0650 ᴀʀᴀʙɪᴄ ᴋᴀꜱʀᴀ.
Page 369381 manufactory: Found match for regex: #*: Sᴍᴀʟᴛ from the King of France's porcelain manufactory at Sevres fused into a mass, and resigned its colour.
Page 422656 Wiktionary:Requests for deletion/Others: Found match for regex: :Yes, but the category shouldn't be deleted, as the lang-specific catgs should be kept here. Perhaps rename Cat:Reference templates by language if necessary. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:54, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 422656 Wiktionary:Requests for deletion/Others: Found match for regex: :Never mind, I didn't realize that's already a separate catg. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:55, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 422656 Wiktionary:Requests for deletion/Others: Found match for regex: :: When it's deleted, where shall we put Category:Quotation reference templates? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:50, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 581613 fatha: Found match for regex: #: Fatḥahs are mainly encoded U+064E ᴀʀᴀʙɪᴄ ꜰᴀᴛʜᴀ.
Page 731947 relume: Found match for regex: #*: Aʀᴀᴛᴜs, who a while relum'd the Soul / Of fondly lingering Liberty in Gʀᴇᴇᴄᴇ {{...}}.
Page 815732 revenge is a dish best served cold: Found match for regex: |author=Eugène Sue |authorlink=Eugène Sue |chapter=XXXV, Revelations |chapterurl=https://archive.org/details/orphan00suegoog/page/n324/ |translator=D. G. Osborne |title=The Orphan, or Memoirs of Matilda |url=https://archive.org/details/orphan00suegoog |location=London |publisher=T. C. Newby |year=1864 |volume=1 |others=illustrated by Robert Cruikshank |page=303 |pageurl=https://archive.org/details/orphan00suegoog/page/n328/}}</ref> The passage suggests that it was an existing expression. Similar proverbs are known as early as the 17th century with “Reuenge is not good in cold bloud” in a translation of Don Quixote.
Page 856077 trucidation: Found match for regex: #* {{quote-book|en|year=1938|author=James Bridie|title=Babes in the Woods|passage=ɢɪʟʟᴇᴛ: They hate me as much as I hate them. And that's saying a good deal. Girdlestone may deal with Walker's … '''trucidations''' of a dead and revered language. I shall begin to live!}}
Page 1055872 sukun: Found match for regex: #: Sukūns are mainly encoded U+0652 ᴀʀᴀʙɪᴄ ꜱᴜᴋᴜɴ.
Page 1055903 damma: Found match for regex: #: Ḍammahs are mainly encoded U+064F ᴀʀᴀʙɪᴄ ᴅᴀᴍᴍᴀ.
Page 1055911 shadda: Found match for regex: #: Shaddahs are mainly encoded U+0651 ᴀʀᴀʙɪᴄ ꜱʜᴀᴅᴅᴀ.
Page 1328295 ענה: Found match for regex: * The verb {{m|he|עָנָה|tr=aná}} is always followed by the preposition {{m|he|ל־|t=to|tr=l-}} and never followed by either the definite direct object marker preposition {{m|he|]|t='''ᴏʙᴊ'''|tr=et}} and a direct object or an indefinite direct object.
Page 1446594 Wiktionary:Requested entries (Burmese): Found match for regex: *: Might be မင်းဆင်, but I'm not sure. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:12, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 1769952 votress: Found match for regex: |passage=“Breathe soft, ye Gales!” the fair Cᴀʀʟɪɴᴀ cries, / “Bear on broad wings your Votress to the skies.”}}
Page 2641496 osmunda: Found match for regex: |passage=The fair Osᴍᴜɴᴅᴀ seeks the silent dell, / The ivy canopy, and dripping cell {{...}}.}}
Page 2893588 hebenon: Found match for regex: |passage=Grim Mᴀɴᴄɪɴᴇʟʟᴀ haunts the mossy bed,
Brews her black hebenon, and stealing near
Pours the curst venom in his tortured ear.}}
Page 2962226 teredo: Found match for regex: |passage=Meet fell Tᴇʀᴇᴅᴏ, as he mines the keel / With beaked head, and break his lips of steel {{...}}.}}
Page 2993837 Citations:4ᵗʰ: Found match for regex: *: Hm hm hm, maybe we should sneak “sigaldry” into the 4ᵗʰ Edition of Programming Perl: I’d do believe I’d rather like an ᴏᴇᴅ citation. :)
Page 3082674 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2012/February: Found match for regex: ::::Should we? We don't include {{term||the}}, {{term||THE}}, {{term||The}}, {{term||Tʜᴇ}}, and {{term||ᴛʜᴇ}}: the differences are in style not the word proper.—msh210℠ (talk) 23:56, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
Page 3203203 Wiktionary:Foreign Word of the Day/Focus weeks: Found match for regex: * {{fwotd-nom|hu|eleven|cite=0|pron=1}} - means "lively". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:17, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 3203203 Wiktionary:Foreign Word of the Day/Focus weeks: Found match for regex: *: We don't usually feature nonlemma forms, do we? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:46, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 3203203 Wiktionary:Foreign Word of the Day/Focus weeks: Found match for regex: * {{fwotd-nom|lv|maize|cite=0|pron=1}} — means "bread", not "maize", but in poetry can even refer to other grains like rye and wheat. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:45, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 3203203 Wiktionary:Foreign Word of the Day/Focus weeks: Found match for regex: *: We should probably go with {{fwotd-nom|got|𐌼𐌰𐌹𐍃|cite=1|pron=1}} instead since I'm pretty sure we don't include reconstructed terms in FWOTD. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:44, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3203203 Wiktionary:Foreign Word of the Day/Focus weeks: Found match for regex: *::: The Gothic entry is now created and has a cite and a pronunciation. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:07, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3203203 Wiktionary:Foreign Word of the Day/Focus weeks: Found match for regex: * What about a false friend of an English word with a nearly opposite meaning (a "false enemy"?)? {{fwotd-nom|dsb|spicy|cite=1|pron=1}} means "asleep, dormant". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:00, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3203203 Wiktionary:Foreign Word of the Day/Focus weeks: Found match for regex: * {{fwotd-nom|ga|fásach|cite=1|pron=1}} desert and luxuriant growth —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:12, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 3203203 Wiktionary:Foreign Word of the Day/Focus weeks: Found match for regex: * {{fwotd-nom|de|Platzangst|cite=1|pron=1}} Colloquially, claustrophobia; formally, agoraphobia. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:47, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 3203203 Wiktionary:Foreign Word of the Day/Focus weeks: Found match for regex: * {{fwotd-nom|ga|greannmhar|cite=1|pron=1}} Both "loving, amiable" and "rough, combative". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:59, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 3203203 Wiktionary:Foreign Word of the Day/Focus weeks: Found match for regex: ** I suspect we could get a week's worth of terms just from these two meanings alone: {{fwotd-nom|de|borgen|cite=0|pron=1}} has the same range as well. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:10, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 3203203 Wiktionary:Foreign Word of the Day/Focus weeks: Found match for regex: Maybe these should have some minimum word length? aa is a word in 19 languages, and ana in 23. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:57, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 3203203 Wiktionary:Foreign Word of the Day/Focus weeks: Found match for regex: Maybe these should have some minimum word length? A pair like German {{m|de|ab}} and Irish {{m|ga|ba}} would be pretty boring. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:55, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 3203203 Wiktionary:Foreign Word of the Day/Focus weeks: Found match for regex: * {{fwotd-nom|ga|Bablóinia|pron=1|cite=0}} and {{fwotd-nom|hu|Babilónia|pron=1|cite=0}} – both anagrams and synonyms! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:54, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 3203203 Wiktionary:Foreign Word of the Day/Focus weeks: Found match for regex: To recognize World Water Week, how about a week of words for "water" from around the world? For example, 28 August a native North American language, 29 August a native South American language, 30 August a European language, 31 August an African language, 1 September an Asian language, 2 September an Aboriginal Australian language, and 3 September an Oceanic language? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:45, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 3203203 Wiktionary:Foreign Word of the Day/Focus weeks: Found match for regex: ::I'll go through water#Translations and see if I can find seven that already meet our requirements. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:10, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 3203203 Wiktionary:Foreign Word of the Day/Focus weeks: Found match for regex: ::: If only. There are hardly any at all at water#Translations. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:57, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 3203203 Wiktionary:Foreign Word of the Day/Focus weeks: Found match for regex: Here are some possibilities: these all already have either a pronunciation section and at least one reference, or at least two references. To make sourcing easier as well as to keep the list interesting, I'm only listing LDLs. There are so many Malayo-Polynesian languages that I'm treating them separately as their own "continent". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:19, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 3203203 Wiktionary:Foreign Word of the Day/Focus weeks: Found match for regex: :These are all I have time for now; I'll add more in the days to come. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:19, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 3203203 Wiktionary:Foreign Word of the Day/Focus weeks: Found match for regex: ::: I haven't been keeping track, but some of them might also mean "river" or "rain", and some might mean specifically "fresh water". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:23, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 3203203 Wiktionary:Foreign Word of the Day/Focus weeks: Found match for regex: :::Yes, but it would need a CFI-compliant quotation since Dutch is a WDL. I wasn't originally thinking of slang words, but I guess there's no reason to exclude them. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:25, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 3203203 Wiktionary:Foreign Word of the Day/Focus weeks: Found match for regex: :::::{{ping|Lingo Bingo Dingo}}: thanks; could you add English translations of the quotes? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:19, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 3292466 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2013/September: Found match for regex: :: "No original research" does not apply to all Wikimedia projects. Wikiversity explicitly permits original research; Wikinews permits original reporting; Wikibooks, as a collection of user-written textbooks, says, "In principle, Wikibooks discourages original research. In practice, however, Wikibooks allows material based on repeatable information from personal experiences or from common knowledge when published literature might reasonably support it, or consensus might reasonably agree with its inclusion." Wikivoyage doesn't seem to have a policy on OR either way, but I can't imagine that it's free of users' personal experiences and relies entirely on previously published sources. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:16, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Page 3292466 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2013/September: Found match for regex: :::: It just isn't true that "anyone here who is aware of a hypothesis (a borrowing path, a reconstructed protoform, a diachronic sequence) has read about it somewhere". When I wrote the etymology sections of Lower Sorbian words like {{m|dsb|bom}}, {{m|dsb|šula}}, and {{m|dsb|šołta}}, stating them to be loanwords from (Low) German, I wasn't following anything I had read anywhere; I was using common sense and my expertise as someone who studied historical linguistics for many years. As it happens, these etymologies can be backed up by a 100-year-old dictionary whose content is available online (, , ), but I didn't know that when I wrote the sections, as I only found those links just now. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:58, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Page 3292466 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2013/September: Found match for regex: ** I agree that we need to be careful about OR in etymologies, and that scholarly research is far preferable to laymen's speculations, but completely eliminating all OR from Wiktionary would mean deleting all of our definitions that haven't been copied from PD dictionaries. We don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:25, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Page 3292466 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2013/September: Found match for regex: :::::::: Did you perhaps mean "deleting by means of WT:RFV" rather than "deleting WT:RFV"? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:05, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Page 3292466 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2013/September: Found match for regex: :: The closeness of wording between the written-out version at feng and {{temp|zh-tone}} makes me suspect that the template has usually been substed in. Is it really so bad to leave it the way it is? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:08, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Page 3292466 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2013/September: Found match for regex: Currently we use a phonetically based romanization of Burmese which, due to the vagaries of Burmese orthography, cannot be generated automatically but must be added manually. Since our Burmese entries already almost all include IPA transcription, however, a phonetically based romanization is not really necessary, and trying to keep up with all the Burmese redlinks around and bringing their transliteration into line with the guideline at Appendix:Burmese transliteration is like herding cats. Therefore, I propose we switch to a romanization based on Burmese orthography; for full details see Appendix talk:Burmese transliteration#Okell's Recommended Standard.
Is this a good idea? Is it feasible? If so, can someone else write the Lua code since I couldn't code my way out of warm Jell-O? And once it's done and tested and ready to implemented, can someone send a bot out to search and destroy all existing Burmese transliterations on non-Burmese pages so they don't overwrite the automated one? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:57, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
Page 3292466 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2013/September: Found match for regex: :: Okell's standard is just a suggestion; we could also use the MLCTS, which has some official recognition and which is in widespread use at Wikipedia. Syllable boundaries aren't too hard to detect in Burmese; {{lang|my| ့}}, {{lang|my| း}}, and {{lang|my| ္}} always mark the end of syllable, as do {{lang|my| ်}} and {{lang|my| ံ}} unless they're followed by a tone mark, as do vowel diacritics unless they're followed by (a consonant plus) one of the things that marks the end of a syllable. I don't see why vowel diacritics per se should present a difficulty. As for reaching consensus on which transliteration system to use, there are so few people around here who are interested in Burmese at all it shouldn't be too difficult. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:45, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3292467 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2013/October: Found match for regex: :: So do both Tocharian languages. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:06, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3292467 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2013/October: Found match for regex: :: At RFD and RFDO, no consensus defaults to keep. RFV isn't about consensus; either a term gets verified or it doesn't, and if it doesn't it gets deleted. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:19, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3292467 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2013/October: Found match for regex: :::::::::::::: I'm astonished that you've been here three years and have never noticed that before, and that you've never noticed that Vahag can do whatever she wants with complete impunity. Just last year it was decided that vandalizing mainspace was not a good enough reason to desysop her. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:06, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3292467 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2013/October: Found match for regex: :::::::::::::::: Sorry, Vahag, but you can't pick your own gender. You said so yourself. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:37, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3292468 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2013/November: Found match for regex: ::*I think the claim that "the difference between long and short alphas, iotas, and upsilons only exists for the briefest of moments" is a red herring. The difference between long and short vowels did eventually disappear in Greek, but it was present during the Golden Age of Classical Greek literature (the period most people who read Ancient Greek are interested in) and it was present in all older stages of Greek, making it of crucial importance in etymologies. Macrons should be used to mark vowel length in Ancient Greek in all circumstances where they're used for Latin, Old English, etc.—and not just in transliterations, but also in the Greek script directly. Thus for example the headword line of ἄγκυρα should read ἄγκῡρα (but isn't it actually ἄγκῡρᾱ, despite what the pronunciation section says?), and in the etymology section of ibid#Old Irish, the Ancient Greek cognate should be listed as {{term|πῑ́νω|lang=grc}}, and Lua should know to link "πῑ́νω" to πίνω and to transliterate it pīnō. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:03, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
Page 3292469 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2013/December: Found match for regex: ::: You don't literally mean redirect, do you? I trust you mean that inflected forms of inflected forms should link back to the base lemma. I agree with that. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:21, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
Page 3292477 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2013/September: Found match for regex: ::::::: erm. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:25, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Page 3292477 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2013/September: Found match for regex: :I thought there was a requirement that all bots (or at least all new bots) have names ending in "bot". Or is that only at WP and not here? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:38, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
Page 3292478 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2013/October: Found match for regex: :It's semiprotected; you won't be able to edit it until your account is not quite so brand-new. Maybe you can put the request on the talk page. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:37, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3292478 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2013/October: Found match for regex: ::: I don't think it's a good idea to transliterate ξ with "ks" rather than "x". "x" is unambiguous and familiar from Greek loanwords in English, and "ks" should be reserved for κσ (e.g. {{m|grc|ἔκστασις||displacement}}). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:25, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3292479 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2013/November: Found match for regex: :Shouldn't this template be renamed {{temp|RQ:grc-something}} for consistency with the other RQ templates? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:55, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Page 3292479 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2013/November: Found match for regex: :I believe that Old Italic, like Greek inscriptions of the same era, was actually freely variable between being left-to-right and right-to-left, and the letter orientation varied depending on the reading order, so if the letter 𐌄 looked like E then the text was left-to-right, and if it looked like Ǝ then the text was right-to-left. (Back in the days of slide projectors, this fact made it very difficult for archaeology professors to tell whether their slides were in backwards or not.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:47, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
Page 3292479 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2013/November: Found match for regex: ::: I think that's OK. The digital text is LTR with letters oriented for LTR writing, and the image is RTL with the letters oriented for RTL writing. I suspect if there were a literate native speaker of Umbrian around, he would say both versions are correct and the word can be written either way. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:08, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
Page 3292479 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2013/November: Found match for regex: ::: Whatever it was, it seems to have fixed itself. I was working on ] at the time and was afraid I had broken something on that page, but it's OK now. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:45, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
Page 3292479 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2013/November: Found match for regex: :: For Middle English, {{temp|Latinx}} is apparently needed to make sure all browsers render Ȝ and ȝ correctly. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:32, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Page 3552120 Wiktionary:Language treatment requests/Archives/pre-2015: Found match for regex: *Support. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:34, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Page 3552120 Wiktionary:Language treatment requests/Archives/pre-2015: Found match for regex: *** And anyway, of course it makes sense. There are Scottish Gaelic terms derived from Old Irish and Scots terms derived from Old English and Walloon terms derived from Old French and Yiddish terms derived from Old High German and so on and so forth. Just because two modern languages have different names A and B, that doesn't mean they can't both be derived from "Old A". "Galician-Portuguese" sounds more like a language family than the name of a medieval language. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:56, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3552120 Wiktionary:Language treatment requests/Archives/pre-2015: Found match for regex: *Support "roa-opt" as well. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 00:06, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3552120 Wiktionary:Language treatment requests/Archives/pre-2015: Found match for regex: :: I support the rename to Old Russian per the following Google Scholar Data, showing that "Old Russian" is more than 10 times as common as all other names I could think of, combined. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:20, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Page 3552120 Wiktionary:Language treatment requests/Archives/pre-2015: Found match for regex: * I also support renaming and trust Emi-Ireland to know what he's talking about. But changing a canonical name is a slightly tricky process that involves editing pages that only admins can edit, so, Emi-Ireland, you can't actually change it yourself. But you can already start adding Wauja words yourself, following the formatting of the three Wauja words we already have: a'napi, e'pi, and kamá. This will require a certain amount of tolerating the term "Waura" until we get around to changing the name, though. Don't forget to add Wauja words to the Translations section of English entries, too! (I checked, and "Waura" i.e. Wauja is already listed at water#Translations.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:54, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3619657 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2013-10/Obsolete forms heading: Found match for regex: # {{support}} per Dan, especially his response to Ruakh below. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:40, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Page 3629318 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2013-10/Removing SAMPA and X-SAMPA: Found match for regex: # Support —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:55, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679249 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/December: Found match for regex: :According to rada#English, the Polish word rada is a loanword from Middle Low German {{m|gml|rât}}, which in turn is cognate with the Dutch word. Assuming the word was borrowed into Polish before any other Slavic language, the Czech, Slovak, Ukrainian, and Belarusian words would then be borrowings from Polish. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:43, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679249 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/December: Found match for regex: :That seems very likely. If it had gone straight from Latin into Welsh during the days of the Roman Empire, it would have wound up looking more like *cynnefnio or something. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:05, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679252 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/January: Found match for regex: This category currently contains something like 75% of all Welsh noun entries. All of the ones I've spot checked, however, do not lack gender info at all; they have it labeled quite correctly using {{temp|cy-noun}}. Is there something wrong with {{temp|cy-noun}} making nouns get sorted into this category incorrectly? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:09, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679252 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/January: Found match for regex: ** Do we have the technical ability to have code "redirects"? That way, if someone does expect our code for Serbo-Croatian to be hbs and creates an entry whose headword line says {{temp|head|hbs|noun}}, it will be treated exactly the same as if it said {{temp|head|sh|noun}} until a bot comes along to clean it up. Back when we used templates for codes it would have been easy enough, but I don't know how easy it is in Lua. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:24, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679252 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/January: Found match for regex: :It works right for me. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:34, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679252 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/January: Found match for regex: ::. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:01, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679252 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/January: Found match for regex: :::: Why should other editors have to remember all the redirects? If you use the main name and Chuck uses one redirect and I use another redirect, what difference does that make to any of us? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:14, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679252 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/January: Found match for regex: :::: It would be more intuitive for it to be {{temp|contraction of|unter|dem|lang{{=}}de}} instead, I think. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:01, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679253 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/February: Found match for regex: ::: "English British forms" clearly refers to forms of the British language as spoken in England. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:11, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679253 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/February: Found match for regex: Thanks to Lua, we've come a long way in automatically sorting entries in categories. {{temp|head}} now knows, for example, that the German umlauts ä, ö, ü are to be sorted as a, o, u, and that ß is to be sorted as ss. {{temp|de-noun}}, on the other hand, does not know that. (Maybe the other German headword-line templates don't know it either, I haven't checked them.) Could someone knowledgable please fix that? Thanks. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:30, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679253 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/February: Found match for regex: :It's been happening to me too lately; purging the page fixes it, but it's a PITA to have to keep purging pages all the time. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:56, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679253 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/February: Found match for regex: :{{temp|sofixit}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:34, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679253 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/February: Found match for regex: :::: And you (Equinox) have edited templates before, including {{temp|welcome}}: {{diff|6939164}}, {{diff|7356882}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:31, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679253 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/February: Found match for regex: If you have tabbed languages turned on, then when you look at one language's entry, all and only that language's categories are supposed to be shown at the bottom. However, at ], it appears that the "Ireland" inside the context template of sense 6 is somehow triggering Irish language instead, because Category:Irish English—and all other English-language categories that are defined from the point until the end of the English entry—are appearing under the "Irish" tab instead. Any ideas how to fix that? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:31, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679253 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/February: Found match for regex: ** I was sort of hoping for a fix that could be implemented with a simple edit to a template or something, rather than completely overturning the current organization of the wiki. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:39, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679253 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/February: Found match for regex: :::: Will any of this solve the problem this thread is about? Why does the software think that Irish English and everything after it is a subcategory of Category:Irish language instead of a subcategory of Category:English language, and how can we persuade it to stop thinking that? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:12, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679253 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/February: Found match for regex: :This specific problem could be solved by renaming the category in question Category:Hiberno-English (though that may refer to something slightly different to Irish English), but the more general problem remains. And renaming our categories to various awkward phrases that no one actually uses just to prevent them from breaking seems very much like getting the wrong end of the stick. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 23:45, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679253 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/February: Found match for regex: :::: I'm using Firefox and there's no resize handle on the text boxes here at Wiktionary, though there is at Wikisource. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:45, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679253 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/February: Found match for regex: ::::::::: I turned enhanced editing off, and the resize handle appeared for a moment, then disappeared again when Dot's Syntax Highlighter kicked in. I don't have that at Wikisource, which must be why I always have the handle there. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:36, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679254 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/March: Found match for regex: What module is responsible for the automatic transliteration of Old Church Slavonic (cu)? I wanted to tell it to transliterate Ѿ and ѿ as Otŭ and otŭ respectively, but there is no Module:cu-translit. This should probably be done for Old East Slavic (orv) as well. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:00, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679254 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/March: Found match for regex: :: If we really want to get fancy we can transliterate it oͭ. Does it have a conventional scholarly transliteration other than otŭ? Part of the point of automated transliterations is that they shouldn't be context-dependent. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:27, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679254 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/March: Found match for regex: ::::::: I've added it as Otŭ and otŭ for now; if we decide later to transcribe it differently, we can change it then. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 00:08, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679254 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/March: Found match for regex: :: I think there are several bots that do occasional runs; after a week or so the links would have been added by bot. But better yet, interwiki links should be handled automatically by Wikidata, as they are at Wikipedia. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:57, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679255 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/April: Found match for regex: ::Interestingly, you do land on the search page if there's more than page with diacritics. Thus while coln is a red link, cołn, Cöln, cōln, cōłn, and čoln are all blue, and if you type coln into the search box and hit return, it takes you to "create this page". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:59, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679255 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/April: Found match for regex: ::: I definitely don't want to disable accent squashing on near matches (or at all); it's the best way of finding terms to add to {{temp|also}} templates at the tops of pages. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:29, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679255 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/April: Found match for regex: Can anyone figure out what's making tabbed languages break at tej? Lower Sorbian and Polish are being treated as subheaders of Hungarian, but I can't figure out why. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:42, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679255 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/April: Found match for regex: :: Thanks. I wasn't the one who used a line-initial ";" for formatting, but I wasn't aware it isn't compatible with tabbed languages. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:18, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679255 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/April: Found match for regex: ::::Oh, okay. Here's another problem: {{temp|R:lv:LEV}} adds a category to the pages where it's transcluded, but it puts the category in the top (usually English) section instead of in the section where it's transcluded (usually Latvian). Anything we can do about that? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:14, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679255 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/April: Found match for regex: :::The page I found the problem on was actually ass, and using {{temp|catlangname}} isn't the problem because it was adding a category directly until {{diff|26321238|text=I changed it}} to use {{temp|catlangname}}, which I did in hopes that that would solve the problem. (It didn't.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:34, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679255 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/April: Found match for regex: :We can certainly create our own code for Middle Vietnamese, as we have for many other languages that don't have an ISO 639 code. I'd suggest mkh-mvi. Until Unicode can accommodate Middle Vietnamese, I suppose approximations like U+1DC4 are the way to go, but we can't use images as substitutes, since they obviously can't be accommodated in page names. Until the "b with flourish" is part of Unicode, I'd suggest using some existing Unicode character like ƀ as a substitute. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:51, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679255 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/April: Found match for regex: :::::: No, they're not. {{l|he|צ׳יק צ׳ק}} was edited by an anon while it was on the Main Page, and if I log out now, I could edit {{l|es|dictablanda}} (I just tried but didn't save any changes). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:35, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679255 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/April: Found match for regex: Do we have templates that will convert a language code into the corresponding name and vice versa? In other words, templates where entering {{temp|template1|de}} will return German and entering {{temp|template2|German}} will return de? If not, should we make some? Ideally they should work for protolanguages and language families as well, so {{temp|template1|gem}} will return Germanic and {{temp|template1|gem-pro}} will return Proto-Germanic. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:24, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679255 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/April: Found match for regex: :: Yeah, but that's way too complicated to remember, and it doesn't do families, and it only goes from code to name, not the other way round. Anyway, I take your answer to mean no, we don't have templates that do this, so the question is, do we want such templates? (I do, but maybe I'm the only one.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:59, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679255 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/April: Found match for regex: :::: Well, we human editors may need them, even if only for subst'ing. When I'm tidying up translation tables, I may have the code but not the canonical language name. The xte gadget can help me there, but that means scrolling all the way back up to the top of the page. I'd rather just type {{subst:langname|hix}} or whatever and have it added automatically. And if I'm creating a new category like Category:Kinyarwanda terms from Hixkaryana, even if I know those language codes, I will still then need to create Category:Kinyarwanda terms from Cariban languages, and the xte gadget won't tell me the code for Cariban languages. So if I could type {{derivcatboiler|rw|{{subst:langcode|Cariban}}}} it would make my life a lot easier. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:47, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679255 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/April: Found match for regex: :::::: I guess a module error since there is no code whose corresponding canonical name is Gaelic. Unless someone is clever enough to get the template to return a message like "The name you have input is ambiguous. Please select one of 'Goidelic languages', 'Irish', 'Manx' or 'Scottish Gaelic'." But there are lots of ambiguous names (Sami, Maya(n), etc.) for which such messages would have to be written, so leaving it as a module error would probably be easiest. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:43, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679255 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/April: Found match for regex: :: Should I not have done it that way? I wanted it in my user space until it was ready to go, and then moved it without leaving a redirect rather than copy and pasting it into a new page. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:36, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679255 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/April: Found match for regex: :::: How long do pages stay at Special:NewPages at all? After a while, pages aren't new anymore. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:23, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679255 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/April: Found match for regex: :::::: Then if it isn't corrected within 30 days of the namespace change, no one will ever know. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:59, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679256 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/May: Found match for regex: :::::: CodeCat is a she, and I found that purging kraal got the module errors to go away, so I recommend trying that first on any page where you're finding them. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:16, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679256 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/May: Found match for regex: ::::::::: {{ping|Lo Ximiendo}} I find the easiest way to purge a page is to click "Edit" and then change the "=edit" (or "=edit&section=nn") at the end of the URL to "=purge" and then hit Return. This is often the only way I can get a red link to turn blue after I've created a new page. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:10, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679256 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/May: Found match for regex: :Per WT:USEX#Official policy, example sentences should not contain wikilinks anyway, so it needs to be changed to {{ux|ru|лы́жи из '''доски́'''|skis made from boards|inline=1}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:54, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679256 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/May: Found match for regex: :::: The statement at WT:USEX#Official policy is a direct quote from WT:ELE#Example sentences, which is official policy. Nevertheless I agree it's silly to require all usage examples to be complete sentences; also, the prohibition on wikilinks is explained with the statement "the words should be easy enough to understand without additional lookup", which makes me suspect whoever wrote that was thinking only of English example sentences at the time, not example sentences in other languages. But, alas, WT:ELE can only be changed by vote, common sense and discussion be damned. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:40, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679256 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/May: Found match for regex: Over at Wikipedia, I asked whether it would be possible to make a Lua module that converted {{w|XSAMPA}} input into IPA output. CodeCat said, "A module could accept IPA and X-SAMPA input fairly easily", so now I'm asking her or anyone else who feels so inclined to make such a module here. Entering pronunciations would be much easier for everyone if we could just type, say, {{IPA|/dIs"tINgwIS/|lang=en}} and it would appear as "{{IPA|en|/dɪsˈtɪŋɡwɪʃ/}}". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:49, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679256 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/May: Found match for regex: :: Cool, thanks. But now that we don't use XSAMPA in entries anymore, we only need XSAMPA to IPA conversion. If it goes both ways, how will the template know to always output IPA? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:05, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679257 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/June: Found match for regex: :: For me too, which is what -sche said. The "real" L2 and L3 headers use a serif font; the "fake" ones use a sans-serif. I can't say I find this particularly tragic, though. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:43, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679257 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/June: Found match for regex: :::: Ew. 2006 called; they want their skin back. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:59, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679257 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/June: Found match for regex: ::He probably means the orange links. What generates maroon links? I've never seen those. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:37, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679257 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/June: Found match for regex: :I agree that Cyrillic should use the same font as the rest of Wiktionary if that font accommodates Cyrillic. While we're on the topic, the formatting imposed by {{temp|m}} now puts Cyrillic in italics, e.g. {{temp|m|ru{{!}}гит}} currently displays as {{m|ru|гит}}, looking like sum but with the s in mirror writing. That's not too bad as far as I'm concerned (I know other people object to italic Cyrillic), but Early Cyrillic (Cyrs) is also displaying in italics, e.g. {{temp|m|cu{{!}}гит}} currently displays as {{m|cu|гит}}, which looks like crap. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:35, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679257 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/June: Found match for regex: ::: That certainly applies to Old Church Slavonic, as the default fonts tend not to include characters like ꙑ, ꙗ, ѩ, and ѭ. As the English Wikipedia, our target audience is not native readers of Cyrillic, but learners of Cyrillic, who may have mastered the roman form of the letters but not the italic form; and even for those of use more familiar with the italic form, things like питати are confusing because it looks so much like numamu—and that's a word in a language that uses both scripts. You say that {{m|cu|гит}} looks fine to you; what does {{m|cu|ѩзꙑкъ}} look like? On my computer, the Early Cyrillic forms are not true italics but merely obliques and look very bad and unnatural (as bad and unnatural as oblique kanji and katakana look). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:55, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679257 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/June: Found match for regex: :::: Also Rusyn (rue). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:22, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679257 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/June: Found match for regex: :Incidentally, at {{diff|27198828}} you also put Greek into italics, but the Greek alphabet does not distinguish between roman and italic letter forms like Latin and Cyrillic do. Greek fonts tend to be somewhat oblique, but Greek doesn't have italics in the usual sense (apart from careless desktop publishing, an environment where you can find anything in italics, even East/Southeast/South Asian characters, Arabic, Hebrew, etc., none of which have any business being italicized). Please at least restore the italic inhibition for Cyrs, Grek, and polytonic, because italics are completely inappropriate for those scripts. And please consider restoring it for Cyrl as well, since the last time this was discussed 11 months ago, there was no consensus to display Cyrillic in italics. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:05, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679257 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/June: Found match for regex: :My font is similar to the one in that image. I don't think it's necessarily too small, but being oblique definitely makes it very hard to read. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:23, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679257 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/June: Found match for regex: :: Well, but now there are other entries using the straight apostrophe in its XSAMPA meaning of ʲ, so if we just turn it off completely, those entries will get broken. Fortunately, there is another way of represent ʲ in XSAMPA, namely _j, so if we remember to always use that, then we can leave ' undefined. Maybe it could cause a module error, warning the user to correct to either " (for stress) or _j (for palatalization). If this is the only problem, then I don't think it's a bad idea at all to convert XSAMPA to IPA in {{temp|IPA}}, especially considering the large number of entries that still use the "normal" g instead of the IPA ɡ. By allowing the existing {{temp|IPA}} template to convert XSAMPA into IPA, we no longer have to track down and fix all of those. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:52, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679257 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/June: Found match for regex: :::: Actually, there aren't any cases where the same character can be interpreted in different ways depending on whether it's treated as IPA or X-SAMPA. The straight apostrophe is not an IPA character; it has no meaning in IPA. The problem is that it looks enough like the IPA stress mark that some people have misused it that way. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:32, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679257 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/June: Found match for regex: :::::: I can't think of any, but I'm always surprised by people's creativity when it comes to misusing the IPA. The bigger problem is people using {{w|Kirshenbaum}} instead of X-SAMPA, because there are a lot of characters that have one meaning in Kirshenbaum and a different one in X-SAMPA, including notably ', which is the stress mark in Kirshenbaum but the palatalization marker in X-SAMPA. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:02, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679257 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/June: Found match for regex: ::Well, maybe, but it's an even worse idea not to. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:49, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679257 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/June: Found match for regex: :::: Because of all the problems people have inputting IPA. I think a lot of people just don't bother with pronunciation information because it's such a hassle to the input the characters. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:29, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679257 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/June: Found match for regex: :::::::: That's the advantage to having one template do both IPA and X-SAMPA: people can use either system depending on what they're more comfortable with. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:36, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679257 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/June: Found match for regex: :::::::::: But until the bot makes its rounds, if CodeCat spots an error in a transcription that's generated by {{temp|X-SAMPA}}, she has to learn X-SAMPA in order to correct it. If we have a single template that does both, she can make the correction directly in IPA. So if it says {{temp|IPA|/@"baut/}} by mistake, someone with no knowledge of X-SAMPA can correct that to {{temp|IPA|/@"baʊt/}} and it'll still come out right. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:24, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679257 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/June: Found match for regex: :What is ULS? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:24, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679257 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/June: Found match for regex: I'm willing to undo the changes to {{temp|IPA}} (and {{temp|rhymes}}) that made them invoke Module:IPA if someone is willing to either (1) run a bot on a regular basis that fixes invalid IPA characters like g (should be ɡ) and : (should be ː) and the affricate ligatures like ʦ, ʧ, ʤ (should be t͡s, t͡ʃ, d͡ʒ etc.), or (2) set up a maintenance category listing pages where invalid characters are used inside {{temp|IPAchar}} (which will include both {{temp|IPA}} and {{temp|rhymes}}). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:01, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679257 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/June: Found match for regex: :Okay, a Feedback comment brought it to my attention that my change to how {{temp|IPA}} works totally broke {{temp|IPA letters}} (whose existence I was previously unaware of) in a way that I don't know how to fix, so I've gone ahead and undone my changes. {{temp|IPA}} now works the way it used to up until about 8 days ago. I still hope someone can find a way to solve the issue of invalid IPA characters inside {{temp|IPAchar}}, though. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:26, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679257 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/June: Found match for regex: ::: Thanks! I have to say, though, there are several entries in Category:IPA pronunciations with invalid IPA characters in which I can't find any mistakes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:22, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679257 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/June: Found match for regex: ::::: Spaces need to be allowed. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:42, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679257 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/June: Found match for regex: :::: The IPA there isn't enclosed in either slashes or square brackets, so it's unclear whether it's a broad/phonemic or a narrow/phonetic transcription. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:28, 29 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679257 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/June: Found match for regex: : There's no such thing as a distinct Cyrillic apostrophe in Unicode. The entries have been moved from a version using the "typewriter" apostrophe ' to a version using the "curly" apostrophe ’, but both characters are equally Latin and equally Cyrillic. Since our custom here is to always use the "typewriter" apostrophe (e.g. don't; {{l|fr|m'}}), I think these Macedonian entries should be moved back to the version with ', but the redirects kept (just as don’t and m’ exist as redirects). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:44, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679257 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/June: Found match for regex: :Even if we undo support for X-SAMPA in the IPA template, we still shouldn't be putting ref tags inside the IPA template. It's just for displaying IPA. Put refs at the end, outside the template. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:31, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679257 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/June: Found match for regex: :It's a feature, and a relatively new one. The same is true for diacritics: if you enter a word with a diacritic in the search box, and if that word doesn't already exist as an entry, but another word with similar or no diacritics does exist as an entry, you'll be taken to the existing entry instead. You'll only be taken to the Search page if there are multiple entries with other diacritics, since in that case the search feature won't know which one you wanted. However, if you move your cursor down to the bottom of the suggested entries in the search box, where it says "containing..." and click there, you'll be taken to the Search page no matter what. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:05, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679259 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/July: Found match for regex: :Worse yet, the "add new rhyme" function, which is not supposed to add the rhyme to the entry page if it's already present, does add the rhyme to the entry page if the entry page uses {{temp|rhymes|lang{{=}}en}} as opposed to {{temp|rhymes}} alone. In other words, if I add tipsy to Rhymes:English:-ɪpsi using the "Add new rhyme" button, then if tipsy already has {{temp|rhymes|ɪpsi{{!}}lang{{=}}en}} on it, {{temp|rhymes|ɪpsi}} will be unnecessarily added to the page (though the page is left untouched if {{temp|rhymes|ɪpsi}} is already present). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:01, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679259 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/July: Found match for regex: Now Template:isValidPageName says it's deprecated and will soon be deleted and should be removed. Can I simply delete the two above lines of code from {{temp|ga-noun}} without breaking anything? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:12, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679259 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/July: Found match for regex: :That always happens. If you edit a "Noun" section in one language, and there's another "Noun" section for another language higher up the page, when you click "Save" you'll be taken to the highest "Noun" section on the page, even if it's not the one you just edited. It's a little annoying, but not really bad, since the correct section was edited. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:05, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679259 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/July: Found match for regex: Some or all of the Gothic noun inflection-table templates are causing the entries where they're transcluded to be categorized into Category:Terms with manual transliterations different from the automated ones/got. Not sure why, or how to fix it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:25, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679259 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/July: Found match for regex: :: Of course you can ignore it, but it makes the cleanup category useless, since you can no longer use it to find terms that genuinely need cleaning up. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:32, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679259 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/July: Found match for regex: :What would Freud say about "have to be death with"? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:20, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679259 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/July: Found match for regex: Why is Sanskrit no longer automatically transliterated by {{temp|l}}, {{temp|m}}, and {{temp|t}}? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:23, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679259 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/July: Found match for regex: :: But the module generated the IAST transcription; how is the user-written one more accurate? Anyway, I've been removing Sanskrit transliterations left, right, and center for several weeks now because they were being generated automatically, and now all those forms are left without any translit at all. Couldn't manual translits override the automatic translits, but automatic translits still appear when no manual is provided? That would at least be better than no translit at all when there's no manual one, which is what we have now. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:05, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679259 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/July: Found match for regex: ::::: Undoing my edits isn't an option at this point. I've been doing this for weeks if not months, usually in combination with removing several other redundant transliterations from translation tables at the same time. For Cyrillic, I've been dutifully moving the stress mark onto the Cyrillic before deleting the translit, but for Sanskrit the stress mark just gets lost. It isn't really all that crucial anyway; having it on the entry page itself is probably sufficient. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:29, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679259 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/July: Found match for regex: ::::: {{diff|27793345|text=This}} is an example of an edit I have no intention of undoing, especially since the Sanskrit entry didn't provide stress marks in the first place. But now those Sanskrit words are without any translit at all. That's why it would be better if manual translits overrode automatic ones, but if automatic translits appeared when no manual one was present. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:33, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679259 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/July: Found match for regex: :Okay, so the etymology sections of both {{m|grc|φέρω}} and {{m|la|ferō}} claim that the stress of {{m|sa|भरति}} is bhárati, so I added an acute accent to its transliteration on the entry page, but then I remembered from Sanskrit class 20 years ago that finite verbs in Sanskrit are always unstressed. So why is this bhárati and not bharati? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:34, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679259 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/July: Found match for regex: to Module:languages/data3/s under the entry for m = {, or is there more to it than that? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:38, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679259 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/July: Found match for regex: right? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:06, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679259 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/July: Found match for regex: :: Huh? There is no preview page option on modules. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:16, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679259 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/July: Found match for regex: I have no idea what any of that means. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:28, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679259 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/July: Found match for regex: :: Maybe there should be a comma after the sort_key's closing curly bracket and no comma after the entry_name's closing curly bracket? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:40, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679259 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/July: Found match for regex: :::Solved it! The entry_name bit has to come before the sort_key bit. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:45, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679259 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/July: Found match for regex: ::::: I guess putting the sort_key bit last had the same effect as moving the closing curly brace to the end. But here's another twist: I'd like links to remove the hyphen "-" as well, but not if it's the first or last character in the string. In other words, for prefixes and suffixes, {{temp|l|sga|ro-}} and {{temp|l|sga|-us}} should link as normal, but {{temp|l|sga|a-t·baill}} should link to atbaill. Is that doable? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:49, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679259 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/July: Found match for regex: ::::::: OK, I've done that and it works. I can't think of a case where I'd need two hyphens in a row or two hyphens separated by a single character in Old Irish anyway. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:36, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679259 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/July: Found match for regex: :::::::::: Well, I was using hyphens to show infixed pronouns, but then I remembered that nasalization of vowels also involves hyphens (i n-inis) and there the hyphen should be part of the page name, so I'm going to remove the hyphen-removing code from the module and just not have hyphens be part of the display of the infixed pronouns (e.g. {{temp|l|sga|at·baill}} instead of {{temp|l|sga|a-t·baill}}). It's easier to read that way anyway. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:10, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679259 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/July: Found match for regex: :::::::::::: The dieresis and dot characters don't get used in page names though, so they never get sorted anyway, do they? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:32, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679260 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/August: Found match for regex: Some recent edit to {{temp|ga-proper noun}}, presumably one of {{diff|27932531|26106024|text=these two}}, has had the effect that the word "valid" appears at the end of the headword line; cf. ]. I have no idea how to fix it, though; could someone else please look into it? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:04, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679260 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/August: Found match for regex: :I'd say the Beer Parlour is the more appropriate place to discuss the question of whether it's desirable, and the Grease Pit is the place to discuss how to do it if it is desirable. We do have a few entries like xłp̓x̣ʷłtłpłłs and xłp̓x̣ʷłtłpłłskʷc̓, and the latter survived an RFD, but I don't think we've ever discussed the possibility of inflection templates that would generate such forms. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:20, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679261 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/September: Found match for regex: ::::::::: I would hope that someone interested in writing a dictionary would understand the difference between "kindly ask" and "dictate". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:56, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679261 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/September: Found match for regex: This template does not categorize into Category:Swedish lemmas, but presumably it should. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:46, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679261 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/September: Found match for regex: :::: I would interpret ᾱ̆ as meaning "this form is attested with both long and short α", not "it is uncertain whether the α in this form is long or short". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:27, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679261 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/September: Found match for regex: * I've {{diff|29221912|text=edited the module}} so that breves are stripped off in grc. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:18, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679261 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/September: Found match for regex: :: I've deleted it now. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:49, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679261 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/September: Found match for regex: I have multiple Burmese-compatible fonts installed on my computer. I used to be able to see Burmese characters everywhere on Wiktionary without any problem. For the past several weeks, though, all I see is boxes in page titles and in the edit field, though the characters still appear correctly in the main body of entries. Any ideas why this is happening and how I can get the Burmese characters back everywhere I need them. Editing Burmese entries is very frustrating when all I see in the edit field is little boxes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:06, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679261 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/September: Found match for regex: :A picture being worth a thousand words, I've added a picture. Forgot to mention I'm using Firefox on Windows 7. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:12, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679261 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/September: Found match for regex: :Same results on IE, but characters do display correctly on Chrome. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:16, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679261 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/September: Found match for regex: ::: Maybe, but playing around with the default serif fonts in my Options doesn't help. Even changing the default serif font to a Burmese font didn't work. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:09, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679261 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/September: Found match for regex: ::: Also the link to Burmese Wiktionary under "In other languages" on the lefthand side has boxes rather than characters, and that's a part that normally has sans-serif. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:10, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679261 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/September: Found match for regex: ::: Also, even in the main text body characters appear correctly only if they're tagged as Burmese by being inside {{temp|l}}, {{temp|m}}, {{temp|lang}}, etc. Otherwise, it's boxes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:13, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679261 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/September: Found match for regex: ::::: Then I get boxes, not characters. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:53, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679261 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/September: Found match for regex: ::::::: Yep, that works. So how do I fix it? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:41, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679261 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/September: Found match for regex: ::::::::: At this point, I'm content to fix it only on my own computer. But going to my browser options and changing the setting for serif font and/or monospaced font to a Burmese-compatible font doesn't even fix the problem. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:54, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679261 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/September: Found match for regex: :For me, this started happening long after I switched to Windows 7. And the fonts do still display correctly on Chrome, but I usually use Firefox. I guess I'll just switch over to Chrome whenever I want to edit Burmese. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:24, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679261 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/September: Found match for regex: ::I don't know Oriya, but in that particular case it looks like diacritics might have been added in the wrong order. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:41, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679261 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/September: Found match for regex: :I think the first way would be shorter. I don't know of any language other than Old Irish that uses the raised dot at a morpheme break, and even for Old Irish we only use the raised dot as part of the head= display, not in entry titles. And even if Old Irish did use the raised dot for entry titles, and we had entries like do·beir instead of dobeir, I still wouldn't want the headword line to display that as do·beir. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:15, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679261 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/September: Found match for regex: :That depends what you're trying to do. You can make text italic by putting it inside double apostrophes ''like this'' and you can make it bold by putting inside triple apostrophes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:09, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679262 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/October: Found match for regex: : My ABP button has the option "Disable on this page only", which worked for me on ]. Apparently Adblock Plus isn't aware of the use-mention distinction. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:41, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679262 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/October: Found match for regex: :*** Re "Pronunciations are trivia, not serious lexicographical content". Why do you spend time editing a dictionary when you so clearly have no interest in lexicography? Pronunciations are most definitely NOT trivia; they are the most essential part of any lexical entry, because written language is subordinate to and derived from spoken language. In fact, written language is not actually language any more than a painting of a pipe is a pipe. Written language is nothing but a convenient way of representing language, which (with the exception of sign languages) is spoken. As long as the pronunciation is known (which of course it isn't for many extinct languages), it is an indispensable part of the lexical entry—for nonlemmas as well as lemmas. Nevertheless, having ===Pronunciation=== sections with nothing in them is pointless, and having a bot flood them all with {{temp|rfp}}'s would render the {{temp|rfp}} tag and the corresponding categories meaningless. Etymologies, on the other hand, are a different kettle of fish. They're interesting and should be included whenever they're known, but there should be no implication that they're a required component of an entry. Even in well studied languages like English, etymologies are often unknown, and for less well studied languages the research has often not been done. Editors should never be made to think, even indirectly, that they have to include etymological information, because that would encourage them to engage in their own etymological speculations. Our etymologies should always be backed up (or at least backable-up in principle) by scholarly research; when that is lacking or when the user doesn't have access to it, it's better to omit etymological information altogether. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:47, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679262 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/October: Found match for regex: :::: It suddenly happened to me too. I think that option went from being off as default to being on as default. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:07, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679263 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/November: Found match for regex: :: I get this message all the time, and I'm not a newbie. I get it because I add <ref> tags in one section (usually the Etymology section), save that section, and then go to the bottom of the language to add a new ===References=== section with the <references/> tag in it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:51, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679264 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/December: Found match for regex: :: One way to ping yourself is to open a second browser in which you're not logged on, then ping your own name as an anon. {{diff|30627062|text=I just did that}}, and it worked: I got a notification. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:30, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679264 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/December: Found match for regex: :::: {{ping|Panda10}}. Yes, I did. Did you? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:46, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679264 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/December: Found match for regex: :::::: The pinging function is often unreliable. It's often happened to me that I've failed to get notifications despite being pinged, without any discernible reason. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:56, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679264 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/December: Found match for regex: :Presumably it's actually Module:etymology language/data that needs to be changed, but I'm not sure how. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:52, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679264 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/December: Found match for regex: :::Yeah, practically all languages automatically have the word "language" added to the end in {{temp|etyl}}, but Anglo-Norman doesn't, and I don't know why. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:06, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679264 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/December: Found match for regex: :::::: I think Canada's the only one that really has its own spelling conventions; every other English-speaking country uses either US spellings or UK spellings consistently. And even Canada doesn't have any spellings that are uniquely its own; each word is spelled either the British way or the American way. For example, Brits might buy rubber casings for car wheels at a tyre centre, and Americans at a tire center, but Canadians would go to a tire centre. And Brits might have a paralysed neighbour and Americans a paralyzed neighbor, but Canadians would have a paralyzed neighbour. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:51, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679264 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/December: Found match for regex: :::::::: I gave two examples of Canadian spelling deviating from Oxford spelling above: tire and paralyze (also curb and analyze). As for {{m|en|advertise}}, it isn't etymologically advert + -ize, so we don't spell it that way (likewise {{m|en|televise}}, {{m|en|compromise}}, {{m|en|surprise}}, etc., are spelled with s). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:14, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679264 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/December: Found match for regex: ::::::::::: I think I'm right about tire too. Oxford dictionaries call that an American spelling in the sense of a rubber or plastic covering of a motor vehicle's wheel and accept only tyre in that sense. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:24, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679264 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/December: Found match for regex: ::::::::::::: The OED is pretty much the last place I'd go to find out what the Oxford spelling of a word is, because it's so comprehensive and so unabashedly descriptive that it lists everything ever attested. If you use an Oxford dictionary for everyday writing, you should use ODE or COED or http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/ and they all agree that tire in this sense is an American (or rather, North American) spelling. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:06, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679264 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/December: Found match for regex: ::::::::::::::: To me, Oxford spelling is the spelling preferred by Oxford University Press in all its publications, for example a journal article published by OUP called “Environmental impact assessment of a scrap tyre artificial reef” or this article mentioning “five trucks equipped with four different types of tyres”. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:32, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679264 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/December: Found match for regex: ::::::::::::::::: None of the words in that list can have z in American English either, at least not in proofread/copyedited American English. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:48, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679264 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/December: Found match for regex: ::::::::::::::::::: Prise in the sense of "open" has become {{m|en|pry}} in American English anyway. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:52, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679264 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/December: Found match for regex: ::: I think a warning is sufficient; the edit shouldn't be prevented. After all, the editor might be making other good edits at the same time; also, for all we know, somewhere out there we do have a Latin section erroneously labeled "Ladin". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:18, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679264 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2014/December: Found match for regex: :::: But if the point is to see alphabetically adjacent entries, we shouldn't start the page with the word the reader is coming from, but some number (20?) of entries before it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:44, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: :: There is barely a difference between the RP vowel in trap and the American vowel in trap among Americans who don't use the so-called "tense æ". Using /æ/ in our transcriptions of RP is as accurate as using /a/ and allows us to keep down the proliferation of transliterations: it's much preferable to write "{{IPA|en|/tɹæp/|a=GenAm,RP}}" than "{{IPA|en|/tɹæp/|a=GenAm}} / {{IPA|en|/tɹap/|a=RP}}", not only because the former is shorter but also because the latter implies a greater phonetic distinction than actually exists. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:14, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: :: P.S. We should never use {{temp|a|UK}} since there is no single monolithic UK accent. For that matter we should never use {{temp|a|US}} either. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:17, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: :::: Well, man is a different case because æ-tensing in AmEng is much more common before nasals than it is before voiceless stops like /p/. But even there it isn't as widespread in AmEng as many Brits think it is. It's what they notice because it's so different from what they say themselves, but what they don't notice is the large number of Americans who don't have æ-tensing even before nasals. (And in my experience when Brits put on an American accent and say a word like man, they don't shift to /æ/, they shift to /eə/.) I'm not advocating a pandialectal transcription here like the one used at Wikipedia, but I don't see any point in using different symbols for sounds that are practically indistinguishable. The RP pronunciation of trap is much closer in quality (not only duration) to the GenAm pronunciation of trap than it is to, say, the Texan pronunciation of tripe (/tɹaːp/). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:37, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: :::::::: I'd say the RP trap vowel is closer to the Nebraska trap vowel than it is to the Yorkshire trap vowel. If we're going to transcribe the Nebraska vowel as /æ/ and the Yorkshire vowel as /a/ it only makes sense to transcribe the RP vowel as /æ/. (Incidentally, in California /æ/ before nonnasal consonants is itself being lowered toward /a/, so the Los Angeles trap vowel may sound like the Yorkshire one.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:55, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: ::::::::::: The pronunciation dictionaries of Gimson and Wells use /æ/ for RP, as does the Collins dictionary. I don't think there is any "general consensus that the RP TRAP-sound is now best represented as {{IPAchar|/a/}}". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:44, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: ::::::::::: To my American ears, the sound file illustrating "conservative RP /æ/" in jam at the BL link Widsith gave above sounds more like my /ɛ/, while the sound file illustrating "/a/" in platform sounds basically identical to my /æ/. So maybe we should switch to /a/ for GenAm too? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:49, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: ::::::::::::: Yet in spite of his acknowledgment that the rendering of TRAP is closer to /a/ than it used to be, he still argues for using /æ/. And it's not as if we're required to follow what other dictionaries do. After all, we render the English r-sound as /ɹ/, which no other English dictionary on the planet does. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:20, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: :::::: We only choose different phoneme symbols for each dialect if there's a good reason to, and in this case I just don't think there is a good reason. I rather suspect that Upton et al. use /a/ for the TRAP vowel as much for typographical convenience as for phonetic precision. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:29, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: **Maybe I care so much because for the last 20 years or so I've been transcribing RP the way John Wells does and it would rub me the wrong way to have to switch to some different method, especially when (as I see it) there is absolutely zero benefit in doing so. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:01, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: ******* That was me, not WikiTiki, who said that about 20 years. But I think you're overstating how widespread the recent shift to the /a/-symbol has been: some authorities have switched, but there is by no means a broad consensus that such a shift is appropriate. And when I listen to the sound files you linked to above, while it's clear that the TRAP vowel has become more open, it's less clear that it's really in the conservative variety and in the new variety. The conservative pronunciation of jam in the sound file sounds like and the contemporary pronunciation of platform sounds like . But because people were used to using the æ-symbol for that sound, they're left with no choice but the a-symbol to stand for . I'd say the language has shifted in such a way as to catch up with the symbols used for it (the sound traditionally transcribed /æ/ didn't use to be pronounced , but now it is). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:39, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: :But sometimes gender is the most convenient way of distinguishing homographs. German Bands, for example, is the genitive singular of the masculine and neuter nouns Band but the plural (all cases) of the feminine noun; Kiefern is the dative plural of the masculine noun Kiefer but the plural (all cases) of the feminine noun. Currently our entries for Bands and Kiefern don't show that; but IMO they'd be easier to understand if they did. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:32, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: ::: Fair 'nuff. Can you edit the form-of templates so that the parentheses surrounding the glosses aren't in italics? That looks really ugly. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:53, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: :: But only by anons, not by established users. Surely semiprotection would be sufficient. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:23, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: * I support this in principle too. While we are under no obligation to include a term just because some other dictionary has it, when multiple reputable general monolingual dictionaries include a term, it's a strong hint we should probably be including it too. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:41, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: ** And how do you propose we figure out why other dictionaries include a term? Should we send an e-mail to the editors and ask? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:14, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: **** Discussion among ourselves will never allow us to read the minds of people not involved in the discussion. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:19, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: * Comment: I see that the lemming test has been acknowledged as a test of idiomaticity at WT:IDIOM for (though originally under a different name). In other words, the lemming principle already has the same status as WT:COALMINE. Maybe we just need a separate WT:LEMMING page to remind people of the fact. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:14, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: :::::: As far as I'm concerned we're not talking about poaching other dictionaries' entries. A large proportion of our RFDs concern the issue whether or not a certain phrase is SOP with many arguments both in favor of and against SOP-ness. Checking whether other dictionaries that also avoid SOP phrases include a certain phrase is a good idea because it allows us to see whether professional lexicographers consider the phrase SOP or not. (To some extent—the presence of an entry obviously means that dictionary's editors consider it inclusion-worthy, but the absence of an entry does not necessarily mean they consider it too SOP for inclusion, as there could be other reasons for its exclusion.) I think it would be irresponsible of us not to check what other dictionaries do and allow that to play a role in our decision-making process. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:12, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: :::::::::::: It isn't just you; all of the "oppose" votes here seem to be saying basically that we should pay no attention to other dictionaries and rely entirely upon ourselves and our own intuitions of what is and isn't SOP, which I think is very dangerous considering that most of us have no experience in lexicography or even linguistics. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:35, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: :::::::::::::: Ungoliant suggests "trying to figure out why the other dictionaries include the term" which means prioritizing our own speculations over professional lexicographers' expertise. Otherwise my impression of opposition on this basis relies not so much on arguments made in this thread as ones I've seen in RFD discussions in the past, where one person says "Dictionaries X, Y, and Z have this term" and someone else replies with "So what? Who cares what other dictionaries say?" or words to that effect. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:07, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: ** In that case, couldn't you use {{temp|attention}} to ask whether the different etymologies have the same pronunciation? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:06, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: : I don't know of any official guidelines on this. Many of them have a language code in them, but that's sometimes a bad idea because so many reference works cover more than one language. And some of them have a suboptimal language code, like {{temp|R:ine:Matasovic2009}}, which is focused on Proto-Celtic rather than Proto-Indo-European. I think you just have to trawl through Category:Reference templates and its subcats before creating a new one, just in case it already exists. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:52, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: :But they can be inserted in the edit box using "Special characters" in the toolbox or the IPA insertion box below the edit field. And users of Firefox can install the Transliterator add-on, allowing them to type in XSAMPA characters and have the corresponding IPA characters appear (that's what I do). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:47, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: :::: Really I don't see what you (kc_kennylau) expect to be done. It isn't just an issue on the Rhymes pages, and it isn't just an issue with IPA. We use dozens of scripts here that can't be typed with ordinary keyboards and our users work around it as best they can. There are lots of character pickers around the web, and virtual keyboards that can be downloaded, and converters like the one Darkdadaah mentioned, and so forth. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:03, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: *::: I do still use them, just not unsubsted in entries. If I encounter a language code somewhere (even outside Wiktionary) and want to know what language it is, I come here and look for the template. I know there are other ways to find out that information, but that's the quickest and easiest way to do it. Also, after I check a translation in a translation table I change {{ttbc|xyz}}: to {{subst:xyz}}: to quickly and easily insert the language name. If the templates are doing no harm, I see no reason not to keep them. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:50, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: :::::: Couldn't the templates be edited so they invoke the module? That way there would be only one list of 7700 languages, but {{subst:xyz}}: would still work. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:21, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: ::::::::: Right. All the more reason not to delete them. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:57, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: :: In the case of (Modern) English, it's specifically for loanwords that were borrowed during the Modern English era. If Modern English has inherited a word from Middle English that is a loanword from, say, Anglo-Norman French, then the Modern English entry would not use {{temp|borrowing}}, though the Middle English entry would. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:12, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: ** The bot policy page says to do a test run of 10–50 entries, not just two. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:54, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: **** You left a message on my talk page about this, but I know nothing about bots so I have nothing more to add. What do others who do know about bots think? There's actually supposed to be a vote, isn't there? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:12, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: :::FWIW Burmese has these too. The names of countries and fruits, for example, always have to form compounds with other nouns. I hadn't heard the term "attributive noun" before, but it's the perfect description of things like {{l|my|အိန္ဒိယ|tr=in-di-ya.}} and {{l|my|ဒူးရင်း|tr=du:rang:}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:00, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: ::::: I suppose, but at the moment that link goes to Appendix:English nouns, but the nouns under discussion here aren't English. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:14, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: ::::::: We could add "attributive noun" to Appendix:Glossary and then link there. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:49, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: :I don't know. It would be a little weird to have, say, Category:English spelling pronunciations since our entries are for words, not pronunciations. Category:English words that have spelling pronunciations is a bit better, but I have no idea whether other people will think it's necessary. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:28, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: :To clarify some terms: a spelling pronunciation is when the pronunciation is changed to reflect the spelling, such as pronouncing a /k/ sound in Arctic because there's a c in it (the pronunciation /ɑrtɪk/ is the older pronunciation). Things like "vittles" are pronunciation spellings. Pronouncing Beijing, adagio, and Taj Mahal with /ʒ/ (the "zh" sound of measure) instead of /dʒ/ (the "j" sound of juice) is hyperforeignism. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:36, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: ::::: English speakers are remarkably unable to pronounce /ð/ outside English. When I was taken Welsh as an undergraduate, one of my classmates was completely incapable of pronouncing /ð/ in Welsh words even though she had no difficulty pronouncing it in English words. She could say {{m|en|them}} like the native English speaker she was, but couldn't pronounce {{m|cy|ddim}} to save her life; it always came out dim. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:30, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: ::: Most if not all of the pages in Category:English idioms (and corresponding categories for other languages) use it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:29, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: :I'm starting to do some now. Maybe you can help by adding documentation for the all the German verb inflection-table templates and headword-line templates that don't yet have any, and by making sure they all create links using {{temp|l-self}} ({{temp|de-conj-strong-7}}, for example, doesn't create links). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:39, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: :::: A general overhaul of the German templates would be great. I think the idea behind parameter 8 is to allow {{temp|de-conj-strong}} to be used on rückumlautende verbs like {{m|de|kennen}} and {{m|de|rennen}}, which have vowel alterations like strong verbs even though they're actually weak. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:34, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: :::: {{temp|de-conj-strong}} is also used on other irregular weak verbs like {{m|de|bringen}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:55, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: KassadBot doesn't like the headers "Pronunciation 1" and "Pronunciation 2", but how else are we to distinguish German forms like or ? Dividing them by etymology doesn't make sense since both pronunciations are formed by adding the same prefix to the same root. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:58, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: ::: I take it for granted that Liliana keeps the Beer parlour on her watchlist. I don't take that for granted about everyone, but someone as active here as she is, yes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:33, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: :: So are all separable verbs to be treated as compounds of adverbs (or other POSes) with verbs rather than as having prefixes? That's how I've been treating the ones where the separable prefix isn't really a prefix at all, like freigeben. But I notice that durch has no ===Adverb=== header, just Preposition and Postposition. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:33, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: ::EP is {{user|EncycloPetey}}, right? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:33, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679265 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/January: Found match for regex: :: I got 71% ("a high level for a native speaker"), partly because I accidentally hit "yes" for ilvinably though I intended to hit "no", and partly because they consider headbound to be a nonword, but it's a technical term in linguistics, so I reported it. There were 13 real words I didn't know, though some I hesitated on (it took me 4.7 seconds to decide against electrophorus, though I would have decided in favor of electrophorous). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:45, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679266 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/February: Found match for regex: :I usually put them in the main namespace if there are only a few (say, up to three). Any more than that I put in the Citations: namespace. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:45, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679266 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/February: Found match for regex: ::: Well, not in cases where there are fewer than 3 quotes and the Citations: tab is still a red link. But there certainly are cases where a quote is found both in the main namespace and in the Citations: tab. Then there's the redundancy within the main namespace between putting the quotes directly under the sense and putting them in a ===Citations=== header. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:26, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679266 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/February: Found match for regex: :My display is different from the screenshot, too. On my display the little seagull-looking thing is over the middle letter. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:28, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679266 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/February: Found match for regex: :::: I'm using Firefox 26.0; isn't that the most recent version? I'm running it on Windows 7. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:55, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679266 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/February: Found match for regex: Is there any established preference for how to link to terms in inflection tables? At {{temp|de-decl-noun-n}}, {{user|kc_kennylau}} and I are going back and forth between using bare links (i.e. ]; his preference) and using {{temp|l-self}} (my preference). I don't want to keep edit-warring about it, especially if there isn't a consensus that my way is the preferred way. I thought there was, though. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:38, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679266 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/February: Found match for regex: ::: Me neither. Kenny, can you be more specific than "well, yeah" about your problem with {{l-self|de|{{PAGENAME}}}}? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:52, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679266 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/February: Found match for regex: ::::::::::: But they add bare links rather than German-specific links. That means (1) clicking on the link won't necessarily take you to the German section if the page has more than one language on it, (2) your browser doesn't know the word is in German (which can make a difference to blind people with screen readers, for example), and (3) those of us who have set our preferences to show links to nonexistent language sections in orange don't see orange links but rather blue links. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:56, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679266 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/February: Found match for regex: ::I'd be in favor of such a change. Or maybe {{temp|sense|adjective}}? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:30, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679266 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/February: Found match for regex: :German Wiktionary has de:Vorlage:geh., standing for gehoben, as well, which comes to the same thing. I sometimes use {{temp|context|formal}} for this, but I'm not 100% sure "formal" is really identical to "elevated style". Of course you can always use {{temp|context|elevated}}, but that doesn't categorize. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:29, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679266 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/February: Found match for regex: : Sounds good to me. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:17, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679266 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/February: Found match for regex: ::Also, italics are used for other things, like emphasis, so if a word is printed in italics, it isn't always clear whether the author italicized it for emphasis or because he considers it foreign. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:20, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679266 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/February: Found match for regex: :: I scored 700. The only languages I mixed up were either closely related (Czech/Serbian, Urdu/Panjabi) or share areal features (Tamil/Gujarati). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:29, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679266 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/February: Found match for regex: :::: I admit I only guessed Tigrinya correctly because I heard the speaker say something that sounded like Afrika and there were no other African languages suggested. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:41, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679266 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/February: Found match for regex: *I've been doing this manually for months whenever I see {{temp|a|UK}} and {{temp|a|US}}, so obviously I support getting a bot to do it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:00, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679266 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/February: Found match for regex: *: It's been suggested before that our pronunciation sections for English terms show in the first instance just RP and GenAm and that everything else gets put in a collapsible box. I think that's a good idea. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 01:05, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679266 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/February: Found match for regex: *::: But your method of avoiding the problem is to provide incorrect broad transcriptions. {{IPA|en|/ˈfʊtɚ/}} is not the correct broad transcription for most of England and all of Scotland, nor are {{IPA|en|/ˈhɒtˌdɒɡ/|/ˈhɒtˌdɔːɡ/}} the correct broad transcriptions for most of North America. Being wrong is simply too high a price to pay for being easy. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 01:29, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679267 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/March: Found match for regex: :I'd be against including them in the headword line, though of course they need to be listed somewhere in the lemma. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:46, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679267 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/March: Found match for regex: ::: I mean goeth should be linked to somewhere within go#English, but not the headword line. Under ===Conjugation=== would be a better place for it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:55, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679267 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/March: Found match for regex: *I too support merging Nynorsk and Bokmål back into Norwegian. They're certainly at least as similar to each other as the various standards of Serbo-Croato-Bosno-Montenegrin are, if not more so. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:07, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679267 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/March: Found match for regex: :: Ancient Greek: cf. {{l|el|άνθρωπος}} vs. {{l|grc|ἄνθρωπος}}. I thought we discussed it a while back and decided against it because it would be so complicated in some cases, e.g. having to transliterate ῇ as ẹ̄̂. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:27, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679268 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/April: Found match for regex: ::Does it give the lax pronunciation of the short vowels? Short e, i, o, u should be /ɛ, ɪ, ɔ, ʊ/. Does it treat vowel + nasal sequences as nasalized vowels before fricatives and at the end of a word? {{m|la|dēfensum}} should be /deːˈfẽːsʊ̃/. Does it geminate intervocalic nonsyllabic i? {{m|la|māior}} should be /ˈmajjɔr/ (or /ˈmaɪjɔr/) and {{m|la|cuius}} should be /ˈkʊjjʊs/ (or /ˈkʊɪjʊs/). Does it generate Ecclesiastical pronunciations or only Classical pronunciations? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 05:41, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679268 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/April: Found match for regex: ::::: The evidence from historical phonology is clear that they must have been; see my comments below dated 11:52, 13 April 2014. Since we indicate both length and quality differences like /iː/ vs. /ɪ/ in other languages such as English (RP) and German, there's no reason not to do so for Latin. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:42, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679268 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/April: Found match for regex: ::::I wasn't? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:15, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679268 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/April: Found match for regex: :::::: Oh, the new one! I forgot all about that. I mean I really forgot all about it. I recently added pronunciation info to ἰτέα using the old template instead of the new one; I'll go change it now and see what I think. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:56, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679268 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/April: Found match for regex: :::: Nasalized vowels before s and f are always long; our page says {{m|la|dēfensum}} but it should actually be {{m|la|dēfēnsum}}, and {{m|la|monstrum}} should actually say {{m|la|mōnstrum}} in the headword line. We don't seem to be very consistent about that. And I see that Appendix:Latin pronunciation doesn't transcribe the short vowels as lax, but w:Latin spelling and pronunciation#Vowels does (though inconsistently). A lot of people don't bother showing the distinction since traditional Latin grammar makes the length distinction primary, but the Vulgar Latin mergers of ĭ with ē and of ŭ with ō only make sense if ĭ and ŭ were /ɪ/ and /ʊ/ rather than /i/ and /u/, and the fact that ĕ and ŏ avoid that merger only makes sense if they were /ɛ/ and /ɔ/ rather than /e/ and /o/. We know the nasalized vowels were long because of the way they developed in Romance: {{m|la|īnsula}} and {{m|la|mēnsa}} develop exactly as if they were īsula and mēsa and not as if they were ĭsula and mĕsa. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:52, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679268 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/April: Found match for regex: ::::::: There isn't a time difference between Classical Latin and Vulgar Latin. When Caesar and Cicero were sitting around chatting with their friends over a glass of wine, they were speaking Vulgar Latin and were certainly pronouncing their short vowels lax and nasalizing their vowels before their fricatives. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:21, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679268 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/April: Found match for regex: ::::::::: Off the top of my head, I don't know, but I'm sure many of the sources listed in the Wikipedia article could tell you. Incidentally, the first source (solecisms) does apply to Classical-era Latin; for example, the graffiti found at Pompeii is full of spelling mistakes that tell us a lot about how the colloquial language was pronounced, and AD 79 isn't "Late Latin", though it's somewhat later than C & C, of course. I don't know offhand whether this particular pronunciation is one of the things those inscriptions tells us, though. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:50, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679268 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/April: Found match for regex: :::::::::I prefer a balance between broad and narrow transcriptions. To use an English example, a word like keeping ought IMO to be transcribed {{IPAchar|/ˈkiːpɪŋ/}}, neither the purely phonemic {{IPAchar|/ˈkiːpinɡ/}} nor the narrowly phonetic {{IPAchar|}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:49, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679268 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/April: Found match for regex: ::::::::::: Good question. For languages like English and German where there's a strong history of phonetic transcriptions in dictionaries, it's easy to follow the example of others (though this changes over time -- nowadays most dictionaries and phoneticians transcribe English heat~hit as /hiːt/~/hɪt/ and German biete~bitte as /biːtə/~/bɪtə/ but 75 years ago or so that would have been /hiːt/~/hit/ and /biːtə/~/bitə/, but the actual pronunciations haven't changed). Latin unfortunately doesn't have that history, so we have to make it up as we go along, discussing amongst ourselves what we think the most important aspects to transliterate are. Which is what we're doing now :) ! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:21, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679268 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/April: Found match for regex: ::::: It doesn't. {{m|la|abiungō}} is /ab.ˈjʊŋ.ɡoː/, while {{m|la|abiēs}} is /ˈa.bi.eːs/. You have to know the morphology of the words: {{m|la|abiungō}} has a prefix {{m|la|ab-}} and a root {{m|la|iungō}}, and {{m|la|abiēs}} is a simple stem. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:33, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679268 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/April: Found match for regex: ::::: By the way, please tell the module to use ɡ (U+0261) rather than g (U+0067) in IPA transcriptions. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:41, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679268 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/April: Found match for regex: ::::::: No, sorry. Abiēs doesn't have it, though, anyway, since it's third declension, not fifth. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:46, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679268 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/April: Found match for regex: : The way to force nonsyllabic i after a consonant is simply to use "j" in the parameter that we're already using to mark vowel length. So while {{temp|la-pronunc|abiungō}} produces the wrong result, {{temp|la-pronunc|abjungō}} produces the right one. However, I notice that it transcribes the n as /n/, but before g it should be /ŋ/. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:54, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679268 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/April: Found match for regex: : Another problem: {{temp|la-pronunc|suāvis}} and {{temp|la-pronunc|svāvis}} both render as {{la-IPA|suāvis}}, but it should be {{IPA|la|/ˈswaːwis/}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:42, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679268 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/April: Found match for regex: :::: Unfortunately, it's more complicated than that. You can't always tell whether a u/v is syllabic or not, and there are even minimal pairs like {{m|la|seruit||he joined}} vs. {{m|la|servit||he serves}} and {{m|la|voluit||he wanted}} vs. {{m|la|volvit||he rolls}}. That's probably why the u~v distinction is maintained in modern Latin writing, while the i~j distinction (which is much more predictable) is usually not made. As for /ŋ/, the module currently converts /n/ to /ŋ/ before /k/ but not before /kʷ/ and /ɡ/, which is silly. If {{m|la|fingō}} and {{m|la|tingō}} are transcribed with /n/, it's because someone was thinking of abstract phonemes rather than surface sounds. If that's the way we want to go, fine, but then to be consistent we also have to transcribe {{m|la|vincō}} with /n/. It makes no sense to use /ŋ/ in {{m|la|vincō}} but /n/ in {{m|la|fingō}} and {{m|la|relinquō}}. But I see that {{temp|la-pronunc|suāvis}} now gives {{la-IPA|suāvis}} while {{temp|la-pronunc|svāvis}} gives {{la-IPA|svāvis}}, so we can use the latter for words where u after s is /w/. This isn't predictable either (unless you know the morphology): while {{m|la|suāvis}}, {{m|la|suādeō}}, and {{m|la|suēscō}} all have /sw-/, the inflected forms of {{m|la|sūs}} all have /su-/, as does {{m|la|suus}} and its inflected forms. I don't even know whether {{m|la|suīle}}, {{m|la|suillus}}, and {{m|la|suīnus}} have /sw-/ or /su-/. One more thing: if we're going to use /i e o u/ for the short vowels rather than /ɪ ʊ ɛ ɔ/, then for consistency we should be using /y/ rather than /ʏ/ as well. It makes no sense to use /i e o u ʏ/. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:38, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679268 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/April: Found match for regex: :::::: I think so, yes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:54, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679268 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/April: Found match for regex: :I was also curious about Aɴɢʀ's thoughts on treating z as two consonants. --Brentypie (talk) 06:58, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679268 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/April: Found match for regex: :And Aɴɢʀ's thoughts on treating the new /sw/ sound as a single letter, as it looks like it was treated that way in scanning poetry. (see malesuada, (Verg. A. 6.276)). --Brentypie (talk) 07:12, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679268 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/April: Found match for regex: :: Mostly I think the above comments make it more important for us to focus on a phonemic transliteration if it's going to be automated, since so many phonetic details are unknown (such as the exact quality of the sonus medius and the distribution of vs. ). I do think we should transliterate z as /dz/. I do not think we should transliterate /sw/ as a single sound; stop + liquid sequences don't necessarily make position in poetry either, but that just means they were syllabified as onset clusters, not that they were single segments. Incidentally I've corrected the link in Brentypie's message of 06:58, 17 April. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:57, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679268 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/April: Found match for regex: :: I list reconstructed terms as cognates too, though I prefer to list an attested form from Old Church Slavonic instead of Proto-Slavic or Gothic or Old English instead of Proto-Germanic if those words are attested. But if they're not, then using the proto-form is a good shorthand for all the attested modern forms. I would be more inclined to do it for proto-languages whose reconstructions are pretty solid (like Slavic and Germanic) than for those whose reconstructions are themselves kind of shaky (like Celtic and Italic). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:17, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679268 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/April: Found match for regex: :::: There are Proto-Celtic reconstructions that are very solid, but the percentage of them that are very solid is much lower than in Proto-Slavic. Reconstructing PSl. is fairly easy not just because of the large number of attested languages but because of the relatively few and relatively transparent sound changes that have happened between the proto-language and the attested descendants. Hell, the number of changes you have to make to PSl. to get OCS can be counted on one hand. That means PSl. has an enormous, very securely reconstructed vocabulary – even for words with no known cognates outside Slavic. We could never do for Proto-Celtic what we've done at Appendix:List of Proto-Slavic nouns (and its subpages), Appendix:List of Proto-Slavic adjectives, Appendix:List of Proto-Slavic verbs, and so on; the lists would either be full of question marks or would have only a handful of entries each. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:11, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679268 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/April: Found match for regex: *:: That's not the only reason we don't redirect one of "labo(u)r" and "colo(u)r" to the other. We also don't do it because labor, labour, color, and colour are also words in other languages besides English. It may not happen very often that other languages have words that include numerals in them, but it can't be ruled out (jiu4 is also a word of Cantonese as well as a word of Mandarin; a1 is also a word of English. Like BD2412, I have no objection to reducing these to {{temp|alternative spelling of}}'s, but I can't get behind hard redirects, even in cases where Mandarin is the only language to use a particular spelling. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:00, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679268 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/April: Found match for regex: :: Showing a nonstandard pronunciation by means of a nonstandard spelling is not eye dialect. Eye dialect is things like sez for says or (in British English) wot for what, where the nonstandard spelling is to supposed to suggest a general nonstandardness in the speaker's language but in fact represents the standard pronunciation. If the pronunciation represented is nonstandard, then it's just a nonstandard spelling, but it's not eye dialect. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:35, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679268 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/April: Found match for regex: :What do you mean by "native tonality indicators"? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 23:48, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679268 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/April: Found match for regex: :You mean separate BP pages for each language? No one would be watchlisting the ones for the smaller, less well known languages, so the questions would never get answered. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:15, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679268 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/April: Found match for regex: ::::: Can we just make it a usage note instead of an attention-whoring cyan blue box? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:01, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679268 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/April: Found match for regex: :: I just encountered this myself at {{m|de|Mass}}. It seems to stand for Switzerland and Liechtenstein DE (= German). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:14, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679268 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/April: Found match for regex: :I agree. Currency and numismatics are not synonyms, and since Category:Currency and Category:Numismatics are separate, the context labels that sort things into them should appear separate too. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:38, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679268 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/April: Found match for regex: :Oh, I see we don't actually have a topic category Numismatics. Maybe that should be fixed too. At any rate the context label and category name should be the same. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:41, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679269 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/May: Found match for regex: :::: Even English compounds aren't organized by the words they contain; Category:English compound words has subcats for the type of compound, but not for the terms used in compounding. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:43, 11 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679269 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/May: Found match for regex: :It would be cool if we could trace down the actual earliest cites they mention. For example, they say that {{m|en|fangirl}} goes back to 1934; it would be great if we could actually find the 1934 cite and add it. (Also, "find a sandwich"? Just lying around in the kitchen or something? Ew. I'd make a fresh one.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:02, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679269 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/May: Found match for regex: * I oppose too. Add the terms as you get definitions for them, even if it's just a one-word gloss. To save typing, you could create a pseudo-template in your userspace and just have your bot create pages with something along the lines of {{subst:User:Ivan Štambuk/uk-entry|держпо́зик|а|f-in|gloss}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:29, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679271 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/June: Found match for regex: ::While I agree that "for who" is not an error, it is less formal and therefore less appropriate than "for whom" in the context of a dictionary definition. Although we are a descriptive and not prescriptive dictionary in our scope, our readers have a right to expect a certain degree of formality and adherence to the prescriptive rules of edited written English in our content. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:27, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679271 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/June: Found match for regex: :To turn Media Viewer off (which you will probably want to, since it's incredibly annoying), go to Special:Preferences, select the Appearance tab, scroll down to Files, and unclick "Enable Media Viewer". If you don't have an account, I don't think you can turn it off, so you're just out of luck. Despite all appearances to the contrary, it's a feature, not a bug. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:55, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679272 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/July: Found match for regex: * I have no strong opinion on the issue one way or the other. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:13, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679272 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/July: Found match for regex: :: "Roman" is a misnomer anyway. The script is called Latin; "roman" is one variety of the Latin script, the other being called "italic". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:44, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679272 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/July: Found match for regex: ::::: I think there's a bit of a slippery slope here. Your test page decomposes "unhelpful" into ] + ], but there's nothing stopping it from being decomposed into ] + ] + ]. Is ] then SOP too, as ] + ]? Is ] just ] + ]? Are full definitions only for monomorphemic words? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:32, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679272 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/July: Found match for regex: ::::::: I disagree that "nothing" is the only one that is SOP of its morphemes, but either way, I think it would create far too much work for us to decide on a case-by-case basis which polymorphemic words are SOP of their morphemes and which aren't. It's hard enough for us to decide that for multi-word expressions as it is. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:20, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679272 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/July: Found match for regex: ::: Okay, I've de-autopatrolled him. (I wonder if de-autopatrol is attestable...) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:29, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679273 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/August: Found match for regex: :There's also the problem of unattested lemma forms. We have an entry for {{m|grc|πρίαμαι}}, for example, but according to Liddell & Scott that particular form is not attested. That doesn't happen too often in Ancient Greek, which has an enormous corpus, but it happens very frequently in languages like Gothic and Old Irish. I've been creating entries for unattested lemmas in both of those languages, but I've been wondering if that's really such a good idea. Maybe we should put them in the Appendix namespace alongside other reconstructed forms. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:54, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679273 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/August: Found match for regex: :::: There are plenty of real cases from extinct languages; I already brought up {{m|grc|πρίαμαι}}, which itself is not attested, but other forms of it are (see ). Old Irish examples include {{m|sga|ad·gnin}}, {{m|sga|ailid}}, and {{m|sga|claidid}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:32, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679273 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/August: Found match for regex: {{ping|Ivan Štambuk}} and {{ping|Word dewd544}} in particular since they seem to be our most prolific Tocharian editors: I see from {{m|txb|kuse}} that the vowel letters that are normally represented as subscripts are represented by full letters in the entry name, but the headword line shows the subscript (in this case, k_use). Is this the best way to do this? "Kuse" and "k_use" correspond to two different spellings in the original script, don't they? If and when Unicode finally provides the Tocharian alphabet, we will presumably want to move our entries to forms written in the native script (hopefully retaining the Latin-alphabet entries as "Romanizations of..."), and if we want to do that by bot, it would be good to have entries under unambiguous names. Shouldn't the Tocharian B section of ] be moved to ] instead? The only problem I foresee is that sometimes it's "ä" that's subscript, and Unicode doesn't have a character for subscript "ä". For those cases maybe we could cheat and use "ₔ" instead. What do y'all (and anyone else interested) think? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:09, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679273 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/August: Found match for regex: :: And are you OK with using "ₔ" for "_ä"? Are there even any entries that currently call for that? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:17, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679273 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/August: Found match for regex: :::: We don't have an about-page for Tocharian. I don't have the resources to recheck and reference the Tocharian entries, but if I happen to see any subscripts in headword lines, I'm happy to move the info to a new entry name. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:33, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679273 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/August: Found match for regex: ::: Cool. Is ] the only one? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:31, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679273 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/August: Found match for regex: : OK, I've moved the Tocharian B section to ] and, I believe, fixed all the links that were pointing to it. I looked through the lemma categories of both Toch. languages and couldn't find any others with subscript vowels, but I may have overlooked something. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:48, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679273 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/August: Found match for regex: Anyone interested in Celtic languages or IPA transliteration (or both, or anyone who just wants to put their oar in) is invited to join the discussion I've just started at Appendix talk:Old Irish pronunciation#Representing the tense sonorants. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 01:25, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679273 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/August: Found match for regex: I see we don't currently have automatic transliteration of Hiragana and Katakana. Is there a technical reason why we can't, or is it just that no one's gotten around to it yet? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:02, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679273 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/August: Found match for regex: :: Would that be a lot of work? Obviously we shouldn't do it if it means listing every single one of the 6.3 kilosagans of possible Kanji characters, but if it can be done with less than 100 characters of code, why not? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:19, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679273 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/August: Found match for regex: *********Whoa! I wasn't planning on getting involved in this debate, but even asking CodeCat what toilets she uses is massively uncivil and inappropriate. CodeCat's gender is both none of our business and utterly irrelevant to the discussion. If I hadn't thought it would just escalate the drama even further, I would have blocked Dan for that remark. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:18, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679273 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/August: Found match for regex: ::It also has the drawback of not working for languages that aren't written with spaces, or aren't written at all. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:04, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679273 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/August: Found match for regex: :: I would actually go further and say that written language isn't language at all but only the representation of language, just like a painting of a pipe isn't a pipe. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:10, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679273 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/August: Found match for regex: :: I'd say the exception is when there are multiple etymologies and they have the same pronunciation—in that case, Pronunciation precedes Etymology 1. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:30, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679273 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/August: Found match for regex: *Support; I do this manually all the time. There is zero reason to use 10 characters (term|lang=) where 2 will do the same thing (m|). CodeCat, you mentioned once before that there are still many instances of {{temp|term}} where no language is specified. I would say those should not be changed at all, rather than being changed to {{temp|m|und}}; after all, probably over 95% of those cases are English anyway. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:44, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679273 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/August: Found match for regex: :In some transcription schemes for proto-languages, capital letters are semantically different from lower-case letters. For example, Proto-Brythonic is often reconstructed with both *b and *B, where Proto-Brythonic *B is the descendent of Proto-Celtic *b, while Proto-Brythonic *b is the descendent of Proto-Celtic *kʷ in a leniting environment. So capitalizing proper names in those cases would be a bad idea. And I'm generally opposed to it for other proto-languages where that isn't an issue, too. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:22, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679273 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/August: Found match for regex: :The fuck? I didn't think {{temp|head}} was supposed to create links at all, just the pagename (or head= parameter if there is one) in boldface. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:09, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679273 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/August: Found match for regex: :::I think this must be fairly recent behavior. I suspect somehow it's treating affixes as two-term entries, like hot dog, where the two words are automatically linked. Only for some reason it thinks ] is something like ]]. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:56, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679273 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/August: Found match for regex: :::::::: If it isn't possible to add links when there are letters on both sides of the hyphen, while not adding links if the hyphen is the first or last character in the string, then better not to have automatic linking in words with hyphens at all, and add it manually where needed. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:22, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679273 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/August: Found match for regex: :Why are they needed for Finnish? Does Finnish have three heights of mid vowels? In other words, are /e/, /e̞/, and /ɛ/ all separate phonemes? Or are , , and three distinct allophones of the same phoneme? Because there's no need to use the symbol e̞ at all, either allophonically or phonemically, unless you're already using both e and ɛ and need a third symbol that's distinct from both of them. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:00, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679273 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/August: Found match for regex: ::: The clause "if the phoneme is really /e̞/" doesn't make any sense. Phonemes aren't preassociated with IPA symbols. IPA symbols are convenient ways of representing phonemes and allophones, and there is always some wiggle room in their application. By longstanding phonetic convention, diacritics are to be avoided unless they illustrate some important distinction; and ordinary Latin-alphabet characters are to be preferred over modified ones whenever feasible. So if a language has only one front mid vowel, the convention is to use "e" to represent it. Using by itself in fact doesn't make any sense, because means "a sound more open than ", but if you don't use in your transcription system of the language in question, then you haven't defined what sound is more open than. You could say it's more open than the cardinal vowel , but in fact very few languages' vowels are located at exactly their cardinal value. (Neither English nor German is cardinal , though German is closer to it than English is.) So you have to define in the context of your language before the symbol is even meaningful. As for Finnish, {{w|Finnish phonology#Vowels}} does not say that /e/, /e̞/, and /ɛ/ are separate phonemes; it says that Finnish has a single mid front unrounded vowel phoneme which falls between cardinal and cardinal . The authors of the Wikipedia reveal their ignorance of how the IPA works by insisting on /e̞/ to mark that vowel, when by actual IPA conventions it should be transcribed /e/. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:51, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679273 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/August: Found match for regex: :::::: See {{w|Cardinal vowels}} on how they're defined. Cardinal , , and are defined as the most high front vowel possible, the most high back rounded vowel possible, and the most low back vowel possible, and all the others are defined as being a certain acoustic distance between those. The IPA makes no claim of being able to represent every conceivable nuance in articulation (or acoustics) in every single spoken language in an unambiguous and universally applicable way. German Haus and English house sound quite different from each other, but both are—correctly—transliterated . —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:44, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679273 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/August: Found match for regex: :I've thought about this too, and part of the problem is deciding which language to put the translation table in if we're going to add them for non-English languages. For example, a whole lot of languages have a single verb for "to be silent" ({{m|de|schweigen}}, {{m|nl|zwijgen}}, {{m|fr|taire}}, {{m|la|taceō}}, etc.), but English doesn't. I've often wanted to be able to put all of those words in a translation table, but where? If we allowed them in non-English languages, we'd have to have the same translation table in each one of the languages where this word exists, and that's a lot more than just the four I mentioned above. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:20, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679273 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/August: Found match for regex: :Incidentally, to judge from Google Books, how manyth and/or how manieth might actually be attestable. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:26, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679274 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/September: Found match for regex: :Is there really that much consensus that Macedonian shares a common ancestor with Greek later than PIE? I would say we should treat Proto-Hellenic as identical to Proto-Greek and leave Macedonian out of it altogether to be on the safe side. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:01, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679274 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/September: Found match for regex: :Certainly more compact; there's no need to include the IPA characters that are also basic ASCII characters. (I believe that set consists entirely of the 26 lowercase letters of the English alphabet.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:03, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679274 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/September: Found match for regex: The second problem is that there is no uniformity of naming. Some are called "xy-pronunc", some are called "xy-IPA" (or "xy-ipa"), some are called "xy-pron" (particularly bad since other templates called "xy-pron" are headword line templates for pronouns), and some have "-auto" appended to the end. Ideally, there should be a uniform name for these; my preference is for "xy-pronunc", but what do others think? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:55, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679274 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/September: Found match for regex: ::Two languages that automatic IPA templates ought to be easy to write modules for (but not by me since I don't know how to write modules) are Finnish and Hungarian. Anyone feel like writing modules and creating {{temp|fi-IPA}} and {{temp|hu-IPA}} to invoke them? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:01, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679274 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/September: Found match for regex: :::: Yeah; as Wikitiki says, using "-IPA" for the ones that do generate IPA allows the option of having some other name for the ones that don't (or the ones that generate other things in addition to IPA). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:56, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679274 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/September: Found match for regex: :All I can think of is to use the {{temp|attention}} tag, or take a specific issue to the Tea room. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:48, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679274 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/September: Found match for regex: ::: Which categorizes entries into "Category:Xyz entries needing reference", but AFAICT all such categories are red. Category:English entries needing reference is at any rate, and adding {{temp|poscatboiler|en|entries needing reference}} creates an error. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:13, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679274 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/September: Found match for regex: ::::: The trouble with joining in that conversation is that I don't care what they're named as long as a name gets picked soon. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:33, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679274 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/September: Found match for regex: :::I think calling it an "Esperanto-like language" is misleading. It doesn't seem to have been deliberately constructed by someone. I think it's much more like a lingua franca. The Wikipedia article on {{w|Sant Bhasha}} is very confusing, but the article on the {{w|Guru Granth Sahib}} says more clearly, "It is written in the Gurmukhī script, in various dialects – including Lehndi Punjabi, Braj Bhasha, Khariboli, Sanskrit and Persian – often coalesced under the generic title of Sant Bhasha." That leads me to believe that Sant Bhasha doesn't require a code of its own, because all of the words appear in some other language, i.e. ਸੋਚੈ is a word of Lehndi Punjabi, Braj Bhasha, Khariboli, Sanskrit and/or Persian, although perhaps only written in Gurmukhi when it's being used in Sant Bhasha. (Is the phonetic similarity between sant and saint/santo a coincidence?) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:01, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679274 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/September: Found match for regex: :Maybe it would be easier if we used these words' actual parts of speech rather than making stuff up. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:11, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679274 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/September: Found match for regex: :I've added the appropriate long marks to {{m|la|abdominālis}}. It would be easier for us to find the things you're talking about if you linked to them using double square brackets ] rather than with greater than/less than signs. I don't think the -atio in {{m|en|ratio}} is really a suffix in English. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:57, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679274 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/September: Found match for regex: *:: I disagree that {{temp|IPA}} can be used with whatever set of symbols you like. Pronunciation information can be added using other transcription systems, as we do with {{temp|enPR}}, but non-IPA systems shouldn't use the {{temp|IPA}} template. I asked for a way of categorizing invalid IPA characters because I was tired of finding things like g ' : instead of ɡ ˈ ː in IPA transcriptions and wanted an easy way to find all the instances. (I sometimes regret making that request, though, because the number of characters considered invalid is greater than I expected, and the number of pages in Category:IPA pronunciations with invalid IPA characters is far greater than anyone can work through.) But I am very skeptical of the attempt to find invalid language-specific phonemes, not least because we often give narrow phonetic transliteration in addition to broad phonemic transliteration. If the template knows that /kʰ/ and /æ̃/ are not phonemes of English, won't it incorrectly tag {{IPA|en|/kæn/|}} as containing invalid phonemes? Or is it smart enough to look only inside slashes and not inside square brackets? Then there's the problem of languages with dialects (/æː/ is a valid phoneme of Ulster Irish but not Munster Irish, /ɑː/ is the opposite) and the problem of people not wanting to stick to the symbols listed in our pronunciation appendices (I get a lot of grief from other editors for trying to make English pronunciations comply with Appendix:English pronunciation). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:18, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679274 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/September: Found match for regex: :::::: No one would be confused if we used the same symbol for the English r-sound that every single dictionary of the English language except Wiktionary uses, namely /r/. At worst we might have to distinguish between and at the phonetic level (using the latter for, say, Scottish English), but never at the phonemic level. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:21, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679274 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/September: Found match for regex: :::::::: The IPA is more flexible than you think it is. If {{w|Peter Ladefoged}}, {{w|Alfred C. Gimson}}, {{w|Kenyon and Knott}}, and {{w|John C. Wells}} are comfortable using /r/ to transcribe the English r-sound, we can be too. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 05:51, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679274 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/September: Found match for regex: :It should be {{m|la|merīdiem}}. What the English entries had (until I just now corrected them) was {{m|la|merīdiēm}}. They never said "merīdīum". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:55, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679274 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/September: Found match for regex: ::::: A lot of the "generic names" for bacteria are just the species name written lower case. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:49, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679274 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/September: Found match for regex: :Huh? We have an entry -isation, and have had for quite some time. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:48, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679275 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/October: Found match for regex: :For {{m|en|hat}} it's obvious because its meaning cannot be easily derived from its phonemes /h/, /æ/, /t/, since phonemes do not have any meaning to convey. For {{m|en|reenter}} it's less obvious because its meaning can be derived from the meaning of {{m|en|re-}} and the meaning of {{m|en|enter}}, but we seem to have an (unwritten?) agreement here that everything written together without a space is eligible for an entry. That convention breaks down, however, for languages that are not usually written with spaces; and it has been controversial for polysynthetic languages that may write whole phrases like "he had had in his possession a bunchberry plant" as one word without spaces. For English, the only real ambiguity is in expressions that are written with spaces, because there is no unambiguous criterion to distinguish idiomatic ones from unidiomatic ones. Probably everyone agrees that hot dog is idiomatic and hot lightbulb isn't, but between those two extremes there's a continuum, not a clearly defined split. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:53, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679275 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/October: Found match for regex: ::The free-standing word corresponding to {{m|la|com-}} is {{m|la|cum}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:37, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679275 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/October: Found match for regex: * I support transliteration of all forms listed in the headword line in all scripts other than Latin, preferably automatically generated, even if this means certain Russian forms will appear to end in -ogo instead of -ovo. Some people might say that's easy for me to say, since the only non-Latin-script language I spend much time on is Burmese, and Burmese doesn't have inflections. Nevertheless, I think it's preferable to transliterate them all rather than to try to decide which scripts are "simple" enough that they don't need it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:53, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679275 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/October: Found match for regex: ::::: The world of language learners is not neatly divided into those who can read the script and those who can't read the script. If push comes to shove, I can read Sanskrit in Devanagari, but I'd rather read it in transliteration because it's easier. I don't know if our Sanskrit headword lines currently include principle parts or not (our coverage of Sanskrit is not great), but if it did, I would want to have translits on each form listed. Devanagari is not just scribbles for me, but it does take me about 10 times longer to read than transliteration. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:28, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679275 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/October: Found match for regex: ::I don't feel super strongly about this, so I'm open to finding a compromise. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:22, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679275 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/October: Found match for regex: :: The problem is it just sounds funny when the subject of the verb is included. I know we moved there is to there be a while back, but it has the same problem: with the subject (even just a dummy subject there) present, the bare infinitive just sounds really odd. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:42, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679275 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/October: Found match for regex: How do we treat spaces when we alphabetize language names? Specifically, does "Lower Sorbian" precede or follow "Low German"? If we ignore spaces, then "LowerSorbian" precedes "LowGerman", but if we treat spaces as preceding A in alphabetical order, then "Low_German" precedes "Lower_Sorbian". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:01, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679275 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/October: Found match for regex: :: I just checked six print dictionaries (two British, four American) and they all ignore spaces (hotchpot before hot dog before hotel). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:12, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679275 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/October: Found match for regex: ::: Both treatments are valid; the question is, which do we want to use? Dictionary headwords apparently usually follow the "ignore the space" rule, but other lists may follow the "treat the words separately" rule. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:53, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679275 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/October: Found match for regex: : For the most part, we don't have to worry about alphabetization here; our entries are on separate pages that aren't ordered with respect to each other. Our categories alphabetize automatically, and I see that Category:en:Languages has Low German >> Low Prussian >> Low Saxon >> Lower Lusatian >> Lower Silesian >> Lower Sorbian >> Lower Wendish, meaning that our automatic alphabetization does treat spaces as ordered before any other character. The only alphabetization we have to do manually is the ordering of the languages in entries like se, which is where I first encountered the problem of where to put Lower Sorbian with respect to Low German. My immediate instinct was Low German >> Lower Sorbian, but then I second-guessed myself and asked here. After discovering that dictionary lemmas treat spaces as nonexistent, I went back to se and switched the order to Lower Sorbian >> Low German. But now that I've looked at how our categories alphabetize, I'm gonna go back again and switch it back to my first instinct, Low German >> Lower Sorbian. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:07, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679275 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/October: Found match for regex: * I think this might overwhelm normal entries, especially if people do it for every morpheme in a polymorphemic word, but it would be nice to do this somehow on reconstructed-form appendix pages. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:49, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679275 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/October: Found match for regex: :I agree that the lack of a lang parameter shouldn't result in an error message, but we don't have any editors who have no real interest in building the dictionary. People with no interest in building the dictionary don't become editors. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:00, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679275 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/October: Found match for regex: Why do we treat proper nouns as a separate POS from nouns? Proper nouns are just a specific type of noun; having separate headings and categories for "Proper nouns" as opposed to "Nouns" is a bit like having separate headings and categories for "Transitive verbs" as opposed to "Verbs". Merging proper nouns in with nouns would solve a lot of ambiguity problems, such as words like Friday and Christmas that can be used both as a proper noun and as a common noun, not to mention the problem that there is no real clear cross-linguistic definition of what constitutes a proper noun. (Most attempts at defining the difference I've seen apply only to English and don't necessarily work for other languages.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:26, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679275 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/October: Found match for regex: :::But we don't have to indicate the "propriety" of nouns by having "Proper noun" considered a separate POS. We could tag nouns {{temp|lb|en|proper}} or {{temp|lb|en|common}}, for example, the way we already label verbs {{temp|lb|en|transitive}} or {{temp|lb|en|intransitive}}. It isn't "dumbing down" the presentation of the language to aim for accuracy as well as precision. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:34, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679275 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/October: Found match for regex: :::::I'm not proposing anything yet; at this point all I want is discussion. I do want to consider getting rid of the L3 header, but you're right that parallelism with transitive and intransitive verbs does suggest retaining Category:English proper nouns as well as creating Category:English common nouns. As for a cross-linguistic definition, I'm not even talking about languages that aren't considered to have the proper/common distinction (though I'm not aware of any languages that don't), I'm talking about a definition that would apply to all languages that are considered to have both kinds of nouns. Even for such syntactically similar languages as English, French, and German I don't know how to define "proper noun" in a way that will apply to all three languages. And if each language has to have its own language-specific definition, that's a good indication to me that the concept of "proper noun" has no linguistic basis at all and is useful only for pedagogy. And if it turns out there is no adequate definition of "proper noun", then we shouldn't use the label template or the category at all. What do other dictionaries do? Do other dictionaries label proper nouns separately? What criteria do they use? For that matter, what criteria do we use? Why are AB-yogurt and air chief marshal proper nouns? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:36, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679275 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/October: Found match for regex: ::::::: But "being considered a proper noun" isn't a definition. And I'm not sure there's even always overlap within the same language. For example, we call language names like Latin and Sanskrit proper nouns, just like names like Noah and London. But the American Heritage Dictionary, which gives no part of speech info for Noah and London, labels Latin and Sanskrit "n.", which they otherwise do only for common nouns. So are language names proper or common? What usage of taxonomic names indicates that theoretical taxonomists treat them as proper nouns? (That's an actual question, not a rhetorical one.) Considering our first definition of ] is "proper noun", I wonder the distinction between the two is supposed to be. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:12, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679275 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/October: Found match for regex: :: Proper nouns never take the definite article in Arabic? So {{m|ar|العراق}}, {{m|ar|السعودية}} and {{m|ar|الإسكندرية}} are common nouns? People sometimes make the same claim about English, that proper nouns never take the definite article, but then Netherlands, Gambia, and Philippines (not to mention Ukraine and Crimea in more old-fashioned varieties) would have to be called common nouns. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:29, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679275 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/October: Found match for regex: ** What's the evidence that the two kinds of nouns are "used very differently"? They seem to be used exactly the same way to me: as the subject or direct object of a sentence, as the object of a preposition, etc. Why do we need to indicate this apparently undefinable and artificial distinction? And if we do, why is the POS heading the most obvious and best place for it? To the extent the distinction actually exists, it's usually obvious from the definition too. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:29, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679275 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/October: Found match for regex: **** The only thing that's clear to me so far in this discussion is that many languages have nouns that are definite without the markers of definiteness that are usual in that language, such as being governed by a definite article, a possessive determiner or the like. But in none of the languages discussed so far is that set of nouns exactly coterminous with a set of nouns that can be defined by a semantic property such as being the name of a person, geographical location, language, etc. In English, Arabic, and German, most geographical names don't use the definite article, but some do, and statements like "the definite article in the Netherlands is part of the name" is simply begging the question. In Irish, most language names do use the definite article except in certain constructions, but at least one ({{m|ga|Béarla||English}}) never uses it. So if we want to label nouns by this property at all, we should label them as being definite even without a definiteness marker, rather than implying that there is some sort of semantic property that causes nouns to be "proper nouns" and that their syntactic behavior results from that. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:13, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679275 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/October: Found match for regex: *I don't think "tradition in the language" is a reason at all, especially since the vast majority of the world's languages don't have a tradition about it one way or the other. If the distinction between common nouns and proper nouns is linguistically real, it must be possible to come up with a definition that applies to all languages regardless of traditional grammars. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:42, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679275 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/October: Found match for regex: *** But why not? What definition of "proper noun" are you using to determine that? Capitalization alone? Because if that's the only criterion that can be used to distinguish proper nouns from common nouns, then the distinction is definitely nonlinguistic. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:40, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679275 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/October: Found match for regex: ***** So the distinction is made on the basis of native speakers' intuitions? A noun is a proper noun because it feels like a proper noun? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:59, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679275 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/October: Found match for regex: ******* So still no definition, just an appeal to authority. I'm becoming more and more convinced there's no such thing as a proper noun. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:05, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679275 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/October: Found match for regex: ********: If my family owns one dog and my mother says "Have you fed the dog?", then "the dog" refers to a unique being; does that make it a proper noun? What about language names like {{m|fr|arménien}} mentioned above? Is that not a unique thing? Then why is it not a proper noun in French? Just because dictionaries invent distinctions to make life easier for language teachers, that doesn't mean those artificial distionctions are actually part of the language. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:49, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679275 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/October: Found match for regex: :::::::::: No, the request for a definition is not a rhetorical ploy. I'd genuinely like a definition because I am often uncertain whether to label a particular noun as a ===Proper noun=== or not, especially in languages other than English. Usually I simply have to rely on how the English equivalent is labeled. Most conventional definitions seem to be circular and therefore useless, as in: "When is a noun capitalized in English? When it's a proper noun. OK, so when is a noun a proper noun in English? When it's capitalized." Either that or hopelessly vague, as in "a proper noun is the name of a specific, unique being", which doesn't explain why The Hague is a proper noun that just happens to include the word the, but the dog is a common noun made definite by the presence of the definite article. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:23, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679275 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/October: Found match for regex: :Cool! Maybe you should make a Template:Black's 1910 or something, similar to {{temp|Webster 1913}}, for entries taken from it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:26, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679275 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/October: Found match for regex: ** s:Index:Black's Law Dictionary (Second Edition).djvu. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:05, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679276 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/November: Found match for regex: ::: The citations page does give one example of lower-case admiraless. Examples of lower-case usage are hard to come by since it's almost always as a title or part of a title. However, culling the list of capital letter English nouns of all non-proper nouns would be a bad idea since there are plenty of common nouns that are always capitalized in English, first and foremost demonyms like Englishman and Spaniard. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:00, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679276 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/November: Found match for regex: :: Whether an entry meets WT:CFI is often a matter of subjective interpretation, not objective fact. While it's true that sometimes people say "keep in spite of the fact that it doesn't meet WT:CFI", much more frequently it's a matter of one side saying "this entry does meet WT:CFI" and the other side saying "no it doesn't". When I vote "keep" at RFD for a term some people consider to be SOP, it's because I disagree with them that it's SOP, not because I think that its SOPness should be ignored. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:17, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679276 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/November: Found match for regex: :Being in three categories does not imply that the etymon existed in three different languages. French {{m|fr|démocratie}} is derived from both Medieval Latin and Ancient Greek, though I would say it is not derived from PIE since the compound was coined in Ancient Greek and didn't exist yet in PIE. Even the Greek word is not derived from PIE; it was coined within Greek from two words that were themselves independently derived from PIE. Categories like "French terms derived from Ancient Greek through Medieval Latin" sound like a good idea in principle, but in practice I think they would quickly become unmanageable. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:31, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679276 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/November: Found match for regex: :Why do we have separate codes for Guernésiais and Jèrriais to begin with? I'd say all three should be dialects of Norman. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:51, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679276 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/November: Found match for regex: :I'd use {{temp|sense}} myself, I don't know about other editors. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:12, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679276 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/November: Found match for regex: *I support doing this, and I support naming the parameter {{para|alt}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:06, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679276 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/November: Found match for regex: * How about calling it WT:Theater since it will be for nothing but drama? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:18, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679276 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/November: Found match for regex: :Note that the {{temp|context}} and {{temp|label}} tags aren't supposed to be about clarifying which meaning of a word is being referenced. That's what {{temp|gloss}} is for. The context tags are for labeling technical terms within a certain field. Numismatics is a field that has technical terms, but currency isn't. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:19, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679276 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/November: Found match for regex: ::: But it could be made obvious, e.g. by having a link on every mainspace entry, visible to both registered and unregistered users, saying "Find an error or omission? Please report it to the Tea Room." —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 23:02, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679276 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/November: Found match for regex: :: Not all deliberate misspellings are eye dialect, though; {{m|en|Grauniad}} isn't. Category:English misspellings does already contain some terms labeled "deliberate misspellings", though, e.g. {{m|en|enuf}}. In fact, in that entry I see that {{temp|deliberate misspelling of}} automatically categorizes into the Misspellings category. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:04, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679277 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/December: Found match for regex: :{{temp|eo-part|alĝustig|ite}} puts the term into Category:Esperanto adverbial participles, while {{temp|head|eo|participle}} puts it into Category:Esperanto participles, so it's more specific. {{temp|head|eo|adverbial participle}} would have the same effect, but by using {{temp|eo-part}}, editors don't have to remember which kind of participle is associated with which suffix, as the template does the work for them. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:14, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679277 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/December: Found match for regex: ::: Yes, a superlative is considered an inflected form. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:47, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679277 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/December: Found match for regex: ::::: Latin {{m|la|novissimus}} is in Category:Latin non-lemma forms, not in Category:Latin lemmas. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:52, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679277 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/December: Found match for regex: * Because we presumably list the translation at the lemma form, and inflected forms of the foreign word at the foreign-language entry. If you want to know how to say "newest" in Hungarian or Polish, you go to ], find the Hungarian or Polish word, go to that entry, and see what the superlative of it is. I'd be opposed to listing translations of nonlemma forms, because of the sheer quantity of translations that could theoretically be added, especially for verb forms. I don't relish the idea of seeing an entire translation table of third-person singular forms at ] and two entire translation tables (one for the past tense and one for the past participle) at ]; especially not for languages where those forms are not distinct from that language's lemma form in the first place, meaning the entries for those languages would be redundant to the entries at ]. We'd never be able to keep them coordinated with the translations tables at the lemma form, which is why we already use {{temp|trans-see}} for near-perfect synonyms, alternative spellings, and the like. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:47, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679277 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/December: Found match for regex: *:::: There are eleven translation tables at ], some with dozens of languages in them. Are we to repeat all of those translations at ], but using the superlative form, even for languages where the superlative is formed fully regularly, even periphrastically (e.g. {{m|fr|] ] ]}} with each word linked separately)? And when someone comes along to ] and adds a new language, say Marathi, to the translations, who's going to go to ] and add the superlative there? And many languages have multiple past tenses, while English only has one, not to mention multiple persons and numbers; should the French translation for ] list all of the following: {{m|fr|marchais}}, {{m|fr|marchait}}, {{m|fr|marchions}}, {{m|fr|marchiez}}, {{m|fr|marchaient}}, {{m|fr|marchai}}, {{m|fr|marchas}}, {{m|fr|marcha}}, {{m|fr|marchâmes}}, {{m|fr|marchâtes}}, {{m|fr|marchèrent}}, {{m|fr|] ]}}, {{m|fr|] ]}}, {{m|fr|] ]}}, {{m|fr|] ]}}, {{m|fr|] ]}}, {{m|fr|] ]}}? And then the same thing for all of the polysemous verbs that have more than one French translation; shall we list all 17 forms for each verb that can be used to translate the English word? Lower Sorbian has at least four verbs that mean "go", two past tenses, three persons, and three numbers; should the translation table for ] really list all 72 forms? I don't think that's going to make things any easier for the reader than simply going to ], finding the Lower Sorbian lemmas, and then finding the appropriate inflected form on the Lower Sorbian lemma page. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:52, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679277 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/December: Found match for regex: *:::::: But indirectly that is what's being proposed, because if we remove the prohibition on inflected forms having translations from WT:ELE, there's nothing to stop someone from adding 72 Lower Sorbian forms in a translation table at ]. And that would not help anyone, not even someone trying to figure out how to say "I went to Cottbus" in Lower Sorbian. Basically, I think it's an illusion that listing the translations for inflected forms will help the reader. It seems at first blush like it will, but in actual practice it won't. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:44, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679277 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/December: Found match for regex: *:::::::: We can, but the original question was about English non-lemma forms in general, not English adjective forms specifically. There will only be 15 distinct Lower Sorbian forms of "newest". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:57, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679277 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/December: Found match for regex: :: Did the vote explicitly define whether comparatives and superlatives are considered inflected forms? I would say they are, but there doesn't seem to be unanimity on that issue. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:00, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679277 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/December: Found match for regex: :::: In that case, what we need to decide is whether comparatives and superlatives are considered inflected forms in the sense of that vote or not. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:09, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679277 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/December: Found match for regex: ::: {{ping|Kephir}} I know Anglom from his work on Germanic languages. He's a good and conscientious editor who largely stays away from drama. If this were Wikipedia, his almost complete avoidance of the project namespace would be problematic, but here at Wiktionary I don't think it is. {{ping|Anglom}}, being an admin doesn't actually give you more responsibilities unless you want them. You're not obligated to go vandal hunting, or block people, or protect pages, or anything like that. I'd support you for adminship too. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:09, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679277 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/December: Found match for regex: :: There's probably not much useful for a dictionary in those journals anyway; I'm sure the words in those articles are found in plenty of more easily accessible places. Great news for Wikipedia, though! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:28, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679277 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/December: Found match for regex: ::I prefer the Scrabble tile logo, but if we do use a different logo, I'd like something that uses the Wikimedia colors of red, green, and blue . Some previous proposals are at m:Red, green, and blue#Proposed Wiktionary logo. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:38, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679277 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/December: Found match for regex: :::: I'm rather partial to the fourth one; it looks like a birds-eye view of someone reading a dictionary. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:20, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679277 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/December: Found match for regex: :I agree that we need to add oui, but I'm not yet convinced that we need to distinguish mn and khk. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:29, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679277 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/December: Found match for regex: :I think {{temp|vern}} is supposed to be used with the vernacular name, e.g. {{temp|vern|dwarf birch}}. The taxonomic name is supposed to use {{temp|taxlink}}, e.g. {{temp|taxlink|Betula nana|species|noshow=1}}. (I have no idea what |noshow=1 does, but someone always comes along and adds it if I forget it, so I assume it needs to be there.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:48, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679277 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/December: Found match for regex: :::So does that mean I shouldn't be including noshow=1 when I use the template? Also, since Category:Entries missing English vernacular names of taxa is a cleanup category, shouldn't it be hidden? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:34, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679277 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2014/December: Found match for regex: ::::::To me, visible categories are for all readers, including those who never edit, while hidden categories are for "behind the scenes" work that only editors do. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:20, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679278 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/January: Found match for regex: :Duo comes from the PIE byform {{m|ine-pro|*duwō}}; in general in PIE, monosyllabic words of the form TRV- (T=obstruent, R=resonant, V=vowel) alternated with bisyllabic forms where the resonant resolved into a sequence of syllabic + nonsyllabic allophones. (Another example is {{m|ine-pro|*ḱwṓ||dog}}, which had the byform {{m|ine-pro|*ḱuwṓ}}—the monosyllabic alternative gave Sanskrit {{m|sa|श्वा|tr=śvā}} while the bisyllabic alternative gave Greek {{m|grc|κύων}}.) Latin has a rule of "iambic shortening" by which a long vowel is shortened after a light syllable (e.g. dŭ) but not after a heavy syllable (e.g. am); see Armin Mester's 1994 paper "The Quantitative Trochee in Latin" especially p. 13. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:56, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679278 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/January: Found match for regex: ::: I don't know about caro, but homo for example did have a short final vowel in Early Latin (Plautus, Terence) but later the long vowel was restored by analogy with all the other third-declension nouns whose nom.sg. ended in -ō. But duo kept its short vowel because it didn't have any related words to analogize to, ambō not still being felt to have the same ending. Duonus didn't have syllabic -u- because it wasn't a monosyllable. If duis goes back to something monosyllabic in PIE, then it presumably did have a bisyllabic byform, but for whatever reason it was the monosyllabic version that got inherited into Latin, while with duo it was the bisyllabic form. (Which is a good thing, because bō, bōrum, bōbus, bōs, bōbus sounds really dumb. And what would we call the dual? The "bal"?) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:36, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679278 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/January: Found match for regex: Shall we create about it while we're about it? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:56, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679278 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/January: Found match for regex: :I'd say poison the well. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:32, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679278 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/January: Found match for regex: * I've heard both, but I have no feeling as to which is more common. Can't we just keep both lemmas and call them synonyms of each other? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:11, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679278 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/January: Found match for regex: ** Our entry claims the short version originated in America, so I'm not that surprised SB hasn't heard it, but I am a little surprised Chuck hasn't heard it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:36, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679278 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/January: Found match for regex: :: It is a general property of {{w|negative polarity item}}s that they can be used in questions as well as negative sentences. I think this lemma is fine the way it is. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:32, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679278 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/January: Found match for regex: :::: If possible, pull the negatives out of them; otherwise, add a note like the Swedish translation currently has. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:32, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679278 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/January: Found match for regex: We call this a non-comparable adjective, and a declension table has just been added for it. But I (a nonnative but fairly fluent speaker) have never heard this used attributively, only predicatively, and de:feil calls it an adverb and offers no declension table. What do other German speakers think? Can you say something like der feile Tisch for "the table for sale"? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:40, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679278 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/January: Found match for regex: :I've added {{temp|rfdef|lang=sq}} to bring it to the attention of those knowledgable in Albanian. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:15, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679278 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/January: Found match for regex: ::Unreconcilable seems to get enough b.g.c hits to be includable, though it is definitely rare in comparison with irreconcilable. I don't think you'll convince many people that a word that appears in Shakespeare is to be proscribed. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:35, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679278 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/January: Found match for regex: :I'd go with ar·chi·tect·ress·es. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:27, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679278 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/January: Found match for regex: ::: Yeah, but I've never found a place where they're all written down. And they sometimes differ between American and British English (but don't ask me how!), just to make life difficult. For the plural ending in this case, though, the rule is that if an ending can be separated while leaving the rest of the word correctly spelled, then you can divide after the fully spelled basic word, e.g. actress·es, walk·ing, tempt·ed. (But the part after the hyphen still has to reflect a spoken syllable, so *horse·s and *walk·ed are wrong.) When in doubt, I just check a dictionary, such as Merriam-Webster and American Heritage for American English; for British English you may have to resort to print dictionaries as none of the online ones I'm aware of (Collins, Cambridge, Oxford) include hyphenation information. "Architectress" is a pretty rare word; I deduced its hyphenation from "architect" and "actresses". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:36, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679278 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/January: Found match for regex: ::: "Why are things pronounced the way they are?" is more often than not an unanswerable question; the best anyone can hope to do is describe what's going on. I know someone from the New York City area who distinguishes lute from loot and dew from do not by the presence vs. absence of /j/ but rather by the vowel quality: /lʉt/ vs. /lut/, /dʉ/ vs. /du/, etc. But I wouldn't even attempt to say why he does it that way. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:30, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679278 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/January: Found match for regex: :::::: Yeah, that's what I meant. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:11, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679278 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/January: Found match for regex: :Well, the first two quotes show that there can be said to be no flies on something as well as someone. But it does feel odd to call it a noun. It's not a syntactic constituent, so it's odd to call it any part of speech at all, and it isn't a phrase either. Maybe it should be moved to no flies with a note saying it collocates with on? Is it ever used without the on, e.g. by someone saying simply, "No flies!" to mean "No flies on him/her/them/etc."? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:25, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679278 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/January: Found match for regex: ::::: In "{{w|Do not go gentle into that good night}}" I don't think there is any implied "while" or "while being"; it's completely synonymous with "Do not go gently", isn't it? Anyway, both this and the example above suggest that using an adjective as an adverb is poetic. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:54, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679278 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/January: Found match for regex: :::::::: "Eat fresh" is different though; it means "Eat (things that are) fresh", not "Eat in a fresh manner" nor "Eat while being fresh", and *"Eat freshly" wouldn't really make any sense. Then there are things like "He bought the fish fresh" where fresh is modifying fish, not bought; in that sentence I'm really not sure whether fresh is an adjective or an adverb. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:42, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679278 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/January: Found match for regex: :The entry croquet currently says the British pronunciation is either "KROH-kay" or "KROH-kee" while the American pronunciation is "kroh-KAY" (with the stress on the second syllable). English doesn't really go in for "official" pronunciations; if "KROH-kee" is a common pronunciation in Australia, that's worth being noted in the entry. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:37, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679278 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/January: Found match for regex: :Because it's not rare. But one should definitely be marked an alternative spelling of the other, rather than having two slightly different definitions, one for each spelling. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:31, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679278 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/January: Found match for regex: # {{support}} This seems to be the normal spelling in the U.S. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:06, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679278 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/January: Found match for regex: ::That seems silly. I think we should treat attested Vulgar Latin as a dialect, using {{temp|context|Vulgar Latin|lang{{=}}la}} for it and putting it in Category:Vulgar Latin. (But being careful not to use {{temp|context|vulgar|lang{{=}}la}} and put it in Category:Latin vulgarities.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:11, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679278 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/January: Found match for regex: :::::: Actually it's protected cascadingly because it's transcluded on the Main page and on several FWOTD pages. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:10, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679278 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/January: Found match for regex: :: "as good as" can be used different ways; some example sentence would help. In "He's as good as dead" I'd say it's an adverb; in "This cake is as good as that one" it's a conjunction. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:29, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679278 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/January: Found match for regex: :Isn't it already covered by sense 2? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:11, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679279 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/February: Found match for regex: * RFD now at Wiktionary:Requests for deletion#evening prayer. Anglicans refer to evening prayer too, but I don't think it's SOP since evening prayer is not just any prayer uttered in the evening. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:25, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679279 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/February: Found match for regex: *I'd be in favor of changing it to {{temp|misspelling of}} and/or {{temp|obsolete spelling of}}, depending on circumstances. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:19, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679279 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/February: Found match for regex: :American dictionaries like Merriam-Webster and American Heritage do not accept the lemma form smoothe (though Oxford does), but they do accept smoothes as the third-person singular of the verb smooth. Perhaps we should call smoothes an alternative form of smooths on both sides of the Herring Pond, while smoothe is an alt. form in the UK but a misspelling in the U.S. (in addition to being an archaic form). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:22, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679279 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/February: Found match for regex: ::: I think in The papers want to know whose shirts you wear it's the ordinary usage of whose, even though the answer could potentially be either the name of a clothing designer or simply "my own, of course". But in Who are you reading? it's metonymy just like Who are you wearing?, since literally you don't read an author, you read his books. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:28, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679279 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/February: Found match for regex: ::: There are languages where there would be different words for her depending on whether it referred to Mary or her sister. In Latin, for example, it would be {{m|la|suum}} if it referred to Mary and {{m|la|eius}} if it referred to her sister. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:38, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679279 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/February: Found match for regex: ::: My unexamined instinct is to treat feces as a singular mass noun (unlike data, which I carefully always treat as a plural noun), but Boogle Gooks Ngram Viewer suggests it has always been more commonly treated as a plural noun. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:48, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679279 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/February: Found match for regex: I just added sense 4 to the verb and am requesting volunteers to look over it and its usex and make any improvements. Also, isn't sense 5 of the noun capitalized? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:19, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679279 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/February: Found match for regex: ::: Maybe a random person can't volunteer the President of China to do the dishes, but I bet his wife can! Anyway, I don't think that needs to be part of the definition; that's just part of the pragmatics of volunteering other people's services. Maybe the quotes you give do call for a separate sense, as they involve volunteering the use of something rather than volunteering a person. That sense doesn't seem to be informal, but when a person is the direct object, I think it is informal. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:40, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679279 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/February: Found match for regex: :They're SOP in Latin, but not in English, and they are used in English, sometimes even unitalicized: , , . —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:50, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679279 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/February: Found match for regex: ::I agree it's a pronoun. I created ] with the Oxford comma as a hard redirect. It may be worth mentioning that this pronoun takes a plural verb, as in "Me, myself, and I are all in love with you." —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:33, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679279 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/February: Found match for regex: :: It's definitely not just your idiolect. I've heard both pronunciations, though I don't use them myself and tend to think of them as "proscribed". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:00, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679279 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/February: Found match for regex: ::Webster's Third New International lists /poʊm/ (to rhyme with home) but marks it with the ÷ symbol, meaning "many regard this pronunciation as unacceptable". It doesn't mention /ɹun/ (to rhyme with June) at all, but does give a dialectal pronunciation of ruin as /ɹɝn/ (to rhyme with burn), which I don't think I've ever encountered. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:28, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679279 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/February: Found match for regex: :They do? I'm familiar with using "up" and "down" to refer to places that are north and south of where one is, but that's not the same thing as using "up" and "down" synonymously with "north" and "south". And I don't think I've ever heard "left" and "right" to refer to places that are west and east of where one is. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:33, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679279 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/February: Found match for regex: :It means someone made a typo when writing the definition. I've fixed it to "functioning as a pronoun". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:40, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679279 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/February: Found match for regex: :According to The Queen it's "/mæm/ as in ham and not /mɑːm/ as in farm" when speaking to Her Majesty, but the fact that someone felt obliged to point this out to someone else suggests that /mɑːm/ as in farm is also a popular pronunciation. You'd never have to tell an American not to rhyme ma'am with farm, as no American would dream of doing so in the first place. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:23, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679279 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/February: Found match for regex: :::Well, since most Americans have the {{w|father-bother merger}}, yes: mom, bomb, calm/palm/psalm (for those who don't use the spelling pronunciation in /-ɑlm/), and so forth. But since we've lost distinctive vowel length it's more accurate to say we pronounce them /-ɑm/. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:49, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679279 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/February: Found match for regex: :::::Some dictionaries, especially British ones, do use the long vowel mark to transcribe American English. For example, John C. Well's Longman Pronunciation Dictionary transcribes AmEng mom as /mɑːm/, and even transcribes AmEng hot as /hɑːt/, as if it were homophonous with RP heart, which I find very distracting. And AmEng does have long vowels, just not contrastive ones: vowels are long before voiced consonants and short before voiceless ones, so while pot and pod are distinguished as /pɑt/ and /pɑd/ phonemically, they're and phonetically. And "tense" vowels are somewhat longer than "lax" ones, so heat has a longer vowel than hit, just not as much long as in BrEng, so we don't bother transcribing it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:43, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679279 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/February: Found match for regex: :::::::: The length mark doesn't bother me too much with /i/ and /u/; I will usually write things like * {{a|GenAm|RP}} {{IPA|/hiːt/|lang=en}} for {{m|en|heat}} rather than separating out /hit/ and /hiːt/ on separate accent lines. But if there are other pronunciation differences that necessitate two separate accent lines anyway, then I won't use the length mark for GenAm. But doing as Longman and transcribing {{m|en|hot}} as /hɑːt/ {{smallcaps|really}} rubs me the wrong way; it just feels flat-out {{smallcaps|wrong}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:55, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679279 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/February: Found match for regex: :::::::::: But underlying representations aren't pandialectal. A person who acquires a dialect in which bock and Bach are homophones isn't going to assign them separate phonemes just because other people are acquiring a different dialect in which they aren't homophones. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:16, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679279 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/February: Found match for regex: :::::::::::::: After long opposition, I finally conceded to the pandialectal transcription at Wikipedia because it's an encyclopedia where the focus of an article is the concept behind the term, not the term itself, so listing three or four different accents' pronunciations of a term would be putting undue weight on lexicographical information instead of encyclopedic information. But Wiktionary is a dictionary, so its focus is on words and it can afford to spend the time and space transcribing words accurately into several different dialects. Wiktionary is the one Wikimedia project where dialectal differences in pronunciation shouldn't be glossed over by a pandialectal transcription scheme. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:13, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679279 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/February: Found match for regex: :::::::::::::::: Just one more thing to add, one more thing to keep our entries from ever being complete. I do add RP and GenAm pronuns to practically every English entry I edit. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:32, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679279 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/February: Found match for regex: :::::::::::::::::: On the contrary, it would exclude 100% of the English-speaking world all at once, because no one pronounces English the way the pandialectal transcription represents it. Anyway, we already have a pandialectal transcription in use here, just not one in IPA: our {{temp|enPR}} scheme is pandialectal. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:05, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679279 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/February: Found match for regex: :::::::::::::::::::: I don't consider /ˈwɑtɚ/ to exclude the pronunciation either, because is an allophone of /t/, but /ˈwɒtɚ/ does exclude those who have an unrounded vowel in the first syllable as well as those who have a nonrhotic vowel in the second syllable. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:59, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679279 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/February: Found match for regex: :::::::::::::::::::::: If the only allophone is unrounded, then the phoneme isn't rounded. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:22, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679279 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/February: Found match for regex: :::::::::::::::::::::::: A phoneme is not just a symbol. It contains distinctive features, like or or whatever feature your favorite theory uses to distinguish /ɑ/ from /ɒ/ in languages that distinguish them. Actually water is a particularly good example of the problems with a pandialectal transcription, because some (cot-caught distinguishing) speakers rhyme it with hotter while others rhyme it with daughter (and still others rhyme it with footer). What symbol do you use to represent that range of possibilities? Neither /ɒ/ nor /ɔː/ will do if hotter has /ɒ/ (since there are accents in which they don't rhyme) and daughter has /ɔː/ (since there are other accents in which {{smallcaps|they}} don't rhyme). You'd have to come up with some other symbol that means "equivalent to /ɒ/ in accents A, B, and C, but equivalent to /ɔː/ in accents D, E, and F, and equivalent to /ʊ/ in Philadelphia". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:45, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679279 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/February: Found match for regex: *To get back to the question that started this thread, Longman gives both /mæm/ and /mɑːm/ but recommends the first for learners of English as a second language. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:14, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679279 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/February: Found match for regex: :The singular of the participle is {{m|fi|liittoutunut}}, so maybe that's the singular of the adjective too. Or maybe the thinking is that you have to have at least 2 things to be allied. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:08, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679280 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/March: Found match for regex: :Is he even using it to mean "flesh part of a fingertip"? From the quote, it looks to me like he's using it in a sense much more directly derived from the verb, namely the act of feeling with the fingers. It could even be considered a clipping of {{term|palpation}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:34, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679280 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/March: Found match for regex: :I don't even know of a term specifically for a male dog regardless of testicular status, let alone one specifically for a castrated male dog. I've never heard of there being specific terms for a spayed female, probably because traditionally in animal husbandry it wasn't common to spay females. I suspect that's partly because spaying is a much more difficult process than castration (you have to be a veterinary surgeon to spay a female animal, but anyone can learn to geld a male) and partly because keeping neutered females around the farm wasn't as useful as keeping neutered males (which tend to run to fat and so make tastier meat). Other terms for neutered male animals not yet mentioned are {{term|capon}} and {{term|wether}}, and {{term|ox}} is often used to refer specifically to a castrated male used as a beast of burden. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:44, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679280 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/March: Found match for regex: :::: Yeah, but I think that symbolism is later than the New Testament. If there's any connection between the two, then it's the NT discourse that influenced the symbolism rather than the other way around, but it's more likely that the symbolism comes from a reassociation of European pagan Horned Gods as Satan. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:02, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679280 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/March: Found match for regex: :Another example is {{m|la|Mārs}}, which is a contraction of {{m|itc-ola|Mavors}}. I don't know how it arose in this word (which Watkins takes back to a Proto-Italic root *ōrd- from earlier *ōrəd(h)), but it's confirmed by the Romance and Brythonic descendants, which can only have come from ō, not ŏ. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:18, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679281 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/April: Found match for regex: :I'd just make a usage note explaining that they're less common than their periphrastic equivalents nowadays. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:13, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679281 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/April: Found match for regex: :Where did you get that KJV translation? It actually says, "But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren." A more literal translation of the Latin would be "and thou, once converted, strengthen thy brethren", but of course the KJV is a translation of the Greek {{lang|grc|ἐγὼ δὲ ἐδεήθην περὶ σοῦ ἵνα μὴ ἐκλίπῃ ἡ πίστις σου· καὶ σύ ποτε ἐπιστρέψας στήριξον τοὺς ἀδελφούς σου}}, not the Latin; {{m|grc|πότε}} really does just mean "when". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 05:53, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679281 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/April: Found match for regex: :It's definitely weak. I'll fix it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:59, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679281 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/April: Found match for regex: :: No, they're not. {{m|la|quiētus}} is right. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:05, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679281 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/April: Found match for regex: ::: I'd say the question is why is Rhymes:French:-waʁ separate from Rhymes:French:-aʁ? Does French poetry really not allow one to rhyme soir with tard? But even if it doesn't, Italian rules may be different. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:40, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679281 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/April: Found match for regex: :::: Yes; the issue is whether is considered a different vowel from in Italian, as (apparently) is considered a different vowel from in French. For comparison, there are accents of English where cute doesn't rhyme with boot, though in standard RP and GenAm it does. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:40, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679281 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/April: Found match for regex: ::: I'm currently reading Heinlein's Starship Troopers and he writes (p. 88): "That night I tried to figure out how such things could be kept from happening. Of course, they hardly ever do nowadays—but even once is ’way too many." —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:06, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679281 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/April: Found match for regex: ::::: I've added an entry for {{m|en|'way}} and separated the adverb into Etymology 2 at {{m|en|way}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:44, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679281 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/April: Found match for regex: ::Looking through the b.g.c. hits I'm pretty convinced it's not comparable. Probably no one ever intended to claim it was; I bet someone just forgot to add the |- inside {{temp|en-adv}}. I've added it now, removing the imaginary "more quite" and "most quite". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 23:53, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679281 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/April: Found match for regex: ::There's no semantic difference between the reflexive and intransive senses, there's a syntactic difference in their constructions: "He undressed himself" (reflexive) vs. "He undressed" (intransitive). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:59, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679281 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/April: Found match for regex: :::: Presumably that means the transitive sense is first attested only with the reflexive pronoun, and is not attested with a nonreflexive direct object (e.g. "The boy's mother undressed him and put him in the bathtub") until some time later. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:04, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679281 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/April: Found match for regex: :::::: Well, sense 1 of avail says "transitive, often reflexive", but I wonder if it's ever nonreflexive in that meaning. Can you avail someone else of an opportunity? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:49, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679281 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/April: Found match for regex: ::: Noun phrases, adjective phrases, and prepositional phrases don't have finite verbs in them. It's clauses that have finite verbs. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:24, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679281 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/April: Found match for regex: ::: I don't think it's idiomatic. We have the relevant definition of {{m|en|see}} (namely "to understand"), and it can be used in other forms than the first-person singular present tense. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:51, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679281 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/April: Found match for regex: :::::::::: The inflected forms of the participles can be found in the participles' own entries, but I do think our Latin conjugation tables should include the supine and the gerund. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:44, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679281 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/April: Found match for regex: :: Incidentally, Persian {{m|fa|در}} is cognate with English {{m|en|door}}, but it is not the origin of the English word. To put it in terms of human relationships, {{m|fa|در}} is door’s second cousin, not its grandmother. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:47, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679281 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/April: Found match for regex: : I suppose someone thought the disappearing ρ made it irregular, but it doesn't really. This isn't even the only r/n-stem in Greek that inflects like this (cf. ἧπαρ, ὕδωρ). It's not a common inflection type, but it's not irregular. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:46, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679282 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/May: Found match for regex: :I'm pretty sure the lemma is fryum and that it is not a native word in any language of India but is simply English fry + 'em or -um (sense 3). All the recipes I could find online mention that they are fried. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:09, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679282 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/May: Found match for regex: :To clarify, I'm pretty sure the nominal lemma is fryum, but I can't find any actual evidence of the singular either, so maybe it should be treated as a plurale tantum. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:20, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679282 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/May: Found match for regex: :See noseeum for a similar construction. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:31, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679282 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/May: Found match for regex: ::: Yes, the presence of biscuits and bacon and the absence of any kind of pasta make me strongly suspect this is cream gravy. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:39, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679282 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/May: Found match for regex: :I wouldn't call them folk etymologies; they're simply mistakes. The forms are all from {{m|la|illum}} and/or {{m|la|illud}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:34, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679282 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/May: Found match for regex: :: What? pre (well, prae, actually) is the opposite of post in Latin, and there is a Latin verb {{m|la|praepōnō}}, although I suspect the Indian English verb was formed by analogy to postpone rather than being inherited or borrowed from the Latin. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:55, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679282 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/May: Found match for regex: ::: Another counterexample: any language that doesn't have infinitives, of which there are many. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:43, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679282 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/May: Found match for regex: :: I think "true that" may be possible in dialects of English where "funny, that" and "it's a funny thing, that" are ungrammatical or at least highly unusual. (I associate "true that" with AAVE—hence the spelling "tru dat"—and "funny, that" with British English.) Certainly the intonation of "true that" is different from that of "funny, that", suggesting it isn't just another manifestation of the same construction. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:15, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679282 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/May: Found match for regex: :From Ancient Greek {{m|grc|τέλος}}, it means "end" or "goal". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:47, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679282 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/May: Found match for regex: :I tried looking on Google Books Ngrams. Alone, the capitalized version is much more common, but that doesn't rule out the place name or sentence-initial position. So I tried several phrases like "eating {G/g}ouda", "ate {G/g}ouda", "some {G/g}ouda", "this {G/g}ouda", and "that {G/g}ouda". Most of these phrases occur too rarely for Ngrams to output a result at all, but with "that {G/g}ouda" and "some {G/g}ouda" the uppercase version was common enough to get a result, and the lowercase version wasn't, so my guess is the uppercase version is more common. But I acknowledge this isn't really great evidence. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:10, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679282 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/May: Found match for regex: :::A first name? As in Gouda Meir? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:39, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679282 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/May: Found match for regex: I'd like to add things like "Will you marry me?" and "Will you come swimming with us tomorrow?" as example sentences, but I'm not sure which sense they belong to. Sense 4 ("To choose to (do something), used to express intention but without any temporal connotations") seems close, but the example sentences do seem to have temporal connotations, namely that the events haven't happened yet. Sense 5 ("Used to express the future tense, formerly with some implication of volition when used in first person") also seems close, except that the implication of volition is not obsolete in these example sentences, and they're in the second person, not the first person. Are we missing a sense? Does one of our existing sense require tweaking? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:09, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679282 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/May: Found match for regex: :: The question was inspired by this XKCD comic, where the humor derives from someone misinterpreting "Will you marry me?" as a question about a future state of affairs rather than about volition. But then it occurred to me that "Will you come swimming with us tomorrow?" is also a question about volition, not a question about a future (or expected future) state of affairs like "Will it rain tomorrow?" I do think "Will you come swimming..." has different implications from "Are you coming swimming..." What you said about Dutch is true about German too ("Willst du mich heiraten?"), and I would translate "Will you come swimming..." with "Willst du mitkommen..." and "Are you coming swimming..." with "Kommst du mit...". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:00, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679282 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/May: Found match for regex: :We have it at mess with. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:42, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679282 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/May: Found match for regex: :I think in old-fashioned slang it used to mean "prostitute" or "slut", a meaning now preserved almost only in son of a bitch, which is intended to impugn the chastity, rather than the personality, of the mother of the person receiving that appellation. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:17, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679282 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/May: Found match for regex: :It's /ˈsɪnæpsɪz/ as the plural of synapse and /sɪˈnæpsiːz/ as the plural of synapsis. I'll add that info now if my stupid Internet connection will let me. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:06, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679282 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/May: Found match for regex: ::However, the boy's name {{m|de|Malte}} does have a short /a/. I've added a pronunciation section to both {{m|de|malte}} and {{m|de|Malte}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:40, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679283 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/June: Found match for regex: : This might even be Old Latin, which we now consider a separate language (itc-ola). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:56, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679283 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/June: Found match for regex: :We actually treat Old Latin as a separate language from Latin (just as we treat Old English as a separate language from English, although there the differences are much greater than between Old Latin and Classical Latin), and our coverage of Old Latin is minimal at the moment. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:23, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679283 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/June: Found match for regex: ::Fixed. I just said "future" rather than "future indicative" since the future tense is always indicative in Latin. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:38, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679283 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/June: Found match for regex: :Perhaps sense 4? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:42, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679283 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/June: Found match for regex: * I don't think so either. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:47, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679283 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/June: Found match for regex: ::: At abode, perhaps? This feels awfully SOP to me. It's a cliché, but not an idiom. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:47, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679283 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/June: Found match for regex: :: Yeah, but that's just as likely to be omitting "home" as "abode". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:20, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679283 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/June: Found match for regex: ::: other woman is definitely idiomatic, and other man is probably attestable though rather rarer. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:09, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679283 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/June: Found match for regex: ::::: Me too, and it isn't covered by any current sense of bring as far as I can tell. But the lemma should be bring oneself to, without "do". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:23, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679283 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/June: Found match for regex: :Yeah, it's just a mistake. The US line even included {{enPR|soundʹĭng}}, which means /ˈsaʊndɪŋ/, so I think someone was thrown off by the "ou" in the enPR transcription. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:36, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679283 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/June: Found match for regex: :I think it's Persian. {{l|fa|کردن}} is "to do" and {{l|ar|غسل}} is Arabic for "washing" but could easily be a loanword in Persian. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:57, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679283 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/June: Found match for regex: : One of the big differences between us and Wikipedia is that our discussion of terms happens almost entirely in discussion rooms like this one rather than on entries' own talk pages. That's because we have so many entries it's hardly possible for very many people to watchlist them all. So a comment on an entry's talk page may go months or years without being seen be anyone else. So bringing the issue here is the better option. As to your question, I don't know any Romanian, but I don't see anything intrinsically unlikely in someone in a song boasting about being an outlaw. (After all, Johnny Cash boasted about {{w|Folsom Prison Blues|shooting a man in Reno just to watch him die}}.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:10, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679283 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/June: Found match for regex: :The Malagasy Wiktionary is almost entirely bot-generated. I wouldn't believe anything I saw there, as little or none of it has been vetted by native Malagasy speakers. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:16, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679284 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/July: Found match for regex: :No, Wikipedia says, "A machine is a tool containing one or more parts that uses energy to perform an intended action", in other words, a machine is a specific kind of tool. Not all tools are machines. A hammer is a tool, but it's not a machine. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:03, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679284 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/July: Found match for regex: :::: How is a hammer a lever? It has no fulcrum. Maybe the hammer together with the arm holding it function as a lever (with the fulcrum at the wrist, elbow, or shoulder), but I don't think the hammer alone is a lever. But it is a tool. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:10, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679284 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/July: Found match for regex: ::::::::: I agree; it probably started as a way of sounding like you were about to say "bullshit", then switching to something innocent at the last second. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:13, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679284 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/July: Found match for regex: ::::::: Yes, it's wrong. I've corrected it to {{IPA|ang|/bæːɑx/}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:11, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679284 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/July: Found match for regex: :::::::::: Old English had no voiced fricatives at the ends of words. None of could occur there; they appeared only between vowels. The first three were allophones of /f θ s/, but even though was an allophone of /ɡ/ rather than of /x/ (which disappeared with compensatory lengthening between vowels, rather than voicing to ), the positional restriction against word-final voiced fricatives still held. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:27, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679284 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/July: Found match for regex: ::::::::::: You have to have heard of something in order to have a low opinion of it. When I tell people in real life that I'm a contributor to (and even an admin at) Wikipedia, they're duly impressed. When I tell people in real life that I'm a contributor to (and even admin at) Wiktionary, I get blank stares or the question "What's that?". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:34, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679284 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/July: Found match for regex: **Very likely. Specifically, people are probably thinking of 1 Corinthians 15:51–52 in the King James Version: "Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed." It clearly means something different from "We shall be dead", but it's still probably the origin of this euphemism. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:25, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679284 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/July: Found match for regex: :: The spelling "ayuh" is fairly common in the works of Stephen King that take place in Maine (i.e. most of them). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:51, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679284 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/July: Found match for regex: :::: Gap in your education. If you had, you would have seen this spelling before. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:08, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679285 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/August: Found match for regex: ::Me too. It means "son of the servant". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:02, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679285 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/August: Found match for regex: :Sorry, I don't understand what problem you were having. Did you click "Edit", or were you using the "Add translation" field beneath the translations? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:36, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679285 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/August: Found match for regex: :: If gay marriage and same-sex marriage aren't SOP, I don't see how this is. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:58, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679285 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/August: Found match for regex: :::: Both terms have already survived RFDs; see Talk:gay marriage and Talk:same-sex marriage. I think this is just as keepable. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:47, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679285 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/August: Found match for regex: :::: SOP stands for "sum of parts". At Wiktionary, entries considered to be sum of parts are usually deleted because their meaning can be inferred from their parts. If the meaning goes beyond what the individual parts mean, the entry is considered to be idiomatic and is generally kept (if it also meets the other requirements for inclusion, such as being attested). The three entries cited are sufficient to establish that the term is used, even if it's less common, so the only remaining question is whether the meanings of "fag" and "marriage" are sufficient for readers to deduce what "fag marriage" is. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:45, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679285 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/August: Found match for regex: :::::: I certainly can. {{m|en|rump ranger|Rump ranger}} is definitely idiomatic, and a nonnative English speaker (or even a native English who isn't very worldly, or a speaker of a dialect where that phrase isn't used) might have no idea what it meant. First time I head {{m|en|shirt lifter}} I didn't have the slightest idea what it meant. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:03, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679285 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/August: Found match for regex: :::::::::: It also gets over 200 hits on b.g.c, so if anyone wants to create it, it's attestable. Seems to be a generic term of abuse, though, with no reference to the addressee's sexual orientation, unlike the other terms discussed in this thread. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 00:37, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679285 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/August: Found match for regex: ::I found fartknocker in this 1974 copy of Texas Monthly, so it definitely pre-dates Beavis and Butt-head. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:52, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679285 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/August: Found match for regex: *:::: Some time ago I added a citation at go to the bathroom where it says a dog started to "go to the bathroom" on the carpet, showing that the expression does not necessarily imply walking to a room with a toilet in it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:17, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679285 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/August: Found match for regex: :: I would simply call it a {{temp|nonstandard spelling of}}; the pronunciation info shows that it reflects a nonstandard pronunciation. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:33, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679285 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/August: Found match for regex: :::: Or simply <code><nowiki>{{label|en|AAVE}} {{alternative form of|fixing to|lang=en}}</nowiki>. That's how I handle dialectal Irish forms that differ in both spelling and pronunciation from the standard. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:49, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679285 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/August: Found match for regex: :::::: I don't see that {{temp|alternative form of}} accepts a from= parameter. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:23, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679285 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/August: Found match for regex: :: Well, Southern American English uses fixing to or fixin' to, but growing up in Texas I never noticed it being reduced to finna or finny. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:32, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679285 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/August: Found match for regex: :{{done}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:32, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679285 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/August: Found match for regex: :Consonant clusters can be simplified over time, but there's no other evidence that "-mb(u)l-" reduced to "-l(l)-" in French; in fact French does have a descendant of {{m|la|ambulare}}, namely {{m|fr|ambler}}. I find the Celtic etymology more plausible. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:34, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679286 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/September: Found match for regex: :OK, they're now separate entries, and Arabic script is called a common noun rather than a proper noun. I've defined Arabic alphabet as a perfect synonym of Arabic script, though, which might not be the case. {{w|Arabic script}} and {{w|Arabic alphabet}} are separate WP articles, with the former discussing the script as applied to any language written in it, while the latter discusses the script as applied to the Arabic language. Also, b.g.c results suggest that while the plural Arabic scripts is fairly easily attestable, the plural Arabic alphabets appears not to be, so maybe WP is right there are many Arabic scripts but only one Arabic alphabet. More editors welcome! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:31, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679286 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/September: Found match for regex: :"To escape from one's mother's uterus, either via the vagina or by caesarean section", perhaps? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:07, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679286 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/September: Found match for regex: ::::: Well, "Where were you born?" does mean "Where did you emerge from your mother's womb?" even if the former is rather less explicit than the latter. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:20, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679286 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/September: Found match for regex: ::::: It occurs to me we're being a bit viviparocentric here. A baby bird is born when it hatches from the egg, right? Which is some time after the egg has emerged from the mother's womb. (Do birds even have wombs?) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:43, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679286 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/September: Found match for regex: ::::::: I would want the literal meaning (said of animals) to be separate from the figurative meaning (said of other things, like ideas). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:10, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679286 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/September: Found match for regex: :::::::::: Specifically, "Where did you come into existence?" could mean "Where were you conceived?" which is not what "Where were you born?" means. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:03, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679286 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/September: Found match for regex: ::::::: Re capitalization: the usage note at {{m|ru|бог}} implies the capitalization in Russian is similar to that in English: capitalized when referring to the monotheistic God, lowercase when referring to a polytheistic god. My Russian Bible always capitalizes {{m|ru|Бог}} in reference to the God of Judaism and Christianity, e.g. Genesis 3:5: "Но знает Бог, что в день, в который вы вкусите их, откроются глаза ваши, и вы будете, как боги, знающие добро и зло." —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:51, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679286 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/September: Found match for regex: :::::::::: I've never seen "he" capitalized in reference to God in an English-language Bible (or the Book of Common Prayer) either. I've only seen it in nonliturgical and nonscriptural texts such as tracts. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:47, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679286 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/September: Found match for regex: ::::::Wikipedia doesn't seem to have an article specifically about the /ɡ/ > /ɣ/ > /ɦ/ change in Slavic, but /ɡ/ is definitely the oldest pronunciation, so the answer to a question like "How did Polish /ɡ/ come about?" is simply "It never changed." The change looks to me like a typical {{w|wave model}} kind of sound change that started somewhere in the middle of its current territory and then spread outward, regardless of the genetic affiliation of the languages it touched: it affects Eastern Slavic (uk, be, rue, dialects of ru), Southern Slavic (dialects of sl), and Western Slavic (sk, cs, hsb) languages but isn't complete in any Slavic branch. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:29, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679286 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/September: Found match for regex: :::::::: Maybe at one point the /ɣ/ pronunciations were more prestigious than the /ɡ/ and so were used in liturgical language even though they weren't used in everyday speech. Or maybe Christianity spread from a ɣ-region to a ɡ-region, taking the ɣ-pronunciation with it for liturgical use but not everyday use. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:35, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679286 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/September: Found match for regex: :Google Books Ngrams suggests that in American English stammer was more common than stutter until about 1940, then they were about equal for 40 years, and since 1980 stutter has been more common, while in British English stammer has always been more common, though in recent years stutter has started catching up. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:39, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679286 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/September: Found match for regex: :You can definitely say "I changed the baby" to means you changed its nappy, but "My son told me to change him" sounds to me like he was talking about his nappy, not his shoes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:41, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679286 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/September: Found match for regex: :You'll hear a truly consonantal in careful pronunciation, not so much in colloquial speech. I think it makes sense to include it in a broad phonemic transcription, but a narrow transcription should probably list both and . —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:18, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679286 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/September: Found match for regex: :::::::: In the U.S., the "ass" meaning of fanny is far too innocuous and even childish for gay men to want to use it to refer to sex. I'm an American gay man myself and I cannot imagine myself or any other gay man I know ever saying "I'm gonna get some fanny tonight". It would be as ridiculous as using tush, tushie or toches in the same context. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:27, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679286 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/September: Found match for regex: :::::::::: That's what I thought at first too, and then you wrote "it seems odd that 'fanny' cannot be used for men since the meaning is ass" so I thought we had widened the scope of the discussion. Anyway, gay men do sometimes use "pussy" and "cunt" (often compounded with boy-) to refer to other men and their anuses, so if British gay men never use fanny that way, maybe it is an anomaly. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 05:58, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679286 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/September: Found match for regex: :I think it does mean "superfluous". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:38, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679286 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/September: Found match for regex: :No, you're not alone. I say /ˈʃɹɪl.li/ too, at least in careful speech. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:14, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679286 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/September: Found match for regex: ::Is Twitter considered durably archived? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:18, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679286 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/September: Found match for regex: ::::Here at Wiktionary, Scots is definitely a separate language. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:30, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679286 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/September: Found match for regex: ::::::It's true that the majority of our Scots entries are for words or spellings that are different from standard English, but we do have some exceptions, such as {{m|sco|Aristotle}}, {{m|sco|electrical}}, {{m|sco|electromagnetic}}, {{m|sco|mine}} and {{m|sco|technological}}. At any rate we certainly have no rules excluding Scots words whose spellings and meanings are identical to their English equivalents. If people want to add them, they're more than welcome. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:03, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679286 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/September: Found match for regex: :::: The Atlas of North American English by {{w|William Labov}} and his coworkers reports on the results of a telephone survey of 762 native English speakers from the U.S. and Canada. Of all these people, they found exactly one (a male from Pittsburgh born in the 1930s) for whom full, fool, and cold all have the same vowel (culture had a different vowel, though). A few other people may merge two of these three sequences (especially full/fool) but not all three. Before we add pronunciations like "/kl̩d/" to {{m|en|cold}} I would like to see some scholarly recognition that (1) such a merger exists more than sporadically and (2) that the merged vowel is really /l̩/, which seems highly implausible (/kʊld/ I could believe, but /kl̩d/ with no vowel at all beggars belief). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:21, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679286 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/September: Found match for regex: ::Part of the reason why it's important to find scholarly information about this is that people often hear what they expect to hear and don't notice when other people make phonemic contrasts or phonemic mergers that the listeners don't make. I bet most Americans who have the Mary/merry/marry merger or the cot/caught merger do not notice that other people have distinctions there, unless they're interested in language and have a good ear. That's why I've been avoiding the "I've never heard this merger" argument the whole time: I don't think I've ever heard this merger (and I do notice some mergers not my own, like when Michael Jackson sings "fill" for feel in "Speechless"), but maybe I have heard it and just didn't notice. Likewise I strongly suspect Gilgamesh has heard people his age and younger make the distinction, but just didn't notice. So rather than relying on our own intuitions and anecdotal evidence, we need to see what published sociolinguists and phoneticians have to say. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:56, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679286 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/September: Found match for regex: :I don't know about Ruakh, but for me they have the same vowel phoneme, but different allophones: the vowel in bone is a real diphthong , while the vowel in bold is monophthongal , or if it is diphthongal, then diphthongal in a different direction . —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:01, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679286 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/September: Found match for regex: :::: I think there's a happy medium that we can strive for. By no means do I want to include only pronunciations that are sanctioned as prescriptively correct, but I do want to include only pronunciations that can be independently verified. There are plenty of scholarly sources that discuss nonstandard pronunciations of American English, so those can be listed (I'd have no objection at all to including /fɪl/ as a pronunciation of {{m|en|feel}}, since that's discussed in the literature). But I do have to draw the line at pronunciations that are based solely on a single user's intuition. I have nonstandard pronunciations in my own speech (/ˈtwʌn(t)i/ for {{m|en|twenty}}, /sɛns/ for {{m|en|since}}, /kɛtʃ/ for {{m|en|catch}}, etc.), but I wouldn't think of adding those to the entries unless I could confirm their existence in a published source. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:57, 2 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679286 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/September: Found match for regex: :::: Wikipedia uses a diaphonemic transcription. I was at first opposed to it there, but finally relented because the alternative was having several lines of text taken up with alternative pronunciations, which is annoying in an encyclopedia article. But in a dictionary entry, there's room to list RP and GenAm (and multiple other accents) separately and a whole ===Pronunciation=== section to do it in. And for English, we already have enPR to be diaphonemic, so we don't need to do it all over again in IPA. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:30, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679286 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/September: Found match for regex: ::::::It's pretty clear Tharthan has very strong subjective opinions about accents he likes and those he doesn't like, and that he isn't going to allow anything like facts to get in the way of those opinions. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:05, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679286 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/September: Found match for regex: :::::: If you are going to use it as the plural of datum, then it's "one datum, multiple data", not "one bit of datum" and "multiple bits of data", which would be treating both "datum" and "data" as mass nouns. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:57, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679288 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/October: Found match for regex: :::: But is "stare" simply "stale" with one consonant phoneme replaced with another? None of the phonetic descriptions of RP or American English that I've read seem to think it is, synchronically. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:58, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679288 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/October: Found match for regex: :::::: All that's true historically, but synchronically it's less obvious, and it's not made any easier by the fact that most discussions of English phonology consider only RP (which is nonrhotic) and/or General American (which has the Mary/merry/marry merger). There's very little discussion of rhotic accents in which stare has the same vowel as Mary but a different vowel than merry. Scottish English is described as having the situation you describe, but in ScEng the vowel isn't actually different before r than before l; stare and stale are just /steːr/ and /steːl/. American accents without the MMM merger usually also have æ-tensing, with the result that /ɛə ~ eə/ appears not only in Mary but also in pass and pan. And then there's yeah /jɛə ~ jeə/, which forms a minimal pair with yea /jeɪ/. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:11, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679288 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/October: Found match for regex: :: "Phonemic IPA" is not a contradiction. The IPA is intended to be used for phonemic transcription just as much as for narrow phonetic transcription. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:11, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679288 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/October: Found match for regex: :: We do have an entry for {{m|la|mundabor}}, which says that it's the first-person singular future passive indicative of {{m|la|mundō||I clean, I cleanse}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:26, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679288 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/October: Found match for regex: :No, what Google gave you is nonsense. It basically means "because apart from me". I'd say pro homine iuxta me "for the person beside me" or pro iuxta me sedente "for the one sitting beside me" or pro iuxta me stante "for the one standing beside me" or even just pro socio meo "for my associate/companion". I'd personally recommend the last one, as Latin is a quite direct language that tends to take things very literally and avoid metaphors. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:50, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679288 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/October: Found match for regex: :See w:Blu-Tack#Similar products. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:49, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679288 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/October: Found match for regex: :Not just that one. There's a module error in many (all?) multi-word English nouns; see also chainman, shoe polish, hot dog. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 23:00, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679289 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/November: Found match for regex: :"All over hell and breakfast" gets 7 hits on books.google.com, which is good; "between hell and breakfast" gets 30, which is even better. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:40, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679289 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/November: Found match for regex: :It's an attributive use of the noun, not an adjective. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:30, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679289 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/November: Found match for regex: : For me, what's shown in the photo is definitely not a front yard, because it's not an expanse of grass. I wouldn't call it a "front garden" either, because that's not a term in my dialect. I'd just call it a garden in front of the house. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:46, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679289 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/November: Found match for regex: ::::I speak American English. I guess I'd call all of the things in those linked photos "lawns", except maybe this one since there's no visible expanse of grass. It's difficult to be sure what American-English term I'd use for something that isn't usual in America, and the landscaping in these photos isn't usual in America. It's sort of like roundabouts, which Wiktionary tells us are called traffic circles in America, but in fact, they pretty much are only found in New England, so those of us from the rest of the country don't have a word for them, and when we encounter them for the first time in the UK, then we call them roundabouts because that's what our British hosts call them. Likewise, if I were staying in one of these houses, I'd probably call the outside area the garden, simply because that's what my British hosts would call it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:08, 23 November 2014 (UTC)\
Page 3679289 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/November: Found match for regex: ::When I was in Dublin, I heard the local English speakers pronounce the first word to rhyme with {{m|en|bun}} and the second word to rhyme with {{m|en|dearie}}, which is what CodeCat and Smurrayinchester both said. The Irish (Gaelic) pronunciation of the second word depends on the speaker's dialect: in Munster it's {{IPAchar|/l̪ˠeːɾʲə/}}; in Connacht and Ulster {{IPAchar|/l̪ˠiːɾʲə/}}. The first word is {{IPAchar|/d̪ˠuːnˠ/}} in all dialects. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:40, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679289 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/November: Found match for regex: I have difficulty believing that {{m|en|cunt lips}} written as two words refers to the labia majora, while {{m|en|cuntlips}} written together refers to the labia minora, but I have no inclination whatsoever to research these two terms on Google Books. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:13, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679290 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/December: Found match for regex: :It's a Classical Latin word , though it isn't clear to what extent it corresponds to the modern pancake. Apparently a glossary equates it with Ancient Greek {{m|grc|τηγανίτης}}, which is translated "pancake" because it's derived from {{m|grc|τήγανον}}, a variant of {{m|grc|τάγηνον||frying pan}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 00:26, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679290 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/December: Found match for regex: :Do you mean silver-grey? Not even Wikipedia has an article on the group called Silver Grays (with an "a" since they were American), though they're mentioned briefly at w:United States Senate election in New York, 1851 and w:Francis Granger. It sounds like the sort of thing better discussed in an encyclopedia than a dictionary anyway. If you have sources about the Silver Grays from U.S. history, you can go to Wikipedia, register an account, and start an article about them. Alternatively, if you don't want to register an account, you can go to w:Wikipedia:Requested articles/Social sciences/History, and ask someone there to start the article for you (be sure to list your sources, though). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:47, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679290 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/December: Found match for regex: :::: Indeed, the German word for faction is {{m|de|Fraktion}}, which threw me off the first time I encountered it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:18, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679290 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/December: Found match for regex: :: I've never encountered it either. Here it seems to be a board underneath the mattress, while here it appears to be the headboard. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:41, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679290 Wiktionary:Tea room/2014/December: Found match for regex: ::::Is it /ʍoʊ/? I don't have the whine/wine merger; for me, /ʍ/ is a fully functional morpheme, but I still pronounce whoa as a homophone of woe. I've always viewed it as an exception where wh represents /w/, much as who and whole are exceptions where wh represents /h/. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:44, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679291 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/January: Found match for regex: :In theory it could come from a *dwēs-, but both Etymology Online and Eric Partridge say bēstia is of unknown origin, and AHD doesn't attempt to derive it from any PIE root. I think we should just remove {{m|ine-pro|*dʰewsóm}} and say "etymology unknown". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:41, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679291 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/January: Found match for regex: ::: I think it would hurt since it couldn't possibly be from the same PIE root as deer. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:25, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679291 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/January: Found match for regex: :: Larousse's etymological dictionary derives the French from Vulgar Latin *mentō, -ōnis; I suppose the Spanish (as well as Catalan {{m|ca|mentó}}) could come from the same source. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:07, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679291 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/January: Found match for regex: ::::: Only in a very vague way. The n's in nuncle and neam and the like arose from a reinterpretation of things like "mine uncle" and "an eam" as "my nuncle" and "a neam". (Likewise the nicknames Ned < Edward and Nan(cy) < Ann.) The Celtic consonant mutations also arose when word-final consonants affected the beginnings of the words that followed them. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:56, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679292 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/February: Found match for regex: ::: I don't know; the fact that the word is rose /ɹoʊz/ and not roose /ɹuːz/, as would be expected due to the Great Vowel Shift, makes me suspect the Modern English word is a loanword from French and not an inheritance from Old English rōse. On the other hand, if Old English actually has rŏse (and the o is apparently short in Latin, so why would it be lengthened in OE?), then the modern word could be inherited. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:45, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679292 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/February: Found match for regex: :You mean for normalization? Or a purely descriptive analysis of the orthography actually found in the manuscripts? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:40, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679293 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/March: Found match for regex: ::: Ludwig could be a reborrowing from Latin Ludovicus, though; that would explain the lack of diphthongization in the second syllable as well (a thoroughly native form would be expected to be *Lautweig). If {{m|gem-pro||*hluda-}} is real, it could come from the PIE zero-grade {{m|ine-pro||*ḱlutós}}, but that's otherwise unattested in Germanic. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:59, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679293 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/March: Found match for regex: I was just adding some Proto-Slavic etymologies, including {{m|sla-pro|*ǫgorь}}, and was wondering how certain we can be that it wasn't {{m|sla-pro|*ǫgorjь}}. Do any of its reflexes prove it has to have ended in rь and not rjь? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:02, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679293 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/March: Found match for regex: :::: I don't think PIE roots had obstruents before sonorants either, so an *-n- after the *-k- would have to belong to a suffix rather than the root. But {{m|grc|ἀράχνη}} probably isn't of Indo-Europan origin anyway. Watkins lists a Celtic and Germanic root *ruk- but doesn't take it back to PIE. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:10, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679293 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/March: Found match for regex: How did {{cog|ine-bsl-pro|*degtei}} become {{cog|sla-pro|*žeťi}}? Shouldn't it have become ^×deťi? *žeťi ought to come from a *gegtei instead. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:58, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679293 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/March: Found match for regex: ::: OTOH, consider {{m|ru|Баку}} from Azeri {{m|az|Bakı}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:01, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679294 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/April: Found match for regex: :I got {{m|sla-pro|*dъždžь}} from Terence R. Carlton, Introduction to the Phonological History of the Slavic Languages (Slavica Publishers, 1990, {{ISBN|0-89357-223-3}}, who says that the jotation of zd and zg is ždž, parallel to the jotation of st and sk to šč. When not after z, the jotations of d and g are different (ď and ž respectively), but after z they merge. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:11, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679294 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/April: Found match for regex: :::: In Polish at least (I don't know about the smaller Lechitic languages) stj/skj became szcz and zdj/zgj became żdż, and these cannot come from šť and žď; in Belarusian, Ukrainian, and Slovene stj/skj became šč and zdj/zgj became ždž (be+uk)/žj (sl), but these could all come from earlier šť and žď. In the other languages they became št and žd or šť and žď. So only Polish has clear evidence for šč and ždž as opposed to šť and žď, but šč/ždž > šť/žď is a pretty natural dissimilation, and positing the opposite sound change (šť/žď > šč/ždž) for Polish is problematic because ť/ď normally become c/dz in Polish, so you'd expect *sc/zdz rather than szcz/żdż. At some level though, whether we write šč or šť for sla-pro is a purely notational issue; the point is that the contrasts č~ť and dž~ď were neutralized after s/z (which became š/ž in that context). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:25, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679294 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/April: Found match for regex: :::::: Yeah, that's why some people write it ǰ or ǯ rather than dž, but dž is by far the most common spelling. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:25, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679294 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/April: Found match for regex: : There are several loanwords in Slavic where s in the source language has become š, such as Polish {{m|pl|msza||Mass}} < PSl. {{m|sla-pro|*mьša}} < Latin {{m|la|missa}}, or the whole slew of Polish men's names ending in -sz taken from Latin names ending in -s ({{m|pl|Dariusz}}, {{m|pl|Łukasz}}, {{m|pl|Mariusz}}, {{m|pl|Mateusz}}, {{m|pl|Tadeusz}}, {{m|pl|Tomasz}}, etc.). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:54, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679294 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/April: Found match for regex: :: We don't have a Category:English terms derived from Polari, but that is almost certainly what this is. In fact, we don't seem to recognize the code pld at all. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:41, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679294 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/April: Found match for regex: ::::: Perhaps Category talk:Polari language, including the RFDO discussion, is what you're remembering, Chuck. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:56, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679294 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/April: Found match for regex: ::I've just read a historical phonology of Slovene which mentions several German loanwords where /f/ was borrowed as /b/, and at least one Romance loanword ({{m|sl|baška||bundle of sticks}} < Latin {{m|la|fascis}}). AFAIK Latin /f/ never became /v/ in word-initial position in any Romance language, so a voiced phoneme in the source language may not actually be a necessary condition for phonemic replacement with /b/ in Slavic. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:46, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679296 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/June: Found match for regex: :: It's also really hard to see how ganef could become gappen. Yes, in the history of Hebrew *np became pp while *nep became nef, but that's surely irrelevant for a borrowing from Yiddish into Dutch. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:53, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679296 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/June: Found match for regex: :: Aren't most nouns that end in soft consonants feminine in Russian? Maybe this one became feminine over time by analogy. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:33, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679296 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/June: Found match for regex: ::::: I didn't say only feminines can end in ь, I just said most nouns ending in ь are feminine. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:28, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679296 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/June: Found match for regex: Did this have a by-form {{m|sla-pro|*edъnъ}}? The West Slavic forms look like they come from {{m|sla-pro|*edъnъ}}. I see OCS has a by-form {{m|cu|ѥдьнъ}}, but that would give palatalized consonants in West Slavic (Polish *jedzien instead of {{m|pl|jeden}}; Lower Sorbian *jeźen instead of {{m|dsb|jaden}}, etc.). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:54, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679296 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/June: Found match for regex: :::: I don't know that much about Upper Sorbian, but AFAICT {{m|hsb|jedyn}} would actually have to come from {{m|sla-pro|*edynъ}}, which only Bulgarian {{m|bg|еди́н}} is consistent with and which no other language requires (since the Bulgarian can also come from {{m|sla-pro|*edinъ}}). The Bulgarian isn't actually consistent with {{m|sla-pro|*edьnъ}}, is it? Wouldn't that have given *еден or *едън? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:07, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679296 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/June: Found match for regex: :::::::: In Proto-Slavic sure, but by Proto-West Slavic there was a correlation of front vowels with palatalized consonants and back vowels with nonpalatalized consonants. So say PS had two by-forms *edinъ and *edьnъ, which normally should have given *jedʲinъ and *jedʲьnъ in PWS. Then if for whatever sporadic, unlautgesetzlich reason, PWS decided to depalatalize the d in this one word, the syllable harmony rules would automatically back the vowels to accommodate the depalatalized d, yielding *jedynъ and *jedъnъ, from which all our West Slavic forms can (and some must) derive. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:36, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679296 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/June: Found match for regex: I assume that the similarity in form and meaning between German {{m|de|Riemen}} and Russian {{m|ru|реме́нь}} is not a coincidence. Is the Germanic word a loanword from Slavic, or is the Slavic word a loanword from Germanic? Or are they both descended from a PIE word, or both borrowed from some third language? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:14, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679296 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/June: Found match for regex: :Wiktionary:About Proto-Slavic says not to include prothetic j and v in page names, so I'd say the same should apply to predictable hiatus-breaking j as well. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:16, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679296 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/June: Found match for regex: : As for Padraic Colum's suggestion, cie is not a possible spelling of a word in any variety of Gaelic. The Irish word for death cap (as in the mushroom) is caidhp bháis (pronounced /kəɪpˠ wɑːʃ/), but the basis for claiming this is the source of kybosh seems to be mostly wishful thinking. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:28, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679296 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/June: Found match for regex: :: The change of to is not phonologically unlikely at all; it's straightforward cluster simplification and/or dissimilation. It's important to remember that OCS is not Proto-Slavic; there are sound changes that OCS went through that make it distinct from Proto-Slavic, and *šč > št is one of them. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:20, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679298 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/July: Found match for regex: :Possibly, but I think it's more likely that it comes from {{m|en|flicker}}, which old movies are wont to do. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:07, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679298 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/July: Found match for regex: ::::::: Why is this a problem? I don't believe in UFOs, but I still have a word for them. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:02, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679298 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/July: Found match for regex: :::::::::Yes, I meant "alien spacecraft", not "anything flying that you don't know what it is". I've seen sky lanterns here in Berlin too, even though they're almost certainly illegal. The first time I saw one it kind of freaked me out because I had never seen one before, so I didn't know what it was, and it was really dark so I couldn't see anything of it except this light floating slowly and mysteriously through the air. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:56, 4 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679298 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/July: Found match for regex: :Well, it's {{m|cu|дльгъ}} in OCS, forming a minimal pair with {{m|cu|длъгъ||debt}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:17, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679298 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/July: Found match for regex: : While we're talking about these words, is there any particular reason Proto-Slavic {{m|sla-pro|*dъlgъ||debt}} has to be a loanword from Germanic? Couldn't both {{m|sla-pro|*dъlgъ||debt}} and {{m|gem-pro|*dulgaz}} come from {{m|ine-pro|*dʰl̥gʰ-}}, just as Proto-Celtic {{m|cel-pro|*dligo-||to owe, be entitled to}} did? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:27, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679298 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/July: Found match for regex: :::: From Terence R. Carlton, Introduction to the Phonological History of the Slavic Languages, (Slavica 1990) p. 95–96: "The resulting vowel is always either ŭ or ĭ, but we are still unable to define the conditions under which ŭ as opposed to ĭ arose. It is simply not known why, for example, r̥ should give ŭr in some roots but ĭr in others, thus, tr̥g- > tŭrg- vs. tr̥p- > tĭrp- (torg vs. terpet’ in modern R). Most likely, the conditioning factors were the nature (whether labial, dental, etc.) of the consonant both preceding and following the syllabic sonant." Now that was written 24 years ago; have things changed since then? Do we now know why tr̥g- > tъrg-, but that explanation doesn't apply to {{m|sla-pro|*dъlgъ}}? Or is {{m|sla-pro|*tъrgъ}} believed to be a loanword too? Otherwise, if there are several Slavic roots with ъr and ъl vocalism, I don't see any reason to assume {{m|sla-pro|*dъlgъ}} is borrowed rather than inherited. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:07, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679299 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/August: Found match for regex: ::::: Actually it was in April. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:26, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679299 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/August: Found match for regex: :Imitative is perhaps not the right word, but it seems to be a very common baby-language word for poo that crosses language family borders, much like mama and papa/dada do. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:44, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679299 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/August: Found match for regex: Other editors' input is requested at Talk:Goídel. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 05:56, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679299 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/August: Found match for regex: ::::: Any particular reason, Bartleby? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:29, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679299 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/August: Found match for regex: ::Unstressed affixes and function words often undergo spontaneous voicing in various languages; normally PIE *kom- should have become *xa- (also spelled *ha-) in Proto-Germanic, but it underwent spontaneous voicing to *ɣa- (also spelled *ga-). Other examples include the change from Old Irish {{m|sga|co}} to Modern Irish {{m|ga|go}}, and all the English function words starting with /ð/ such as the, this, that, there, then, etc., all of which had /θ/ in Old English; as well as the function words ending in voiced fricatives like is, was, of and so on. But since PG *gadōną isn't a function word it couldn't have undergone this spontaneous voicing, so it must come from something along the line of *gʰodʰ- or *gʰadʰ- and be unrelated to κατά. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:48, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679300 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/September: Found match for regex: :The first looks like utter bullshit. I don't have a feel for the bullshit level of the second one. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:20, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679301 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/October: Found match for regex: :Pathetics? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:25, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679301 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/October: Found match for regex: :: What does {{m|de|Braucherei}} mean? At any rate, it hardly seems contestable that {{m|es|brujería}} is from {{m|es|bruja}}, so the real question is about the origin of {{m|es|bruja}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 05:44, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679301 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/October: Found match for regex: :Well, it does also mean "build, construct" (the last syllable of {{m|en|architect}} comes from the same root), and badgers are known for building extensive underground burrows. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:48, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679302 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2014/November: Found match for regex: ::Actually, we use a lower-case h with a subscripted number. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:19, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
Page 3679330 Wiktionary:Tea room/2013/December: Found match for regex: :The last two are not correctly spelled Ancient Greek words. {{l|grc|οἴσω}} is the future tense of {{l|grc|φέρω}} and {{l|grc|φάγομαι}} is the future tense of {{l|grc|ἔφαγον}} (which has no present tense). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:43, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679330 Wiktionary:Tea room/2013/December: Found match for regex: :: "For the purpose of" is clearly a preposition since it's followed by the gerund, which behaves syntactically as a noun. I don't know what "in order to" is either, but it's the same thing as bare "to" when followed by an infinitive, as in I want to go to Miami. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:09, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679330 Wiktionary:Tea room/2013/December: Found match for regex: ::: But not in modern English. If the infinitive after to is modified by something, it's modified by an adverb, not adjective (to boldly go where no man has gone before vs. *to bold go where...) so it's pretty clearly a verb. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:14, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679332 Wiktionary:Tea room/2013/September: Found match for regex: Are we missing some senses of for? I can't figure out which of the current senses is being used in phrases like "She's in mourning for her mother" and "He feared for his life". Is the first really "She's in mourning on behalf of her mother"? That sounds as if the mother is the one who really ought to be in mourning, but the daughter is a substitute mourner. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:57, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679332 Wiktionary:Tea room/2013/September: Found match for regex: :For what it's worth, "velikih olj" gets about 100 Google hits, while "velikih olij" gets none. "Oil" of course isn't one of those words that appears in the plural very often. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 23:54, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679332 Wiktionary:Tea room/2013/September: Found match for regex: ::: I was hoping velik would also mean "many" in the plural (I looked at the translation table under many and it gave veliko). Alas, none of the users at Category:User sl-N seems to be terribly active. BTW, "motornih olj" gets over 16,000 Google hits and "motornih olij" gets only 5. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 00:43, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679332 Wiktionary:Tea room/2013/September: Found match for regex: :: Isn't it derived from in the ballpark? A ballpark estimate or ballpark figure is one that is in the ballpark of the actual amount. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:05, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679332 Wiktionary:Tea room/2013/September: Found match for regex: ::: The Wikipedia article {{w|Flare}} may be more helpful here than our entry. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:00, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679332 Wiktionary:Tea room/2013/September: Found match for regex: :Your multiple negatives make it difficult for me to be sure what point you're trying to make, but in general we ought to be translating euphemisms with euphemisms and dysphemisms with dysphemisms; for example I would hope (but I haven't checked) that our German translation of darn is verflixt or the like, while our German translation of damn is verdammt. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:19, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679333 Wiktionary:Tea room/2013/October: Found match for regex: :: Me too. I'd just delete ne're-do-well as a rare misspelling. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:31, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679333 Wiktionary:Tea room/2013/October: Found match for regex: :Please read WT:CFI. Wiktionary does not accept words its users made up unless those words have seen actual use by multiple published authors over a period of least a year. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:12, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679333 Wiktionary:Tea room/2013/October: Found match for regex: :See sense 1 of grace#Verb and especially the usex. The phrase as a whole seems unidiomatic to me, even when (as it probably usually is) it's used sarcastically. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:09, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679333 Wiktionary:Tea room/2013/October: Found match for regex: :I think we're missing that sense. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:37, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679333 Wiktionary:Tea room/2013/October: Found match for regex: :::::And in that case, he couldn't say "the American problem" because that would mean something else. "The American problem" would be a problem that America has, while "the America problem" is a problem that other countries have. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:34, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679333 Wiktionary:Tea room/2013/October: Found match for regex: ::: If the line is "We stopped their butt cold", then it seems to be sense 3 of butt, i.e. using butt metonymously to refer to the whole person. It's not in the plural because the group is being considered collectively, so they have a single collective butt. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:09, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679333 Wiktionary:Tea room/2013/October: Found match for regex: :Of the various possibilities that occurred to me (Edinburg(h)ers, Edinburg(h)(i)ans, Edinbourgeois), Edinburghers gets the most hits on b.g.c (1830 hits), then Edinburgers (275, though the very first hit refers to a kind of sausage and the very second hit is in Dutch, and for all I know some are in reference to {{w|Edinburg, Texas}}), then Edinburghians (164), then Edinburgians (66) then Edinbourgeois (40), and then Edinburgans (1). So Edinburghers gets 3 times as many hits as all others combined. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:09, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679333 Wiktionary:Tea room/2013/October: Found match for regex: Senses 5 ("(automotive) An opening in a hood/bonnet or other body panel to admit air, usually for cooling the engine.") and 7 ("A covered opening in an automobile's hood which allows cold air to enter the area beneath the hood.") are the same, aren't they? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:59, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679333 Wiktionary:Tea room/2013/October: Found match for regex: *busybody and buttinsky are the first two that occur to me off the top of my head. The synonyms listed at those entries are: marplot, meddler, kibitzer, nosy parker, backseat driver. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:13, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679333 Wiktionary:Tea room/2013/October: Found match for regex: :According to this, it means "little tick", though that may be Spanglish since the usual Spanish word for tick is garrapata. Googling for "tequito" and "el tequito" is useless because of all the restaurants etc. by that name, but googling for "un tequito" came up with a few things. It looked like some people were using it to mean techie; other uses I couldn't figure out at all. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:46, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679334 Wiktionary:Tea room/2013/November: Found match for regex: Does this word occur anywhere other than in the Christmas carol {{w|This Endris Night}}? What is its etymology? Is it Middle English or Early Modern English, or both? (The carol is apparently from the 1470s and thus right on the cusp between the two stages.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:03, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679334 Wiktionary:Tea room/2013/November: Found match for regex: :: But not really that rare. Just looking through the last 100 years of British prime ministers I find a Gordon, a Winston, a Neville, a Stanley, and a Ramsay—all given names derived from surnames, and the {{w|List of people with given name Wilson}} includes no fewer than five Brits: {{w|Wilson Baker}}, {{w|Wilson Benge}}, {{w|Wilson Carlile}}, {{w|Wilson Jameson}}, and {{w|Wilson Jones (footballer)}}. It's not going to give names like David and James and William a run for their money, but it's not really rare (like, say, Hrothgar is nowadays). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:51, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679334 Wiktionary:Tea room/2013/November: Found match for regex: :::: Pretty much all first names that are derived from surnames became first names through the mediation of being middle names, although some (like Scott) have become so well known as first names that people barely remember that they originated as last names. Some people get first names in -son simply because they're literally the son of someone with the base name, i.e. a boy may be named Johnson because he's John's son or Wilson because he's Will's son. Beats John Jr. and Will Jr. in my opinion, but it doesn't work with all names. (My father's name was Douglass, but I'm very glad he didn't attempt to name me "Douglassson".) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 23:09, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679334 Wiktionary:Tea room/2013/November: Found match for regex: ::Thank you, Betty White. Speaking of grow a pair, "to play fantasy football"? Really? Would that sense survive RFV if someone were to challenge it? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 23:37, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679334 Wiktionary:Tea room/2013/November: Found match for regex: **Yes, pocket pool is exactly what I was about to say; looks like a 1-to-1 match between the Finnish and English (and probably many other languages too). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:51, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679334 Wiktionary:Tea room/2013/November: Found match for regex: :I suspect he's just using "bits" to mean "traces", as in "This product may contain traces of peanuts", which you sometimes find as a warning on packages of food that doesn't actually contain peanuts but was packaged in a factory where there are peanuts around, and some people are so severely allergic to peanuts that they can have a reaction just from traces of peanut dust on the packaging. I don't think he's using "bit" as any sort of technical term. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:06, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679334 Wiktionary:Tea room/2013/November: Found match for regex: ::: Well, I thought about that too, and I think even in the first sentence it makes a kind of sense. He means cashews and peanuts are different kinds of things, using bit in its bits and pieces sense. Obviously I can't get into the guy's head, but I still don't think he's using it as a technical term for {{w|culinary nut}} or anything like that. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:36, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679334 Wiktionary:Tea room/2013/November: Found match for regex: :My instinct is to use Belarusian in reference to the modern country of Belarus and Byelorussian in reference to the former Byelorussian S.S.R. (and would thus probably mark it historical); I wouldn't use Belorussian at all, but if I encountered it I would expect it also to refer to the former SSR. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:44, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679334 Wiktionary:Tea room/2013/November: Found match for regex: :: Just looking at the period since World War II it seems Romansh (the spelling I've always used in English myself) is slightly more common in modern times, though the two spellings are neck-and-neck most of the time. I personally prefer the c-less spelling in English, but not strongly enough to make an issue out of it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:25, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679334 Wiktionary:Tea room/2013/November: Found match for regex: :To return to the original question, I've always heard BBC reporters pronounce it /ˈbaɪ.ə(ɹ)n/ (depending on the rhoticity of the speaker), so yes, to rhyme with iron. I do find it amusing that they generally call it "Bayern Munich", translating München into English but keeping Bayern in German. I don't know why they don't call it "Bavaria Munich". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:52, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679334 Wiktionary:Tea room/2013/November: Found match for regex: ::However, I observe we're not really answering the OP's question, namely how the two pronunciations differ. If you go to and click on the loudspeaker icon you can here a pronunciation of the "diabeeteez" pronunciation (in IPA, ) and if you go to and click on the loudspeaker icon you can here a pronunciation of the word "Epictetus", which rhymes with the "diabeetus" pronunciation (in IPA ). You just have to mentally replace the "Epict-" part with "diab-". Since you (OP) are German, you may have trouble hearing the difference between /z/ and /s/ at the end of a word, but you should definitely be able to hear the difference between the /iː/ and the /ə/ in the last syllable. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:57, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679346 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2013/November: Found match for regex: :Take a look at for starters. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 23:35, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679347 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2013/October: Found match for regex: :: And you're right, Celtic t can't come from PIE dʰ- (unless it's a loanword from High German, Hittite or Tocharian). There seems to be a lot of highly questionable material at tan#Etymology 1. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:28, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679347 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2013/October: Found match for regex: We seem to have two competing theories as to the Proto-Slavic word for ‘(an individual) hair’: these entries say it was {{m|sla-pro|*volsь}} with a front yer, while these entries say it was {{m|sla-pro|*volsъ}} with a back yer. Lower Sorbian {{m|dsb|włos}} can be either masculine or feminine, and while the masculine can come from either proto-form, the feminine can come only from a form with a front yer. Is there any communis opinio about which form is the right reconstruction? Or were they both present in the proto-language? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:14, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679347 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2013/October: Found match for regex: :: Russian волос seems to be declined as an o-stem, but for all I know that's a later analogy. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:11, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679347 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2013/October: Found match for regex: ::::Ivan has just started Reconstruction:Proto-Slavic/volsъ, so I'd say Reconstruction talk:Proto-Slavic/volsъ is the better place for such a list than here. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:38, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679347 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2013/October: Found match for regex: :::::: It turns out the Lower Sorbian probably really is only masculine. One dictionary claimed it was feminine as well, but apparently only because a plural {{m|dsb|włosy}} would be irregular coming from a masculine {{m|dsb|włos}} but regular coming from a feminine {{m|dsb|włos}}. But if it came down straight from sla-pro as a plurale tantum it could have retained its -y ending despite being masculine. (The regular plural {{m|dsb|włose}} is also attested.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:54, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679347 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2013/October: Found match for regex: :::::::: The i-stem accusative plural and the o-stem nominative and accusative plural could all definitely yield dsb włosy. I'm not sure what *volsьje would give. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:09, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679347 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2013/October: Found match for regex: :::::::::: A regular o-stem ending in -s is głos (both dsb and pl); its plural is głose in dsb and głosy in pl. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:35, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679347 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2013/October: Found match for regex: :The only way this etymology would work is if it had undergone Grimm's Law twice, once to convert *gʷelbhos to *kʷelbos, and once again to change *kʷelbos to *hwelpaz. Seems pretty impossible. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:07, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679347 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2013/October: Found match for regex: :In the case of shtalb, I don't know what you intended to do, but what you succeeded in doing was to delete the entire entry, and Torvalu4 (quite rightly) reverted you. However, he's not an admin so he can't block you from editing, and indeed shows you've never been blocked from editing. There's no restriction on the number of times an entry can be edited within a certain timespan, though if someone else edits the page between the time when you open it for editing and the time when you click "Save page", then you'll get an edit conflict notice. But that won't blank the page unless you explicitly confirm that's what you want to do. So I don't know what's going on either. Do you always click "Show preview" before you click "Save page"? Try that for a while, and see if that helps, as it will presumably show you when what you're about to do is delete all content. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:32, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679347 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2013/October: Found match for regex: :I believe that you didn't intend to delete the entire entry, but if you look at of your edit, you'll see that you did delete the entire entry, even if that wasn't your intention. And there have been other pages where you've deleted all content from the page, leading admins to believe you were saying they were unfixably wrong, so that the pages were deleted. As a result, Tiranë (for example) is now a red link. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:51, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679347 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2013/October: Found match for regex: ** Try clicking "Show changes" and "Show preview" before saving; they will show you what changes you're about to make and what the page will look like when you're done. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:27, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679347 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2013/October: Found match for regex: :Whatever is happening with your edits, I'm certain it has nothing to do with your debate with Torvalu4. There's simply nothing he (or anyone else here, for that matter) could be doing to cause this. Yet it doesn't seem to be happening on this page—you haven't blanked the Etymology Scriptorium once in this whole discussion. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:34, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679347 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2013/October: Found match for regex: ::That's what the Online Etymology Dictionary thinks too. Partridge says it might go with {{m|la|queror||I complain}} (cf. querulous) but that seems a little far-fetched. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:45, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679347 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2013/October: Found match for regex: :I've double-checked Kluge and corrected the etymology. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:40, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679347 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2013/October: Found match for regex: :: I've cleaned up and expanded the entry. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:34, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679347 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2013/October: Found match for regex: :::: No problem. It's called Gaulish at Wiktionary, though, which is its most common name in English. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:53, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679347 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2013/October: Found match for regex: ::You omitted a step: find the proof, publish it in an academic journal, gain the consensus of the academic community, and we will add your conclusion. We don't usually include etymologies that aren't believed by anyone but their proposer, even if published. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:16, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679347 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2013/October: Found match for regex: ::: He never denied that. But the OP's comment that salsiccus "also sounds like sal + sic + que, salsicce, meaning salted and dried" won't work because sic by itself doesn't mean "dry". Nor, for that matter, does sal mean "salted". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:53, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679347 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2013/October: Found match for regex: ::::: There's a difference between sic and siccus. The latter means "dry" (not "dried") in Latin, the first doesn't. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:15, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679347 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2013/October: Found match for regex: ::::::: The stem of siccus isn't sic, it's sicco-, and it doesn't matter whether sausages are dry or dried because the word {{m|la|salsīcius}} doesn't contain that stem anyway (note the long vowel and the single -c-). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:00, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
Page 3679347 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2013/October: Found match for regex: :Ancient Greek {{m|grc|ἄπολις}} is attested, though. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 23:15, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3693247 Wiktionary:Translation requests/archive/2013-09: Found match for regex: :::::: In English, home base and home plate are two names for the same thing. I don't know whether this synonymy is present in Russian as well, but if anything along the lines of основная пластина occurs, then it probably refers to home plate. Incidentally, in baseball one speaks of throwing the ball, never passing or serving it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:16, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
Page 3693247 Wiktionary:Translation requests/archive/2013-09: Found match for regex: :Dieses Wort gefällt mir, denn es erinnert mich an frische Sommernächte, in denen man draußen unter den Sternen schläft. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:10, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Page 3693248 Wiktionary:Translation requests/archive/2013-10: Found match for regex: ::Not to sound snarky, but if you're right there in a city surrounded by hundreds of thousands of native speakers, why are you asking us? ;-) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:06, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3693248 Wiktionary:Translation requests/archive/2013-10: Found match for regex: :::: Fair enough! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:32, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3693248 Wiktionary:Translation requests/archive/2013-10: Found match for regex: :Nur du kannst mir wehtun. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:08, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3693248 Wiktionary:Translation requests/archive/2013-10: Found match for regex: *Séamus (in modern spelling Séamas) is really James. The Old Testament patriarch Jacob is called Iacób in Irish, though I don't how often that's used as a given name in Ireland. The modern spelling of Séaghdha is Sé, and it's a (very rare) boy's name in Ireland, so it would be odd to use it as a middle name for a girl. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:17, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3706211 Module:User:ZxxZxxZ/IPA2: Found match for regex: "",
Page 3707164 Wiktionary:Votes/2014-01/Representing the short-a phoneme of Received Pronunciation: Found match for regex: # {{support}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:26, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3707164 Wiktionary:Votes/2014-01/Representing the short-a phoneme of Received Pronunciation: Found match for regex: #:: I said it all in the beer parlor discussion. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:49, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3773698 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2014-03/CFI: Removing usage in a well-known work 2: Found match for regex: # {{oppose}}. Approval of this proposal will result in the loss of recognition for nonce words found in well-known works. I could agree to having nonce words listed in Appendix: namespace and linking to them from mainspace via {{temp|only in}}, but the current proposal makes no provision for that. (I would rather have abstained, since voting is the worst possible form of decision-making and we should really avoid it as much as possible, but around here abstaining from a vote means having your opinion ignored.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:43, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
Page 3773698 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2014-03/CFI: Removing usage in a well-known work 2: Found match for regex: #:: This vote is solely on "Removing the item 'use in a well-known work, or' from WT:CFI, specifically WT:ATTEST, placing ', or' at the end of the item 'clearly widespread use'." Your comments above reflect what you would like to happen if this proposal is approved, but that's not what the proposal itself says. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:21, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
Page 3773698 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2014-03/CFI: Removing usage in a well-known work 2: Found match for regex: #:::: I think this vote itself already constitutes an undesirable level of instruction creep and bureaucratic masturbation. I hate votes and wish we wouldn't use them in our decision-making. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:40, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
Page 3773698 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2014-03/CFI: Removing usage in a well-known work 2: Found match for regex: #:: This vote and virtually every other vote we've had at Wiktionary proves it. What's blatant nonsense is calling for a "vote" on every little thing we want to do, as is calling ideas you disagree with "criminal". Pretty sure disagreeing with Dan Polansky isn't against the law in my country. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:24, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
Page 3791308 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2014-03/Unified Norwegian: Found match for regex: # {{abstain}} Probably a good idea, but I don't know enough about Norwegian to be 100% sure. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:21, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Page 3822751 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2013/July-December: Found match for regex: :Well, it's good Early Modern English, especially as a translation of “qui es in caelis”. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:02, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Page 3822751 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2013/July-December: Found match for regex: ::::: Using a nonthird-person form after the interrogative who is perfectly normal even in modern English ("who are you?" "who am I"?), it's using a nonthird-person form after the relative who that sounds odd nowadays. Interestingly, there's no verb in the original Greek; it's Πάτερ ἡμῶν ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς, literally "Our father, the one in the heavens". It's the Latin translation Pater noster qui es in caelis that adds in a verb. The NRSV translates it simply "Our father in heaven", which is straightforward and idiomatic while still being more faithful to the source text than "Heavenly father" is. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:56, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
Page 3822751 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2013/July-December: Found match for regex: ::::::: But there's no room for a pronoun; qui is the subject of the verb, and its antecedent is pater. It's when you put a pronoun in (as German does with "Vater Unser, der du bist in Himmel") that it gets on syntactically shaky ground. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:52, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
Page 3822751 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2013/July-December: Found match for regex: ::::::::: Because "Pater noster" is already in the vocative, and the subject of the sentence is "nomen tuum", so there's no grammatical function left over for "tu" to have. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:47, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
Page 3822751 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2013/July-December: Found match for regex: ::::::::::: But all isn't a noun like Pater noster is. You could have Omnes qui estis hic or Omnes vos qui estis hic, and with a noun you could have Amici qui estis hic, but Amici vos qui estis hic just isn't good Latin. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:29, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
Page 3822751 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2013/July-December: Found match for regex: ::::::::::::: The Latin translation of the Greek original begins with the sentence "Pater noster qui es in caelis, sanctificetur nomen tuum". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:51, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
Page 3822751 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2013/July-December: Found match for regex: ::It can't hurt to list the URLs in a nonlinking fashion (e.g. by stripping off the http(s):// part) on the talk page to make them easier for other people to find. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:47, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3822751 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2013/July-December: Found match for regex: :Yeah, that's happened to me too. It's really annoying. The only solution I know of is to write <references/> at the bottom of the section I'm editing; save; add it again in a proper References section at the bottom of the page; and then go back and delete it. Either that, or just edit the entire language entry at once so you can add the References section at the same time as the reference. But calling it "abuse" is really an exaggeration. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:55, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3822751 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2013/July-December: Found match for regex: ::. Functional explanations for linguistic change almost never stand up to scrutiny. Some languages just develop articles over time, even without any identifiable external reason. In this case, bilingualism in Greek still doesn't explain the development of the indefinite article, since Greek didn't have one; and you could still push the question back and ask why Greek developed a definite article (in Homeric Greek, ὁ/ἡ/τό was a demonstrative, not an article). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:18, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3822751 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2013/July-December: Found match for regex: :: Well, I think that's usually true in historical linguistics, but there are sensible why-questions you can ask about language, as long as you don't try to take the why's back too far. For example, "Why is it gli italiani e gli spagnoli and not i italiani ed i spagnoli?" "Because you use gli rather than i before a word starting with a vowel and before a word starting with s followed by a consonant." (An answerable question.) "But why do you use gli rather than i before a word starting with a vowel and before a word starting with s followed by a consonant?" "Umm... just 'cuz. Because if you don't, it's wrong in Italian." (A non-answer to an unanswerable question, even AFAICT when you know something about historical linguistics and phonology.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 23:02, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Page 3822751 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2013/July-December: Found match for regex: ::::We use pointed Yiddish for main entries here, so specifically it's {{m|yi|סיראָוועטקע|tr=sirovetke}}, which Beinfeld and Bochner give as a variant form of {{m|yi|סראָוועטקע|tr=srovetke}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:33, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
Page 3822751 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2013/July-December: Found match for regex: :Could it be céad míle fáilte? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:12, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
Page 3870051 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2014-06/Romanization of Sanskrit: Found match for regex: # {{support}}. There are whole books of Sanskrit written in Latin script, so I see no reason to exclude Sanskrit in Latin from the dictionary. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:12, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3870051 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2014-06/Romanization of Sanskrit: Found match for regex: #*::: What if we restricted romanized Sanskrit entries to IAST? Then there would be only as many Latin-alphabet entries as Devanagari entries. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:48, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3887984 Wiktionary:Votes/2014-06/Allowing Cyrillic to be italicized: Found match for regex: # {{abstain}} As long as Early Cyrillic is not italicized, I don't care one way or the other whether Modern Cyrillic is italicized or not. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:19, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
Page 3891327 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2014/January-June: Found match for regex: :: It looks fine to me. In fact, there's no record at the U.S. Copyright Office website that the copyright on this book was renewed, in which case it's in the public domain in the U.S. now anyway. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:12, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3891327 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2014/January-June: Found match for regex: :::: It sure looks that way. According to "Copyright Term and the Public Domain in the United States", works published from 1964 to 1977 with a copyright notice are under copyright until 95 years after their publication date. So while Dictionary and Texts are public domain, Grammar won't be until January 1, 2060. Them's the breaks! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:47, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3891327 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2014/January-June: Found match for regex: :What does Dutch use if it needs a possessive that refers back to men? German uses sein to refer back to man; does Dutch not use zijn that way? Alternatively, Irish uses the second person singular for it; could Dutch do that? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:01, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3891327 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2014/January-June: Found match for regex: :{{w|Old Occitan}} says, "The Catalan language diverged from Old Occitan between the eleventh and fourteenth centuries", sourced to "Riquer, Martí de, Història de la Literatura Catalana, vol. 1. Barcelona: Edicions Ariel, 1964", so I'd say any Catalan terms from earlier than that period could be considered Old Occitan. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:57, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3891327 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2014/January-June: Found match for regex: ::: But since we deal in written language, the issue for us is more whether there were significant differences in the written dialects before the 14th century or so. If not, I'd use the Old Occitan label and tag words with {{temp|context|Catalan dialect}} as necessary. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:58, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3891327 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2014/January-June: Found match for regex: :: Does it matter? I say yes, they should be macrons. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:12, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3891327 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2014/January-June: Found match for regex: :::: Using both means both the long and short versions are attested, or it isn't clear whether the vowel was long or short. *nō̆- is basically shorthand for *no-/nō-. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:31, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3891327 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2014/January-June: Found match for regex: :::::: No, a vowel letter with no diacritic over it is generally interpreted as short. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:28, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Page 3891327 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2014/January-June: Found match for regex: ::Also, the absence (or presence) of diacritics doesn't make one script "superior to" another. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:34, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3891327 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2014/January-June: Found match for regex: :::: I too think that abjads are more suitable to some languages than others. The Hebrew script is great for Hebrew and Aramaic, but it's really cumbersome for Yiddish (partly because Yiddish tries to make an alphabet out of it); Yiddish (especially Standard Yiddish and the Litvish dialect) is IMHO much better suited to Cyrillic, but for political reasons it's unlikely to ever be changed. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:03, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3891327 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2014/January-June: Found match for regex: :::::: There are plenty of non-Slavic languages that use Cyrillic һ for /h/, and й for /j/ is unproblematic once you get over the Slavic prejudice against using it word-initially. Hebrew letters are just so big and blocky that words get really long and "heavy-looking" once you start using full-fledged letters like אַ, אָ, and ע for extremely common vowel sounds, not to mention the really clunky ײַ and the need to put a silent א at the start of vowel-initial words. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:38, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3891327 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2014/January-June: Found match for regex: :::::::: I make fun of the French for taking 8 letters to spell three sounds: {{m|fr|souhaits}} = {{IPAchar|/swɛ/}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:04, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Page 3891327 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2014/January-June: Found match for regex: :: Refer to your {{m|de|Hosen}} as {{term|trousers}} or (if applicable) {{term|jeans}} but never as {{term|pants}}, since the latter refers only to your {{m|de|Unterhosen}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:56, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Page 3891327 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2014/January-June: Found match for regex: :No. Per {{w|No problemo}}, correct Spanish is sin problema or no hay problema. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:08, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Page 3891327 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2014/January-June: Found match for regex: :::::: Another way to skirt the issue is to write "a phoneme /æ/". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:23, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Page 3891327 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2014/January-June: Found match for regex: :No discussion or authorization is needed to justify using a Cyrillic letter rather than a Latin letter in words written in the Cyrillic alphabet. (Of course if we have any Latin-alphabet Ossetian entries, they should use the Latin letter.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:24, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3891327 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2014/January-June: Found match for regex: :: But the problem is that element has senses that are usually or exclusively found in the plural; these are currently senses 5 and 9, which correspond to senses 2 and 4 of elements. I can certainly understand the desire to keep those definitions at the plural form, just as the main definitions of scissors and trousers are at the plural forms, not at scissor and trouser. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:02, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3891327 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2014/January-June: Found match for regex: :::: Well, "more commonly used" shouldn't be the only criterion; words like shoes, toes, eyes, and ears are more commonly used in the plural than the singular (and so, according to b.g.c. Ngrams is elements), but that doesn't mean we should use the plurals as the lemma forms in those cases. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:19, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
Page 3891327 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2014/January-June: Found match for regex: ::: At Wikipedia, writing an article about one's own company or product is not against the rules per se, but it is Very Strongly Discouraged because of the great difficulty of writing neutrally about something in which one has a vested interest (financial or otherwise). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:26, 7 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3891327 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2014/January-June: Found match for regex: *Bigotry? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:06, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3891327 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2014/January-June: Found match for regex: :::: Latin in particular doesn't have nearly enough cases to cover all prepositions. For example, both {{m|la|cum||with}} and {{m|la|sine||without}} take the ablative; you couldn't reasonably use the bare ablative to cover both of them (as well as all the other prepositions that take the ablative). A language would need two dozen cases or more in order to completely dispense with adpositions; not even Finnish, Hungarian, and Turkish manage that. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:20, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3891327 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2014/January-June: Found match for regex: ::: We don't make judgment calls on what's "improper" at all. We indicate that a term is "nonstandard" only in very clear cases where several usage guides and other dictionaries have indicated that the term is nonstandard. This does not seem to be the case with anarcho-feminist. Google Books Ngrams suggests that the anarcho- and anarcha- forms are about equally popular. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:21, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3891327 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2014/January-June: Found match for regex: :Lower Sorbian, which is more closely related to Polish than Russian is, is definitely not a zero copula language. Even the "l-form" of the past tense is still a true participle which requires a form of "to be", e.g. wón jo cytał knigły "he read a book", where Russian and (I believe) Polish both treat the "l-form" as the main verb: он читал, on czytał (right?). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:43, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3891327 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2014/January-June: Found match for regex: ::: I wasn't sure what I meant by that either. A finite verb, I guess, as opposed to a participle, which is nonfinite. Our definition of finite verb is pretty sucky, incidentally; I'm not convinced that all finite verbs in all languages can stand alone as a complete sentence. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:30, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
Page 3891327 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2014/January-June: Found match for regex: *Gesundheit. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:14, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3891327 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2014/January-June: Found match for regex: :Category:Dimensions and Category:en:Dimensions don't exist, but we could consider creating them. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:33, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3891327 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2014/January-June: Found match for regex: ::: Time, maybe? Considering there are only three dimensions in space, I'm impressed we even have four terms to put in. More generally, I see that WP has w:Category:Physical quantities for pretty much everything that can be measured; maybe we could have that too. Or just put them in Category:en:Geometry, perhaps? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:37, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3891327 Wiktionary:Information desk/Archive 2014/January-June: Found match for regex: :You can search a word in English and, if you're lucky, find the lemma form of that word (usually, just the singular) in the language you're interested in under the "Translations" header. If it's a blue link, you can go to the entry and (hopefully) find the plural there. If it's a red link, you're out of luck. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:25, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Page 3899548 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/September: Found match for regex: :It's allophonic, but the rules are complicated. Long vowels occur before certain consonant clusters (basically, the ones that can form a syllable onset) and short before others (those that can't or don't form an onset). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:48, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3899548 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/September: Found match for regex: :I'd say you can add whatever words you like, but they should always be marked as AU, even in cases where there's no significant pronunciation difference between the various dialects. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:02, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3899548 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/September: Found match for regex: :It would be good if we could improve our search function to suggest possible words in such cases. It does do that sometimes, but not often enough. Until we manage to strengthen our search function, I would suggest trying Google. When I typed in lacksadaisical the first thing it said was "Did you mean lackadaisical?" and when I typed in algorythim the first thing it said was "Showing results for algorithm", so in both cases Google was good at figuring out what you were trying to say. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:25, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3899548 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/September: Found match for regex: :P.S. If you go to Category:English lemmas you'll find a list of all English headwords here; it's a bit like seeing just the headwords in a paper dictionary. So that might help too, rather than trudging downstairs for your paper dictionary. Now, it is true that if you scroll through that category 200 entries at a time, it might take you a long time to get to the section you're looking for, but if you type https://en.wiktionary.orghttps://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Category:English_lemmas&from=alg into your browser's URL bar, you'll find all the headwords starting with "alg-", and https://en.wiktionary.orghttps://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Category:English_lemmas&from=lack will get you all headwords starting with "lack-". I concede this is rather esoteric knowledge we can't expect new users to figure out intuitively. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:35, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3899548 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/September: Found match for regex: :This is Wiktionary. Your sandbox is over at Wikipedia, at w:User:Emma3171/sandbox. It doesn't get cleared automatically. Anything you have written there will stay there until you clear it yourself. And even after it's been cleared, you can still find its previous contents in the page history. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:07, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Page 3899548 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/September: Found match for regex: :::: Long consonants are very often indicated by gemination in IPA, probably more often than with the long sign, so you can put the syllable break boundary between them, thus: /pet.to/. To be honest, though, I've never understood Wiktionary's obsession with showing syllable breaks; they're usually either completely predictable or (as in English) totally ambiguous. Showing a syllable break at an ambisyllabic consonant is easy when the consonant is also long, as in the /pet.to/ example above, but how do you show that the /p/ in happy is ambisyllabic while not being long? Neither /hæ.pi/ nor /hæp.i/ nor /hæp.pi/ is unambiguously correct. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:15, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3899548 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/September: Found match for regex: :::::: But then we only have to show the break before the stressed syllable, not the other ones. So /ˈhæpi/ would be unproblematic, though /ɛkˈspɛns ~ ɛksˈpɛns/ still wouldn't be. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:54, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3899548 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/September: Found match for regex: :::::::: Yeah, but as long as you use /dd/ and /ss/ rather than /dː/ and /sː/ it isn't really a problem. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:06, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3899549 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/October: Found match for regex: :If our definition of block capital is correct, then typed capitals wouldn't be block capitals. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:24, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3899549 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/October: Found match for regex: :Go to Special:Contributions, enter their user name, and check the "Only show edits that are page creations" box. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:13, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3899549 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/October: Found match for regex: :This is Wiktionary, not Wikipedia. This is not the place to discuss suggested page moves at Wikipedia. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:09, 4 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3899549 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/October: Found match for regex: :It's dos, and this meaning is the first meaning listed under do#Noun. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:41, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3899550 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/November: Found match for regex: :This is Wiktionary, not Wikipedia. Because this is a dictionary, the difference between capital letters and lower-case letters is very important, so polish and Polish are two different pages, and subjunctive has a lower-case letter because it isn't normally capitalized. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 23:23, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
Page 3899550 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/November: Found match for regex: :According to G-d#Translations, it's {{m|fr|D.ieu}}, which is confirmed by and , while indicates an alternative form {{m|fr|D-ieu}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:04, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
Page 3899550 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/November: Found match for regex: :I'm pretty sure there's never been an Ancient Greek Wiktionary, and I'm pretty sure there will never be one. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 23:48, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
Page 3899550 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/November: Found match for regex: :::: Actually, the main problem—indeed the main reason why no more Wikimedia projects in extinct languages will be approved—is that there are no native speakers to form the basis of the community of editors. It is now a requirement that a language have native speakers in order for it to have its own Wikipedia, Wiktionary, Wikibooks, etc. Exceptions are sometimes given for Wikisource and Wikiquote, since those projects present previously published information rather than original writing. However, even then, extinct languages are often incorporated into the Wikisources and Wikiquotes of their modern descendants, so Old English source material is hosted at English Wikisource and Ancient Greek source material is hosted at Greek Wikisource, and so on. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:12, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
Page 3899550 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/November: Found match for regex: :::::: Of course we can have as many Ancient Greek words here at English Wiktionary as we want. But there isn't going to be a Wiktionary with definitions written in Ancient Greek and with Ancient Greek as the interface language. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:45, 11 November 2014 (UTC)
Page 3899550 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/November: Found match for regex: :I've deleted them both since you have gotten {{temp|RQ:Mlry MArthrP1}} and {{temp|RQ:Mlry MArthrP2}} to work. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:48, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
Page 3899550 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/November: Found match for regex: :Sense 1 is not post-2000; here is an example from a book published in 1979. Also, {{m|en|nonsexual}} doesn't mean "not experiencing sexual attraction", and since "not experiencing sexual attraction" is probably currently the most common meaning of {{m|en|asexual}} outside of biology, using it this way is neither exclusively colloquial, nor a misnomer, nor a misuse of the term. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:35, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
Page 3899550 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/November: Found match for regex: :The citation I gave wasn't in German, though I did link it through books.google.de. Try this link: . We don't have a policy on how to order senses; some people are in favor of putting the oldest sense first (even if it's now obsolete), other people are in favor of putting the oldest non-obsolete sense first, other people are in favor of putting the currently most commonly used sense first, other people just add senses at the bottom as they think of them. The reason I said that nonsexual doesn't mean "not experiencing sexual attraction" is simply that as far as I knew, the word isn't used that way; however, I have now found this book that does use nonsexual with that meaning, so I take it back. But nonsexual is still much less common in this sense than asexual is. Saying that things are an "error" or "misuse" makes sense only within a prescriptive context (and we aren't a prescriptive dictionary) or with regard to actual real-world usage (and since asexual is very widely used to mean "not experiencing sexual attraction", it isn't an error or a misuse to use it that way). It isn't "an arbitrary decision someone made", it's the way the language evolved. You might as well call it "an arbitrary decision someone made" that {{m|en|silly}} now means "foolish" instead of "blessed" as it originally did. No one consciously made that decision, the language just evolved that way. It's true that our definition could use some tweaking, as you point out, since asexuality doesn't necessary entail a complete lack of any sexual attraction, but can also include a simple lack of interest in sex. I really don't see that the biological and sociological meanings are in any direct conflict, though; amoebas and bacteria are just as uninterested in sex as any person who identifies as asexual. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:45, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
Page 3899550 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/November: Found match for regex: :: I have no objection to that. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:51, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
Page 3899551 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/December: Found match for regex: :: ~~I don't think even people who say "Ich bin gestanden" and "Ich bin gesessen" say "Ich bin angefangen". I'm sure it's just a mistake in the template. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:47, 9 December 2014 (UTC)~~
Page 3899551 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/December: Found match for regex: :: Having read the usage note, I take that back. Apparently it's nonstandard usage found in some parts of Germany. If de-wikt doesn't have it, that'll be because they're much more prescriptive than we are. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:49, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3899551 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/December: Found match for regex: : Well, I like it. And I don't think it's pedantic; it's just a way to introduce words that are unusual for one reason or another. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:33, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3899551 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/December: Found match for regex: ::: We're a dictionary; we want to encourage people to look up definitions! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:25, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3899551 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/December: Found match for regex: ::Most languages have rules of external sandhi to some extent. I would be in favor of us adding liaison forms to our French pronunciation sections, at least in cases where the pronunciation may not be what the spelling leads us to expect (e.g. {{m|fr|] ] ]}} is {{IPAchar|}}, isn't it?). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:07, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3899551 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/December: Found match for regex: :Not all. Only verbs stressed on the first syllable take the {{m|de|ge-}} prefix. Verbs starting with an unstressed prefix like {{m|de|be-}}, {{m|de|ver-}}, etc., as well as verbs ending in {{m|de|-ieren}}, do not take the {{m|de|ge-}} prefix. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:59, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3899551 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/December: Found match for regex: ::: There's {{m|de|gebenedeit}}, but that's really rare, being used virtually only in the Ave Maria. Otherwise I can't think of any exceptions at all. The {{m|nl|getolereert}} vs. {{m|de|toleriert}} contrast is one of the most salient morphological differences between Dutch and German. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 23:33, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3899551 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/December: Found match for regex: :Well, we already have a lot of entries in Category:Swahili language, and there's already a Swahili Wiktionary, and the Kamusi Project is also a collaborative dictionary with a large Swahili database, so the projects are already started, they just need more volunteers. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:51, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3899551 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/December: Found match for regex: :You might be interested to read w:Santa Ana winds#Etymology. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 23:43, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3899551 Wiktionary:Information desk/2014/December: Found match for regex: *:: I'm not sure what you're getting at. There is no separate Unicode character for the slashed zero; some fonts render "0" with a slash, others render it without one. Without a Unicode character, we have no way of having an entry for it besides 0. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:40, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3907532 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2014-07/Allowing well-attested romanizations of Sanskrit: Found match for regex: # {{oppose}} I don't see why the threshold for inclusion of Latin-alphabet Sanskrit should be higher than it is for Devanagari Sanskrit. Sanskrit is not a WDL, so one single mention should be sufficient. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:12, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 3907532 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2014-07/Allowing well-attested romanizations of Sanskrit: Found match for regex: #::If the requirement for Sanskrit is "one use in a contemporaneous source" then we can't host any Sanskrit here at all in any script, since Sanskrit was not written down until centuries after it became extinct. Nevertheless, CFI does permit one mention for extinct languages under the same conditions as for living LDLs. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:28, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 3907532 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2014-07/Allowing well-attested romanizations of Sanskrit: Found match for regex: #:::: I suppose the condition that "the community of editors for that language should maintain a list of materials deemed appropriate as the only sources for entries based on a single mention" is there to exclude that sort of thing. If the community of editors of Ancient Egyptian maintains a list that excludes anything coining words for nuclear energy, then such coinings will not be included. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:35, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 3907532 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2014-07/Allowing well-attested romanizations of Sanskrit: Found match for regex: #::: It's a matter of establishing a precedent. I don't want to support a proposal with an overly narrow inclusion criterion, because if it passes it will then become the status quo, making it that much harder to later broaden the inclusion criteria. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:28, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 3907532 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2014-07/Allowing well-attested romanizations of Sanskrit: Found match for regex: #:: Why to the exclusion of the Latin alphabet? Why not have both? Why should we allow romanizations for Gothic, Chinese, and Japanese, and prohibit them for Sanskrit? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:55, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 3946241 Wiktionary:Votes/2014-08/Migrating from Template:context to Template:cx: Found match for regex: #:: I think he means mu#Etymology 2. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:11, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
Page 3946241 Wiktionary:Votes/2014-08/Migrating from Template:context to Template:cx: Found match for regex: # {{abstain}} because polls are evil. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:34, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3946241 Wiktionary:Votes/2014-08/Migrating from Template:context to Template:cx: Found match for regex: #:: Policy votes in English Wiktionary — replacing discussion and consensus-seeking with divisiveness and the tyranny of the majority since probably earlier than 2006. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:35, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 3967426 Wiktionary:Votes/2014-09/Renaming rhyme pages: Found match for regex: # {{abstain}} Me either. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:25, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 3967426 Wiktionary:Votes/2014-09/Renaming rhyme pages: Found match for regex: # {{abstain}} We aren't talking about suffixes. The /eɪm/ of name isn't a suffix. It's a {{w|syllable rhyme}}. But I still don't really care whether that's indicated by a leading hyphen or not. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:27, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 3998686 Wiktionary:Votes/2014-11/Entries which do not meet CFI to be deleted even if there is a consensus to keep: Found match for regex: # {{oppose}} The situation does not arise. If there's a consensus to keep, then there's a consensus that the entry does meet WT:CFI. CFI has more than one possible interpretation; it's not objective, nor should it be. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:32, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Page 4001784 Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2014-11/User:ObsequiousNewt for admin: Found match for regex: # {{support}}—Especially since Atelaes appears to have gone on an extended wikibreak (though I'd support even if he hadn't). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:53, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
Page 4010746 Wiktionary:Votes/2014-12/User:Anglom for administrator: Found match for regex: # {{support}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:31, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 4026439 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/December: Found match for regex: ** It's very common for "Variations of" appendices to have a section called "Homophones", but they aren't really homophones. I'd support a different name for them. They tend to include strings that are similar to the one in question but replace a letter with a letter that (in English at least) often has the same sound (e.g. replacing c with k and vice versa) or doubling one of the letters. For example, I recently made Appendix:Variations of "mis" and included a Homphones section where I listed miss (and several variations on it), mys, miis, and MMIs. I think it's helpful to include these links, but I know it's misleading (or flat-out wrong) to call them homophones. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:11, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4026439 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/December: Found match for regex: :::It's a proper spelling, since Latin is one of the alphabets used for Pali. I'm pleased to see the {{tl|pi-alt}} template, but I wonder if it can be made to completely omit the line for the current transliteration. For example, at byaggha there's a line that just says "(Latin script)"; couldn't the module eliminate the whole line? (Sorry I'm late to this conversation, I only just now noticed, on January 2nd, that the December Beer Parlor was not on my watchlist!) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:28, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4026441 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/January: Found match for regex: :Certainly one reason we haven't any new WOTDs yet this year is that this year is only two days old. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:02, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026441 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/January: Found match for regex: ::: I don't like the idea of cycling through all our entries regardless of quality. At WT:FWOTD there is the requirement that a candidate word must have pronunciation information and at least one citation; I think that English WOTDs ought to be held to at least that standard if not a higher one. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:17, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026441 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/January: Found match for regex: :: I for one do not want to see protolanguages in translation tables. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:58, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026441 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/January: Found match for regex: :::: I would not be opposed to things like Appendix:English–Proto-Indo-European glossary, Appendix:English–Proto-Semitic glossary, Appendix:English–Proto-Algonquian glossary and the like, though, just like proto-language word are in Appendix space rather than mainspace. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:07, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026441 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/January: Found match for regex: :::::: Since Latin word order is free, -que attaches to whichever word is first: canis magnus felisque parvus or magnus canis parvusque felis, which just proves your point. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:52, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026441 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/January: Found match for regex: *** I also don't think a change is necessary. It seems like a solution in search of a problem. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:52, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026441 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/January: Found match for regex: Pinging NativeCat, Chuck Entz, Ungoliant, and Embryomystic. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:08, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026441 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/January: Found match for regex: ::: Better yet, Wikimedia needs to move its nrm projects to nrf. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 23:05, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026441 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/January: Found match for regex: *So can we consider this to have consensus, or do I have to start a vote before it will actually happen? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:11, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026441 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/January: Found match for regex: *::: Short of going through all of Category:Guernésiais language, Category:Jèrriais language, and Category:Norman language manually, I don't know what to do to merge them. I'm not a bot operator, nor would I even know how to begin programming a bot. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:49, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026441 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/January: Found match for regex: :::::: Module:labels/data already includes "Guernsey" and "Jersey", so we can use those. It will generate the names "Guernsey Norman" and "Jersey Norman", which are probably easier to understand than Guernésiais and Jèrriais anyway. Without a bot, it will take for freakin' ever, since Jèrriais alone has over 9000 entries. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:41, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026441 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/January: Found match for regex: :This reminds me of the language ISO is pleased to call "Hiberno-Scottish Gaelic", a term they apparently made up, which has been given the code ghc. Basically, it's a cover term for Early Modern Irish and Early Modern Scottish Gaelic and is hardly more different from the modern varieties (abstracting away from the Irish spelling reform) than Early Modern English is from modern English. We do not recognize ghc as a separate language, but simply treat 13th- to 17th-century Irish as ga and 13th- to 18th-century Scottish Gaelic as gd. I'm inclined to believe Ivan when he says the differences between "Literary Kajkavian" and modern dialectal Kajkavian are more orthographic than linguistic, and to oppose recognition of the kjv code, at least for the time being. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:33, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026441 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/January: Found match for regex: :Yes, because I'd oppose. I think entries of characters whose only definition is their Unicode character name should be hard redirects to whatever Appendix lists them, rather than being redlinks. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:03, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026441 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/January: Found match for regex: ::::: You, Aɴɢʀ and bd2412 specified "characters whose only definition is their Unicode character name", though? This seems to primarily imply "decorative" Unicode blocks like "miscellaneous symbols", "box drawings", "arrows". If there is reason to suspect that there is a more specific definition in existence — as is the case for all orthographic and mathematical characters, for starters — no redirect should be created, IMO. --Tropylium (talk) 22:14, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026441 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/January: Found match for regex: ::::::::: Edits that don't change the appearance of the page, such as whether there's a space after # and whether {{temp|context}} or {{temp|lb}} is used, should never be edit-warred over, or worried about in any way. If someone switches between one way and the other, let them. It has no bearing on the dictionary at all. As for copyvio, what does BD2412 say? It seems to me to be less of a copyvio to use the same quote over and over than to use different sentences from the same work to exemplify different words, because that way we're using less of the total work. And copyrighted or not, I see no problem at all in using the same sentence to illustrate multiple words. I've done it myself to illustrate words of Irish. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:46, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026441 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/January: Found match for regex: ::::::::::: The difference between US and UK spelling is visible on the displayed page, as is the difference between "<" and "from". The difference between presence and absence of a space after # is not. And there is no way the absence of a space after # "massively hinders usability of the wikitext"; it's a purely aesthetic preference on your part. "Non-consensual switching" only leads to back-and-forth if a second editor actually goes to the trouble of switching an edit back to how it was before, which in the cases under discussion is superfluous and frankly silly, since edits of this kind have no effect on the actual content. Of the diffs provided in this thread, I have not yet seen one worth getting upset about, much less one worth reverting. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:12, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026441 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/January: Found match for regex: ::::::::::::: If he were the one reverting your edits my reaction would be the same. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:25, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026441 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/January: Found match for regex: :::::* Does it matter? FWIW I think it's most likely to be WF making fun of this thread and that ReidAA has nothing to do with it, but really it just doesn't matter either way. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 00:38, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026441 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/January: Found match for regex: ::::The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:38, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026441 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/January: Found match for regex: Category:Fashion contains both Category:Cosmetics and Category:Makeup. What, if any, is the difference between them? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:40, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026441 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/January: Found match for regex: *:: I'm not entirely sure what you're looking for. Something along the lines of a sense of {{m|en|favorite}} that {{m|en|favourite}} does not have? If so, there's a meaning of {{m|en|program}} that {{m|en|programme}} doesn't have, namely a computer program (which is spelled program in en-GB as well as en-US). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:29, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026441 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/January: Found match for regex: *::: @Aɴɢʀ: When the subject of centralizing -ize/-ise and -or/-our and other US/UK pairs of spellings' content onto single pages comes up, people sometimes say "what if a given sense is only attested in one spelling?" My points are (1) senses being split by spelling isn't just a US/UK thing, (2) splits can be handled in the way the IP suggests, and (3) senses being split specifically by US/UK spelling seems to be not only too vanishingly rare to represent an obstacle, but perhaps entirely nonexistent. An example of a US/UK spelling split would be if "realize" were used to mean "say foobar" in America, always with the -ize spelling, while it was never used to mean that in Britain or with the -ise spelling. (In such a case, if we centralized page would have to contain a note that the "say foobar" sense way US-only.) In the case of program/programme, I note that {{b.g.c.|"computer programme"}} is actually very well attested. Even if it weren't, the fact that both national varieties of English used the spelling program would be a different kind of issue. (Specifically, it would mean there were two things we needed entries for: one thing spelt "programme" in the UK and "program" in the US, and another thing spelt "program" in both countries. In the "realize" example, in contrast, we'd be talking about a thing that was attested only in one country and in one spelling, and that wasn't used in the other country in any spelling.) that turned into a ramble, I apologize/apologise... - -sche (discuss) 22:30, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026441 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/January: Found match for regex: *:::: So something more along the lines of British {{m|en|arsed}} (as in I can't be arsed to do it), which isn't *assed in American English, because that word isn't used with that meaning in American English? I know that's not a perfect example because arse and ass differ in more than just spelling, but if spelling were the only difference between them, would that be what you're looking for? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 23:17, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026442 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/February: Found match for regex: :To what end? I think it would be more helpful to have a category for terms without IPA pronunciation, so we know what needs to be added. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:37, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026442 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/February: Found match for regex: ::::: In the absence of a meaningful way to define the alleged distinction between common nouns and proper nouns (and I mean anywhere in the world, not just on Wiktionary), the question is moot. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:38, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026442 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/February: Found match for regex: *I don't use the anagrams sections for anything myself, but they do no harm and don't duplicate information available (or even potentially available) in any other Wikimedia project, so I'd be opposed to trashing them. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:41, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026442 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/February: Found match for regex: ::: We've already made vandals sysops too, and even allowed them to remain sysops after their vandalism has come to light. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:43, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026442 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/February: Found match for regex: *No. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:21, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026442 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/February: Found match for regex: ::I think they'd be more palatable if they weren't called "Trivia". We already have a "Usage notes" section; what about making an "Orthographic notes" section for information such as is provided in the sections linked to above? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:06, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026442 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/February: Found match for regex: :I wouldn't call it a policy so much as my personal decision which no one has objected to. I made that choice for Old Irish because Old Irish verb forms are notoriously unpredictable. It is very hard, often impossible, to say what a given form of a given Old Irish verb will be unless it's attested. (Students of Old Irish are often left with the impression that all verbs in that language are irregular; that's an exaggeration, but only a small one.) For this reason, I thought it best if we don't even try to predict them, but merely to list the attested forms. Ancient Greek, on the other hand, has comparatively well-behaved verbs: if you know the stem and the ending, you can glue them together to make the verb form. Even if that form is unattested, you can quite certain that the predicted form is correct. Also, the Ancient Greek corpus is orders of magnitude larger than the Old Irish corpus, making it much more difficult to find out what is and isn't attested. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:41, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026443 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/March: Found match for regex: ::I don't know about Proto-Ugric, but there is a clear distinction between root and stem in Proto-Indo-European. The root is the most basic lexical part, which has a canonical shape (one or two consonants followed by a vowel followed optionally by a sonorant consonant followed optionally by an obstruent consonant). A stem is in many cases a root (appearing in one of its "grades", full grade, o-grade, or zero-grade) followed by a suffix; the stem is what the endings are added to. A single root may form multiple stems, especially in verbs, which may have a present stem, perfect stem, aorist stem, etc., all formed from the same root but using different "grades" and different suffixes (or no suffix at all—some stems are identical to the roots they're formed from) and maybe other modifications like reduplication. See for example {{m|ine-pro|*gʷem-}}, a root, which forms the present stem {{m|ine-pro|*gʷm̥sḱé-}}, the aorist stem {{m|ine-pro|*gʷém-}} (which happens to be identical to the root in this case), and the perfect stem {{m|ine-pro|*gʷegʷóm-}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:31, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026443 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/March: Found match for regex: *I feel like such fine phonetic detail doesn't belong in a dictionary because it's not a lexical property of the word in question. The fact that /ʁ/ is realized as in Bavarian is a fact about the phonology of Bavarian, not a fact about {{m|de|robben}}. I also wonder how verifiable a lot of these pronunciations are. Who says that it's , with a highly unusual and almost unpronounceable sequence of vowel plus syllabic consonant in northern and central German? I live in Berlin, and while I've certainly heard (which isn't even listed), I don't think I've ever heard . I don't think I can even produce in a way that is reliably distinct from . And who says that the standard German pronunciation of {{m|de|Madrid}} is with an aspirated at the end of a syllable? I've never read a phonological description of standard German that permits aspirated consonants at the end of a syllable. I'm also curious about what inflected and derived forms of {{m|de|Madrid}} are attested to verify the claim that the final consonant is underlyingly /t/, i.e. that the word works in German as if it were spelled Madrit. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:31, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026443 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/March: Found match for regex: Do we still need {{temp|lang}}? Is there anything that {{temp|lang|it|Nel mezzo del cammin di nostra vita}} does that {{temp|l|it||Nel mezzo del cammin di nostra vita}} (note the two vertical bars after it) doesn't? If I want to put a link inside {{temp|lang}}, e.g. {{temp|lang|it|Nel ] del cammin di nostra vita}}, it doesn't even tell the link to go to the Italian section, while {{temp|l|it|Nel ] del cammin di nostra vita}} does tell the link what language it is. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:48, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026443 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/March: Found match for regex: :: Besides quotations, I've sometimes used it in inflection-table templates for forms that don't need linking. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:51, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026443 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/March: Found match for regex: ::::::I don't really give a flying fox if we delete it or not; I just want to know if there's any particular reason I should keep using it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:23, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026443 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/March: Found match for regex: :I prefer phonemic transcription because that's what most dictionaries use and because that's what lexical. That said, the phonemic transcription need not be highly abstract; for example, if the distinction between two phonemes is loss in a certain environment, then the sound that surfaces can be transcribed even if an abstract analysis would regard the other sound as the underlying one. (For example, German {{m|de|Rad}} can be transcribed {{IPAchar|/ʁaːt/}} rather than {{IPAchar|/ʁaːd/}} since /t/ and /d/ are distinct phonemes in German, even though an abstract analysis would posit {{IPAchar|/ʁaːd/}} as the underlying form.) But that's just my preference; we have plenty of examples of narrow transcription being used, and there's no reason we can't use both. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:06, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026443 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/March: Found match for regex: ::: I agree. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:26, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026443 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/March: Found match for regex: :::: That's a difficult case. On the one hand, you don't want to give such a highly abstract representation (like the SPE ones you mentioned) that the word would be unrecognizable to native speakers if pronounced the way it's transcribed. On the other hand, you don't want to overwhelm the user with a bunch of fine phonetic detail whose absence would probably not be noticed by native speakers. One rule of thumb I sometimes try to follow in cases like this is "How narrow a transcription can I get without using any IPA diacritics, superscripts, etc., but only the basic characters?" Obviously that rule can't be applied exceptionlessly in all cases, but if {{IPAchar|}} is unambiguous as it stands, then don't go overboard and transcribe it {{IPAchar|}} or whatever. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:02, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026443 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/March: Found match for regex: ::::::: But our license is also CC ShareAlike. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:39, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026443 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/March: Found match for regex: :::::::::: Yeah, it's confusing because we're simultaneously talking about Wordnet and Wordset in this thread. Wordset has the same license we do, but Wordnet doesn't. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:41, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026443 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/March: Found match for regex: ::: Maybe your page histories look different from mine, but when I look at a page history, the "thank" button is there for all diffs except my own and those made by anons. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:16, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026444 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/April: Found match for regex: :That's not just because they're paper, it's also because they have onymous authors who have reputations to consider and who can generally be trusted to do their research. We don't have that luxury. Because we're a wiki that anyone can edit, we have to show that our etymologies haven't been pulled out of our collective ass. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:41, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026444 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/April: Found match for regex: :::::: Nothing at WT:ETYM requires contributors to use <ref> or to provide sources for their etymologies at all. Doing so is recommended whenever possible; it is not required. Etymologies without references are more likely to be removed as possible bullshit than ones with references, but it is neither the case that all unsourced etymologies are bullshit nor that all sourced etymologies aren't. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:25, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026444 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/April: Found match for regex: * I'm inclined to Oppose for the same reasons as Dan. I'd prefer adding something to CFI about what makes an acceptable phrasebook entry; the {{temp|phrasebook}} tag is enough to distinguish phrasebook entries from other entries, implying "This entry may be intentionally SOP". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:14, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026444 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/April: Found match for regex: :Shouldn't all English words derived from {{m|ine-pro|*sed-}} ideally be listed under Descendants at {{m|ine-pro|*sed-}}? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:47, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026444 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/April: Found match for regex: ::: Well, maybe so. Also, some words wouldn't be right on {{m|ine-pro|*sed-}} at all but somewhere else like {{m|gem-pro|*sitjaną}}. As for cases like {{m|en|sitter}}, they could have the category added directly without any template at all. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:17, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026446 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/May: Found match for regex: :I agree. I do think, however, that accounts and bots of deceased users should be permanently blocked so they can't be used if someone were to hack into them. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:46, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026446 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/May: Found match for regex: :I think you're extremely unlikely to achieve consensus among the editors of three different projects to do anything but keep the status quo. I also think Wikiquote is worst place to host a collection of proverbs, since most proverbs aren't quotes. In the world of dead-tree reference works, if I wanted to find out what a proverb meant, I would turn neither to a book of quotations nor to an encyclopedia but to a dictionary, so I'd say Wiktionary is the place for them. But mostly I think it's tilting at windmills to try to get Wikipedians, Wiktionarians, and Wikiquotidians (or whatever they're called) to agree to a one-project solution. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:27, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026446 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/May: Found match for regex: ::: I knew you only meant the Appendix, not individual entries. Sorry for responding here rather than at WP. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:23, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026446 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/May: Found match for regex: :: Well, exactly. The problem is not that editors disregard CFI as they see fit, the problem is that some terms are considered idiomatic by some people and SOP by others. When people vote "keep" on a term that some people consider SOP, that doesn't mean the keep-voters are ignoring CFI, it merely means the keep-voters feel the term does meet CFI while the delete-voters feel it doesn't. That's not the fault of CFI, that's the fault of Wiktionary's being a democracy instead of a dictatorship. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:31, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026446 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/May: Found match for regex: :::: Yes, I do dispute that. Plenty of people vote keep or delete based on their interpretation of CFI rather than yours. That isn't the same thing. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:51, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026446 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/May: Found match for regex: :Do you still have a category for Dutch IPA entries that use invalid phonemes? If so, {{temp|IPAchar|...|lang=nl}} could find things that need cleaning up. But otherwise, I can't think of a reason to have it. It's probably just there out of force of habit, since we add the language code in virtually every other template. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:25, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026446 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/May: Found match for regex: ::: I don't know what a no-op parameter is, but as long as it's doing no harm, leave it as it is. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:02, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026446 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/May: Found match for regex: # {{abstain}} I'm not sure whether U+1039 (MYANMAR SIGN VIRAMA) is considered a nonprinting character or not, but I definitely agree with Wikitiki that I'd rather write {{m|my|ဗုဒ္ဓ}} than {{m|my|ဗုဒ္ဓ}}. And when I do write the latter, the automatic transliteration breaks: {{m|my|ဗုဒ္ဓ}} renders as {{m|my|ဗုဒ္ဓ}} instead of {{m|my|ဗုဒ္ဓ}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:44, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026446 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/May: Found match for regex: # {{abstain}} Can someone point me to an example of a definition line that's a sentence? I don't think I've ever seen one. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:34, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026446 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/May: Found match for regex: # {{abstain}} This depends on the outcome of Poll 4, since the presence or absence of a blank line after such templates does not affect display. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:36, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026446 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/May: Found match for regex: *The image currently at penis is relevant and nonprurient. I see no reason to remove it or hide it, though if a drawing instead of a photograph would be acceptable (vulva has a drawing), I wouldn't object to that either. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:05, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026446 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/May: Found match for regex: *Support. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:47, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026446 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/May: Found match for regex: **The term Castilian is ambiguous; although it sometimes does main all varieties of Spanish spoken in Spain, it is often used to exclude the dialects of southern Spain (Andalusian, Canarian, etc.), and in Spanish itself, castellano is often a simple synonym of español and refers to the entire language in all countries (though I don't think the English word Castilian is used that way very often at all). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:20, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026446 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/May: Found match for regex: :A lot of English speakers (and speakers of other languages, for that matter, but we'll stick to English here) haven't learned how to think about language beyond orthography, so they say things like, "Should it be home page, with a space between the two words; or homepage, all one word?" (boldface added). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:29, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026446 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/May: Found match for regex: :Yes, but that's not so clear cut as there are multiple definitions of {{m|en|word}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:03, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026448 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/June: Found match for regex: ::::: But Southern US English is not restricted to the states considered the South. Indiana isn't the South, but the language of the southern half of Indiana is distinctly Southern. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:48, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026448 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/June: Found match for regex: ::::: "Bundesländer with a seacoast" would exclude Berlin and Brandenburg (which are often considered part of Northern Germany) and Hamburg (which always is). The {{w|Uerdingen line}} seems better for linguistic purposes such as ours. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:48, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026448 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/June: Found match for regex: ::::::::: Well, {{m|en|axes}} is, in fact, the plural of {{m|en|ax}} as well as the plural of {{m|en|axe}} (not to mention the plural of {{m|en|axis}}), which is exactly what the page already says. Do you think that we should say it's the plural of {{m|en|axe}} (and {{m|en|axis}}) alone, and not mention {{m|en|ax}} on the page at all? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:47, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026448 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/June: Found match for regex: ::::We don't really have any rules on nesting anyway, do we? We seem to do it on a very subjective, intuition-based basis. I feel like it makes sense to nest Primitive Irish, Old Irish, and Middle Irish under Irish, but if the rule is to group ancestral forms under the equivalent name without words like "Primitive", "Old", "Middle", etc., then it isn't clear where to put Old English and Middle English (since we never have English in translation tables) or Old Norse (since there isn't a language we call "Norse"). I think I would look for Plains Apache under A rather than P, but I don't know how representative I am. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:32, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026448 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/June: Found match for regex: ::* It's only unclear if it isn't followed rigidly (which of course it isn't), but I do feel it would be tedious to see that {{m|en|foot}} comes from a Middle English word that means 'foot', which comes from an Old English word that means 'foot', which comes from a Proto-Germanic word that means 'foot', which comes from a Proto-Indo-European word that means 'foot' and is cognate with a Sanskrit word that means 'foot' and an Ancient Greek word that means 'foot' and a Latin word that means 'foot'. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:03, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026449 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/July: Found match for regex: # {{abstain}} I'm not bothered by the current image, but if we do switch to a drawing, I'd suggest one of File:Penis location.jpg, File:Sketch of a flaccid penis.png, or File:Sketch of a human penis.png. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:43, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026449 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/July: Found match for regex: *That looks like a good way to do it to me. See {{m|dsb|b́edro}} for an example of how I treated an obsolete word whose modern spelling is unattested. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:25, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026449 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/July: Found match for regex: ::As far as I'm concerned, they're includable if they meet CFI: at least three uses in independent, permanently archived sources, spanning more than a year. For most verbs it shouldn't be difficult to find usage, considering how widespread such forms are in reported speech. But they're not eye dialect and shouldn't be labeled as such; they should be labeled {{temp|nonstandard form of}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:22, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026449 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/July: Found match for regex: ::I have been wanting us to abandon the label "proper noun" for ages. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:59, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026449 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/July: Found match for regex: **Aren't quotations under the lemma form, not under the inflected form? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 05:46, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026449 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/July: Found match for regex: **It's certainly written in Hebrew letters in the Bible. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:22, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026449 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/July: Found match for regex: ::: I can think of cases where grammatical gender doesn't match natural gender ({{m|ga|cailín||girl}} is masculine, while {{m|ga|gasóg||boy scout}} and {{m|ga|stail||stallion}} are feminine), but I can't think of a case where a word referring to a person of one gender is derived from a word referring to a person of the other gender, but grammatical and natural genders don't match (in a language that has grammatical gender, unlike English). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:31, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026449 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/July: Found match for regex: ::: Oh, and if anyone's wondering why {{m|it|gato}} and {{m|it|gata}} are orange links, it's because the Italian words are actually {{m|it|gatto}} and {{m|it|gatta}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:32, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026449 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/July: Found match for regex: :: One other thing to keep in mind is that sometimes the "female equivalent of X" means "woman is who is an X" but sometimes it means "wife of an X". In the UK at least, a {{m|en|duchess}} is always the wife or widow of a duke; no woman can become duchess by virtue of her birth. Our definition of {{m|de|Burggräfin}} is "female burgrave", but when burgraves were still running around they were always male; a {{m|de|Burggräfin}} is the wife of a burgrave. A hundred years ago or so, {{m|de|Professorin}} almost always meant "wife of a professor" but today it almost always means "female professor". In the {{w|E. F. Benson}} novel Trouble for Lucia, a woman becomes mayor of a town in England and has to choose a {{m|en|mayoress}} to help her, but she is not the mayoress herself—in that context, then, mayoress means neither "female mayor" nor "wife of the mayor" but rather "woman who assists the mayor". I doubt a single template can or should accommodate all this variation. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 05:56, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026449 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/July: Found match for regex: :{{ping|-sche}} I've voted now. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:13, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026449 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/July: Found match for regex: ::WT:CFI#Number of citations says, "For all other spoken languages that are living, only one use or mention is adequate, subject to the following requirements:". Perhaps whoever wrote that meant "natural languages", since constructed languages are subject to their own CFI. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:55, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026449 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/July: Found match for regex: :Benwing's user page says (s)he is on wikibreak as of last September, but Special:Contributions/Benwing suggests otherwise. If the wikibreak is over, please remove that statement. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:08, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026449 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/July: Found match for regex: The main page of the Wiktionary app just shows the (English-language) Word of the Day. Can/should it also display the Foreign Word of the Day? If so, how do we implement that? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 05:16, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026449 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/July: Found match for regex: :: Hmm, that says that anything appearing on the mobile main page should be tagged with mf-XXX, but when I look at the code of our main page, not even the (English) Word of the Day has that tag, so I can't figure out how the mobile main page knows to show it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:58, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026449 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/July: Found match for regex: :::: I figured it out: the id=mf-wotd is in Template:WOTD, not directly in the Main Page. However, since {{temp|WOTD}} and {{temp|FWOTD}} have totally different setups, I can't figure out where to put the id=mf-wotd to get the Foreign Word of the Day tagged correctly. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:16, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026449 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/July: Found match for regex: :::::: Nothing, I guess. I just checked both my phone and my tablet and it looks good on both. Thanks! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:36, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026449 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/July: Found match for regex: :We operate differently here from Wikipedia. If you feel like {{temp|cleanup}} is inadequate, it's better to start a new discussion about the term in question at the Tea room. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:23, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026450 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/August: Found match for regex: :::::: Someone else has restored kveldi and I've restored κυκλῶν and made it more precise than it was. I've left kljenuta deleted since if the declension table at {{m|sh|kljenut}} is right, kljenuta isn't a form of it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:33, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026450 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/August: Found match for regex: *: No it shouldn't, and no they shouldn't. I don't know how to use a bot, and I don't always have the time to create entries for all the inflected forms. I often create entries only for those inflected forms that already exist as spellings in other languages. For example, if some random Irish or Old Irish verb form happens to share a spelling with an existing Spanish entry, I'll create the Irish form there, but I won't bother creating brand-new entries for all the other forms of the verb. In other words, I'll work to remove orange links from inflection tables, but not (always) black/red ones. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:39, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026450 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/August: Found match for regex: :::: but that may become unwieldy for usexes where the translation is on a different line from the usex. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:20, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026450 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/August: Found match for regex: :::: Some Lithuanian (and perhaps Latvian) nationalists deny it. I've seen the claim made that the Balto-Slavic theory was a Soviet plot to justify the annexation of the Baltic States into the Soviet Union. I don't know whether any reputable linguists free of ideological motivations deny it, but if so, they're in the minority. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:24, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026450 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/August: Found match for regex: : When we're giving a direct quote, we should keep the original spelling of the whole quote, i.e. without Russian stress marks (unless we happen to be quoting some text that for whatever reason uses them). We should also keep е for ё if that's how it was spelled in the original. (I don't quite understand why we allow ё in page names in the first place.) We can include stress marks in the transliteration if need be, though that will mean writing the transliteration out manually instead of letting it happen automatically. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:55, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026450 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/August: Found match for regex: ::::All of this is fine for our own example sentences, but I do think we should follow the original orthography when we're giving a direct quote. We're showing how the word is used "in the wild", and I don't think we should pretty that up. But headword lines and translation listings and usage examples can be as learner-friendly as we want them to be. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 05:54, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026450 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/August: Found match for regex: :::::: I feel like with direct quotes, we should present them as faithfully as Wikisource presents source texts: we don't copy over fonts and word breaks, and incorrect character shapes can be replaced with correct ones when the intent is clear (e.g. when the original author is clearly attempting to write a palochka but doesn't have the exact character available), but we do present misspellings, misprints, typos, etc., uncorrected (though they can be ed) and we don't add pedagogical diacritics. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:17, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026450 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/August: Found match for regex: :: I support a Reconstructed: namespace too, without conlangs. They can have a namespace of their own, e.g. Conlang:. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:19, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026450 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/August: Found match for regex: ::: I'm in favor of organizing them like the main namespace rather than like the current layout, e.g. https://dictious.com/en/Reconstructed:bʰer- with a ==Proto-Indo-European== heading rather than https://dictious.com/en/Reconstructed:Proto-Indo-European/bʰer-, where the ==Proto-Indo-European== heading would be redundant. Maybe we could pick a shorter name for the namespace though, like Proto:. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:18, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026450 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/August: Found match for regex: :::: It would work, it just wouldn't be the optimal name. "Recons:", maybe? I just don't feel like typing out "Reconstructed:" all the time. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:45, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026450 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/August: Found match for regex: :I think it's preferable to have a single Romanization header in such cases. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:44, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026450 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/August: Found match for regex: ::: We also need to establish some limit for how much more common the plural is. According to bgc ngrams, {{m|en|shoes}}, {{m|en|eyes}}, and {{m|en|feet}} are all somewhat more common than their corresponding singulars, but I wouldn't want to treat the plurals as the lemmas. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:28, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026450 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/August: Found match for regex: **Do we have a context label for Quakerism? If not, we should make one. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:49, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026450 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/August: Found match for regex: :I do. We already have them for other Christian denominations such as Category:en:Anglicanism, Category:en:Eastern Orthodoxy, Category:en:Coptic Church, Category:en:Mormonism, Category:en:Protestantism, Category:en:Roman Catholicism, so why not Quakerism? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:25, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026450 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/August: Found match for regex: :: I could support this in cases where it's ambiguous (like Congolese French) or highly misleading (like Swiss German was), but some of the reduplicated names (e.g. English English for the English of England) are actually well established and I wouldn't be happy to see them go. And I really wouldn't want to change the names of local varieties when the names are nonreduplicated, well established, and unambiguous, like Austrian German or Munster Irish. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:43, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026450 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/August: Found match for regex: ::: I think that's easier to read than piling the forms up horizontally. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:09, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026450 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/August: Found match for regex: :See WT:ELE#Example sentences: "Example sentences should... not contain wikilinks (the words should be easy enough to understand without additional lookup)". However, that policy may have been written with English example sentences in mind; perhaps it's time to reconsider it for other languages. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:55, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026450 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/August: Found match for regex: :I'd like this too, though "in order of importance" is probably an unattainable goal. I've added pronunciation info at {{m|en|garbage}} now. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:52, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026450 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/August: Found match for regex: :: The first two in your list above, {{m|en|said}} and {{m|en|no}} use {{tl|audio-IPA}}, so they do have IPA pronunciations given. I bet several of the others in the list do, too. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:55, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026450 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/August: Found match for regex: ::: @Aɴɢʀ: I fixed the script above. Do you want to have the list constrained to lemmas? Do you want to have a longer list? --Dan Polansky (talk) 12:58, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026450 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/August: Found match for regex: :::: I don't know about Ultimateria, but I don't want it constrained to lemmas, and I'd like to have an exhaustive list unless that would take too long to generate. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:29, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026450 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/August: Found match for regex: ::::: Thanks, Dan! But I'm wondering why nearly is in the list; it's had IPA since {{diff|32203933|text=February}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:19, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026451 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/September: Found match for regex: :: Or for a more extreme example {{tl|sga-conj-complex}}. And I agree with WikiTiki89 that it's better to use named parameters. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:56, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026451 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/September: Found match for regex: :I'd lean in favor of a separate language code for Volga German, for the reasons you mention. (Is it never written in Cyrillic?) And I'm in favor of treating pdt as one language with a Russian dialect and an American dialect—or rather, a North American dialect, since isn't Plautdietsch also spoken in Canada and Belize? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:04, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026451 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/September: Found match for regex: :On the other hand, w:Plautdietsch language#Varieties says the two major dialects are Chortitza and {{w|Molotschna}}; does that division correspond to what you're calling the Russian/American division? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:12, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026451 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/September: Found match for regex: :::Maybe we should recognize four dialects of it then: the two older ones and the two modern ones. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:04, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026451 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/September: Found match for regex: : I've been using macrons in grc exactly the same way as in Latin (i.e. everywhere except page names) ever since Module:languages/data3/g was edited {{diff|24977416|text=here in January 2014}} to automatically strip them in links. Breves have been stripped since {{diff|29221912|text=October}}. I see no reason not to take advantage of this functionality, nor do I see any way in which doing so is "intransparent". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:52, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026451 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/September: Found match for regex: * I prefer using a ===See also=== section for this sort of thing. It's not a keyboard limitation issue. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:27, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026451 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/September: Found match for regex: ::: I think we should cite etyma in their lemma forms; this means saying that {{m|fr|bœuf}} comes from {{m|la|bōs}} (not from {{m|la|bovem}}) and that {{m|fr|chanter}} comes from {{m|la|cantō}} (not from {{m|la|cantāre}}). It just makes it easier for people to find the informative entry at first click. One possible compromise I've seen in some entries is to link to the lemma form but display both the lemma and the relevant inflected form, e.g. <code><nowiki>{{m|la|bos|bōs, bovis|ox}}</nowiki> or <code><nowiki>{{m|la|canto|cantō, cantāre|to sing}}</nowiki>. I'm not thrilled with that, as it strikes me as pedantic, but I can live with it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:48, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026451 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/September: Found match for regex: :Yes. I've been waiting a long time for someone to finally do this. I find it really annoying to have to separate the {{tl|etyl}} and {{tl|m}} templates, and half the time I find myself putting the etymon directly in {{tl|etyl}}, and then I have to go back and fix it. Using {{tl|inh}} makes life much easier. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:12, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026451 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/September: Found match for regex: ::::: <code><nowiki>{{compound|lang=en|quick|wit}}{{suffix||-ed|lang=en}}</nowiki> will, though. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:56, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026451 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/September: Found match for regex: :::::: Will {{temp|affix|en|quick|wit|-ed}} put it in Category:English compound words? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:32, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026451 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/September: Found match for regex: And what are the cross-linguistic usage patterns and semantics that determine whether a noun is proper or common? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:20, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026451 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/September: Found match for regex: ::***** What about indefinite pronouns like someone, anyone, whoever, etc.? They don't refer to a specific person. In many languages (e.g. Italian and Portuguese) possessive pronouns can take determiners (il mio padre / o meu pai), and as for pronouns taking adjectives, what about "poor me" and "lucky you"? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:54, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026451 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/September: Found match for regex: :: Before, the way not to miss votes was to watchlist Wiktionary:Votes. Now, you have to watchlist Template:votes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:24, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026452 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/October: Found match for regex: ::: That sounds almost like an argument to make such entries Translingual rather than pin them down to a specific language. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:54, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026452 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/October: Found match for regex: :I'm opposed to listing inflected forms that are identical to the lemma form, unless (as with pecūniā) the diacriticized headword form is different from the lemma's own diacriticized headword form. Since ] already says "(plural sheep)", there's no need to list it separately. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:29, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026452 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/October: Found match for regex: *I'd be fine with it if we got rid of the little pictures. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:34, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026452 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/October: Found match for regex: :Speaking only to the case I'm somewhat familiar with, I would not be in favor of a section for the Gaeltacht, as being from the Gaeltacht is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for being a native speaker of Irish (though there is a greater than chance correlation). Also, unlike the Basque Country and Catalonia, the Gaeltacht does not correspond to any political entity and could not be considered a "sub-national country" by any stretch of the imagination. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:33, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026452 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/October: Found match for regex: :: @Aɴɢʀ: I can understand where you're coming from, and I therefore agree that the Gaeltacht was a bad example. However, surely being from anywhere is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for being or for not being a speaker (native or otherwise) of any language; in every case, the country listings are only suggestive of language ability. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 20:54, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026452 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/October: Found match for regex: * Definitely support. This has long been a desideratum of mine. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:52, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026452 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/October: Found match for regex: :::::Is there anything at WT:CFI saying that durably archived cites have to be produced originally in the language and not translated? I can't find anything to that effect, but maybe I missed it. The Alice translation certainly exists in a dead-tree edition, which is available from Amazon. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:11, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026452 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/October: Found match for regex: : I'd say in cases like this it would make more sense to say {{tl|lb|en|chiefly|medicine}} to indicate a term is used chiefly but not exclusively in medicine. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:12, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026452 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/October: Found match for regex: :I'd pay you $1 for every 100 entries cleared out of Category:term cleanup and all its subcategories. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:52, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026452 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/October: Found match for regex: :::Does it violate any of Patreon's terms and conditions that what you're doing isn't really art? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:38, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026452 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/October: Found match for regex: ::::::::::: Most Anagrams sections, which are bot-generated, still use the ] format. I always convert those to <code><nowiki>{{l|en|example}}</nowiki> when I see them, but normal links like ] I leave alone for English words as I don't see what's wrong with them. (I do change them for other languages, though.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:57, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026452 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/October: Found match for regex: :The ISO-639 codes were apparently removed at the request of the government of Sweden, which didn't like the idea of their not being dialects of Swedish; the decision was thus more political than linguistic. At the moment, Scanian seems to be the only one we accommodate at all: Category:Regional Swedish includes subcategories only for Finland Swedish, Scanian Swedish, and Swedish Swedish. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:10, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026452 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/October: Found match for regex: ::: Of the five under discussion, only three have old codes. We can use those, but we should probably prefix them with gmq-. The other two will need codes of their own. Westrobothnian may as well use gmq-bot, as it does at sv-wikt. If Gutnish doesn't already have a code at sv-wikt, gmq-gut will work. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:50, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026452 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/October: Found match for regex: :::: Well, what do you know, we already have dlc and gmq-gut, so it's just a matter of the other three. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:11, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026452 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/October: Found match for regex: :: I'm unaware of a special term for verbs that can take clauses as their complement, but the difference between your two examples is the kind of clause they take. "Think" is followed by a noun clause, "(that) she is here", which (when that is removed) is by itself a complete sentence. "Saw", however, is followed by a small clause, "everyone go away", which is not a complete sentence and cannot be introduced by that. (You can tell it's not a complete sentence because everyone takes a singular verb, "everyone goes away", but in this case go is in the bare stem form.) When think means "hold an opinion" rather than "believe something to be the case", it can take either a noun clause or a small clause: I think that she is pretty or I think her pretty. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:21, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026452 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/October: Found match for regex: ::Yes, though neither "think" nor "see" is a reporting verb. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:20, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026452 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/October: Found match for regex: ::: {{w|Singlish}} lists three sources asserting that it's a creole, and looking at the example sentences, especially those labeled basilectal, I'm inclined to agree. (I certainly wouldn't consider "Dis guy Singrish si beh zai sia" to be an utterance of a dialect of English.) According to Category:Creole or pidgin languages, the code we use for creoles and pidgins is crp, so maybe crp-sng? Incidentally, why do we have both Category:Creole or pidgin languages and Category:Pidgins and creole languages? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:54, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026452 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/October: Found match for regex: ::::: More specifically, that module is not in agreement with Module:families/data, which specifies "creole or pidgin" as the name of the language family. Can someone more versed in editing modules than I am please fix it? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:59, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026453 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/November: Found match for regex: *** Ngrams suggests "three quarters" is more common than "three fourths" on both sides of the Herring Pond, but that "three fourths" represents a much larger minority in en-US than in en-GB. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:41, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026453 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/November: Found match for regex: ***** I guess. Another thing to consider is that, although I personally consider it punctuation abuse, the hyphenated forms are also very common as nouns: one-sixth, three-quarters, five-eighths, etc. They should probably be listed at least as alternative spellings. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:17, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026453 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/November: Found match for regex: ::: I wish Special:PrefixIndex had a different name, since you can put any string there regardless of whether it's a prefix or not. And I also really wish Wiktionary had some functionality as a language-specific reverse dictionary. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:34, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026453 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/November: Found match for regex: :We have the template {{tl|...}}, which seems to be a good way of achieving uniformity. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:40, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026453 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/November: Found match for regex: ::Thanks, Aɴɢʀ! Template applied, looks great. —GrammarFascist (talk) 22:25, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026453 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/November: Found match for regex: :::If cole mine meets CFI (at least three attestations from independent sources over the space of more than a year) I see no reason not to include it. We're not paper, and our usefulness is not determined by dividing the number of valuable entries by the number of total entries. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:50, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026453 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/November: Found match for regex: * I support this deletion after the fact. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:09, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026453 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/November: Found match for regex: ::::::: Yes, it would. {{tl|l|la|jūra}} takes you to ] since we strip macrons for Latin, but {{tl|l|lv|jūra}} takes you to ] since we don't strip macrons for Latvian. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:34, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026453 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/November: Found match for regex: ::: PD-Art is for photos taken from a distance. I think these images were made on a scanner, so commons:Commons:When to use the PD-scan tag applies. At any rate, we certainly have other scans of old manuscripts at Commons, see e.g. commons:Category:9th-century manuscripts. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:51, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026453 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/November: Found match for regex: ::::: Other dictionaries number the headwords, e.g. ¹wind and ²wind or wind 1 and wind 2 or the like. I think it would be confusing to have avoid numbers altogether (and we certainly have used "Noun 1" and "Pronunciation 2" headers in the past, though bots tend to remove them). Ultimately I think it would be least confusing (though not 100% nonconfusing) to have each entry on a page of its own, i.e. with its own URL, e.g. "https://dictious.com/en/en/wind_(movement_of_air)", "https://dictious.com/en/en/wind_(twist)", "https://dictious.com/en/nl/wind_(wind)", "https://dictious.com/en/nl/wind_(form_of_winden)", "https://dictious.com/en/ang/wind", and so on. Then "https://dictious.com/en/wind" would just be disambig page, as would "https://dictious.com/en/en/wind" and "https://dictious.com/en/nl/wind". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:36, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026453 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/November: Found match for regex: :::As I recall, I hired you (Daniel) to clean up Category:term cleanup and all its subcategories, i.e. including the ones for other namespaces. I don't really care whether {{tl|term}} is deleted or not; if it's kept, then once Category:term cleanup and all subcategories are cleared, I'd prefer {{tl|term}} to output an error message if lang= isn't present. That way Category:term cleanup won't fill up again. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:15, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026459 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/January: Found match for regex: :Fixed. You have to put the category call inside the "includeonly" part and not inside the "noinclude" part. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:11, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026459 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/January: Found match for regex: ::: Hmm, I don't know why that's happening. It would be good for the template to be luacized, but that wasn't the problem you brought up. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:22, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026459 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/January: Found match for regex: :For Pinyin and Romaji, it happens when the software assumes that the word is being written in Hanzi/Kanji even though it really isn't: if I write {{l|zh|Běijīng}} it shows up as {{l|zh|Běijīng}} because it assumes that everything labeled "zh" is in Hanzi, so it uses a font that's better suited to Hanzi. I would have expected {{l|zh|Běijīng|sc=Latn}} to force it to show up using the default Latin font, but it doesn't; it still shows up as {{l|zh|Běijīng|sc=Latn}}, which is annoying. (Interestingly, if I specify the language as "cmn" instead of "zh", Pinyin shows up using the default Latin font, even without being explicitly labeled "sc=Latn", so {{l|cmn|Běijīng}} shows up as {{l|cmn|Běijīng}}.) For Navajo, I have no idea since Navajo is only written in the Latin alphabet, so the software shouldn't be assuming anything else. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:59, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026459 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/January: Found match for regex: :Why are the forms listed in a different font face? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:39, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026459 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/January: Found match for regex: :::: I wouldn't assume that all terms linked with {{temp|l}} and {{temp|m}} (and l/XX templates) are lemmas. There are all sorts of times when nonlemma forms might find themselves inside those templates. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:39, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026459 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/January: Found match for regex: Why does {{temp|alter}} and/or Module:Alternative forms display forms in a font different from the default font? How do we fix that? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:56, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026459 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/January: Found match for regex: :: So what should it say? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:30, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026459 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/January: Found match for regex: :::: I dunno, I've never used it myself. I just noticed that it looked funny when other people use it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:10, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026459 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/January: Found match for regex: :I've been going through the German topic categories and fixing the ones with diacritics to use {{temp|catlangcode|de|Blah}} instead of bare ] for the same reason: {{temp|catlangcode}} uses smart sorting, and the bare Category: code doesn't. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:19, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026463 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/December: Found match for regex: ::: I wouldn't call it a mistake. Some dialects of English prefer "I ask that they not be hidden" while others prefer "I ask that they are not hidden". Context and pragmatics permit the latter to be interpreted correctly rather than in a nonsensical way. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:45, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026463 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/December: Found match for regex: ::I didn't get your ping. As I understand it, the ping has to be in the same paragraph as a signature. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:46, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026463 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/December: Found match for regex: So, the "Reconstruction:" namespace has been implemented, but there's a problem: the "Reconstruction talk:" namespace has a stray comma after the word "talk", e.g. Reconstruction talk,:Proto-Indo-European/albʰós. This should be fixed before any more pages are moved, but I don't know whom to report it to. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:50, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026463 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/December: Found match for regex: Pinging {{ping|Koavf}}, who seems to be making a lot of the moves. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:52, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026463 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/December: Found match for regex: ::OK. Other things that need to be fixed: (1) The headword line templates like {{tl|head}} and its language-specific equivalents need to put words in Reconstruction: namespace into categories (Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/albʰós is currently uncategorized). (2) The link templates like {{tl|l}} and {{tl|m}} need to point to Reconstruction: namespace instead of Appendix: namespace. Obviously this can wait until all pages have been moved, since for now the links to Appendix: simply redirect to Reconstruction: and thus nothing is broken. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:00, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026463 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/December: Found match for regex: :::: The talk namespace has been fixed, thanks for getting that fixed, CodeCat! Can a bot now start moving the pages, or do we want to have a discussion and possible vote about how to name Reconstruction pages ("Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/albʰós" vs. "Reconstruction:albʰós#Proto-Indo-European" vs. whatever) first? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:36, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026463 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/December: Found match for regex: :: I have wished for over 10 years that there was a way to see links from other Wikiprojects. It would make cleaning up broken links much easier. And it must be possible, since Commons does show usage of its files on all Wikiprojects. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:47, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026463 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/December: Found match for regex: :We don't include constructed languages without getting consensus first, and so far there's never been consensus to include a conlang that doesn't have an ISO 639 code (nor for many that do have ISO 639 codes); see Wiktionary:Criteria for inclusion#Constructed languages. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:39, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026463 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/December: Found match for regex: ::::: That's a good point. Last summer I created an entry for {{m|en|silflay}} as an English word, but its etymology is the appendix-only language Lapine. However, I didn't use {{tl|etyl}} for it since we haven't made up a code for Lapine; instead I just put the link to the appendix in the See also section. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:09, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026463 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/December: Found match for regex: :: I believe WP's "div col" thing only works on some browsers (e.g. it doesn't work on Internet Explorer), while our method works everywhere. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:06, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026463 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/December: Found match for regex: :::: In that case, make it so. In fact, come to think of it, {{tl|der3}} and {{tl|rel3}} already make columns automatically, so why not have a {{tl|tra2}} for a two-column translation table? It wouldn't even need a separate {{tl|div end}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:51, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026463 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/December: Found match for regex: :: If we do this (and I don't know enough about it to say whether it's feasible but it seems like a good idea), I'd rather the parameter for {{tl|section}} (or whatever equivalent we end up using) be en than English. There's less potential for screwing everything up because of a little typo; I'm far more likely to remember djr than to remember how to spell Djambarrpuyngu. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:07, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026463 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/December: Found match for regex: ::::I bet it would even be possible to accept either one and have the module distinguish them on the basis of whether the first letter is capitalized or not. Then {{tl|section|Ari}} would be interpreted as the Trans-New Guinea language Ari (aac), while {{tl|section|ari}} would be interpreted as the Caddoan language Arikara (ari). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:26, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026467 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/February: Found match for regex: :We don't have automatic romanization of Arabic. It's all manual for that language. If someone romanized it as ḏīb when it should be ḏiʾb, then they just made a mistake. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:00, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026467 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/February: Found match for regex: ::: Sure 'nuff. I took out the manual translit and now it automatically generates ḏiʾbun. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:15, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026467 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/February: Found match for regex: Can anyone figure out why {{temp|IPA}} is no longer placing a space after the colon? Kc kennylau says he doesn't think it's because of his recent edits to Module:IPA, but I don't see any other recent edits to relevant templates or modules that could be causing it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:12, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026468 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/March: Found match for regex: ::{{temp|l}} will strip the superfluous diacritics from the link, but not the display: {{temp|l|grc|νεκῠ́οιῐν}} links to νεκύοιιν but still displays {{l|grc||νεκῠ́οιῐν}}, which doesn't seem to be what JohnC5 wants. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:28, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026468 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/March: Found match for regex: At {{m|fr|choucroute}}, gives a result that says the word is uncountable but still expects a plural form, and the term gets categorized into Category:French entries needing inflection. I assume there's something wrong at Module:fr-headword; could someone take a look? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:49, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026468 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/March: Found match for regex: :: Dank je wel! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:57, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026468 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/March: Found match for regex: :::: It's easy enough to get it to say "(countable or uncountable, plural choucroutes)". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:05, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026468 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/March: Found match for regex: Does anyone know why the automatic Arabic transliteration isn't working in {{m|ar|مُجَدَّرَة||pockmarks}} (see mujaddara#Etymology)? I'm pretty sure all the diacritics that are supposed to be there are present. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:51, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026468 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/March: Found match for regex: :: Aha, a sneaky invisible character. Thanks for your help. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:48, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026468 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/March: Found match for regex: :We consider East Frisian Low Saxon to be a dialect of German Low German, so any frs you encounter should be changed to nds-de. Unless it's being used mistakenly for Saterland Frisian (also called East Frisian), in which case it should be changed to stq. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:17, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026470 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/April: Found match for regex: :Ideally we shouldn't be using punctuation characters as letters, we should be using their "modifier letter" equivalents (e.g. ʼ instead of ’ or ' and ꞉ instead of :), so tsà’ should be moved to tsàʼ. In the meantime, though, the easiest way to fix it would be to just add |head=tsà’ to force the template to recognize the whole string as the headword. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:59, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026470 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/April: Found match for regex: :::Hän has about 10 elderly speakers left; I strongly doubt any of them has ever written Hän on a computer. But even for better attested languages your suggestion seems like a very bad idea. We'd have to make entries for things like English don`t and Italian citta' and German muessen and l as a variant spelling of 1 and all sorts of monstrosities people commit when they don't know or care about proper typographic style. The whole reason ʼ exists as a separate Unicode point at all is for cases like this: when a language has something that looks like but functions as a letter rather than as a punctuation mark. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:48, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026470 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/April: Found match for regex: :::::Even the linguists who have described it have certainly mostly either written it by hand or by typewriter, and even written by computer, once it's printed out you can't tell the difference between ʼ and ’. That's why the descriptive vs. prescriptive argument is a red herring: as far as human beings are concerned there's no difference between tsà’ and tsàʼ. Only the software knows the difference, and there's nothing "prescriptivist" about using the character the software will treat correctly. We really shouldn't be using the curly apostrophe ’ in entries at all, because we've decided to use the typewriter apostrophe ' for the punctuation mark (e.g. don't), and the modifier letter ʼ should be used in any instance, in any language, where it functions as a letter. The curly apostrophe should only be used in hard redirects like don’t→don't (and, in theory, ajaa’→ajaaʼ though I don't know if we have any such redirects in practice). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:26, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026470 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/April: Found match for regex: :: Yes, that happened to me too until I went to ad, then clicked on the AdBlockerPlus icon in my menu bar and selected "Disable on this page only". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:25, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026470 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/April: Found match for regex: :::: It's kind of amusing, if you think about it. The adblocker doesn't know the difference between an ad and a mention of the word ad. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:05, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026470 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/April: Found match for regex: :"Abbreviation" is no longer considered a valid part of speech. If, as in this case, the term abbreviated is a noun, then the POS should be ===Noun===, not ===Abbreviation===. This is true for all languages, not just Russian. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:49, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026471 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/May: Found match for regex: ::: Given that our sole definition of the countable sense of philia is "a psychological disorder characterized by an irrational favorable disposition towards something", I'd say Japanophilia isn't a philia at all, let alone a paraphilia. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:41, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026471 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/May: Found match for regex: :I think that the first one is the canonically correct order, but I also think our software should automatically correct the order if it's entered wrong (which is why I had to use HTML entities above to show the difference). But maybe that's what's going wrong for you? At any rate, both of the above display correctly for me. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:42, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026471 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/May: Found match for regex: :::If they display fine for you, what isn't displaying right? Burmese fonts are always a little wonky. On Firefox, Burmese only displays correctly for me if it's inside a tag like {{temp|l}}, {{temp|lang}}, {{temp|m}}, or {{temp|t}}. If it's not inside a tag, I get boxes (including in the edit window and in page titles). In Chrome, on the other hand, Burmese displays right for me everywhere except browser tabs. And this is on the same computer with the same fonts installed. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:07, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026471 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/May: Found match for regex: We have Category:Reduplications by language, but AFAICT we don't have any template that categorizes into it. Could someone please make a template {{temp|reduplication}} to be used in etymology sections (not a definition-line form-of template, though, which is why it probably shouldn't be called {{temp|reduplication of}}) that will categorize terms into the language's reduplication category? I could do it myself the old-fashioned way, but I suppose it really ought to invoke Module:category tree or something, and I don't know how to do that. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:16, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026471 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/May: Found match for regex: :::: OK, old-fashioned template is at User:Angr/Template:reduplication. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:18, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026471 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/May: Found match for regex: :::::: Yeah, the way you rewrote it. I had intended the syntax to be {{temp|reduplication|jaw|lang=en}}, but your syntax is {{temp|reduplication|en|jaw}} which is indeed just like {{temp|m}}. I think my way is a little more intuitive; it has the same syntax as other etymology templates like {{temp|clipping}}. In fact, I'd like it to take all the parameters that {{temp|clipping}} does. And I'm also thinking about whether it should take a parameter specifying the type of reduplication: total reduplication (e.g. {{m|en|jaw-jaw}}), rhyming reduplication (e.g. {{m|en|jeepers creepers}}), alliterating reduplication (e.g. {{m|en|jibber-jabber}}), and so on. Maybe this is something to discuss at ES before taking the template live. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:01, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026471 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/May: Found match for regex: :::::::: I suppose it's a matter of what we expect and what we expect other people to expect. I've gotten used to the syntax of {{temp|m}}, {{temp|lb}}, and {{temp|ux}}, but in general I expect templates to take a lang= parameter and I'm always having to go back and correct my syntax when I use something like {{temp|prefixsee}} or {{temp|phrasebook}}, because I expect them to take lang= and they don't. Anyway, I don't suppose it's a huge deal, but I do think things like nocap=, nodot=, gloss= and so on would be a good idea, and I probably will bring up the other things at ES, but not today because it's my bedtime. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:28, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026471 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/May: Found match for regex: :Looks fine to me. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:23, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026471 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/May: Found match for regex: User:kc_kennylau hasn't been around in several weeks, so I'll ask the community at large: can someone please fix Module:cy-mut so that mut3 is "H" followed by a lowercase letter when the input is a capital vowel letter? For example, at Amwythig, the h-prothesis is currently generated as hAmwythig, but it ought to be Hamwythig. Thanks! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:06, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026471 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/May: Found match for regex: ::Thanks, Kenny! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:12, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026473 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/July: Found match for regex: :There's nothing wrong with using combining characters in page titles if the precomposed characters don't exist in Unicode (yet). The only time to leave diacritics out of page titles but include them in the headword line is if such diacritics aren't normally found in printed texts but are encountered only (or primarily) in pedagogical texts like dictionaries, grammar books, readers for children and language students. If Svan texts always include these diacritics, then they should be part of the page title. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:38, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026473 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/July: Found match for regex: :{{done}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:03, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026473 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/July: Found match for regex: : {{done}} except for the ones at {{m|grc|Τίρυνς}}, which I consider a false positive. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:30, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026473 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/July: Found match for regex: :: {{reply to|Benwing}} I agree with Aɴɢʀ about the issue with {{m|grc|Τίρυνς}}; surely WingerBot should only flag the need for a psile or dasia in tranclusions of {{temp|m}} or {{temp|l}}, not {{temp|lang}}, right? — I.S.M.E.T.A. 00:36, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026473 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/July: Found match for regex: :::: There's nothing wrong with it looking inside {{temp|lang}} too; the issue at {{m|grc|Τίρυνς}} is simply that the vowels are being used to refer to their sounds in any position in a word; they're not being used as words. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:06, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026473 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/July: Found match for regex: ::::::: Here are a large number of articles at Google Scholar that discuss animate/inanimate as a form of gender. Rand Valentine, a professor of linguistics at the University of Wisconsin, has a website for the grammar of Ojibwe, where animate and inanimate are described as genders. As for the Wikipedia article on {{w|Grammatical gender}}, it says, "Common gender divisions include masculine and feminine; masculine, feminine and neuter; or animate and inanimate". It also says, "Some authors use the term 'grammatical gender' as a synonym of 'noun class'", but some authors do prefer to use the term "noun class" rather than "grammatical gender" for categories unrelated to sex. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:55, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026473 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/July: Found match for regex: Why does {{temp|IPA|...|lang=sga}} no longer link to Appendix:Old Irish pronunciation? It's taking me to Wikipedia instead, as if the pronunciation appendix didn't exist. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:56, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026473 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/July: Found match for regex: :: Oh, okay. I've added a bunch more languages to the module. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:20, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026473 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/July: Found match for regex: :Sounds good to me. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:47, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026474 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/August: Found match for regex: :Categories update automatically, but sometimes it takes a while for the updates to show up. Purging the cache of a page or making a null edit will often update the category, too. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 05:46, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026474 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/August: Found match for regex: :: What are "relationals" anyway? The ones I looked at in that category all look like postpositions to me. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:20, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026474 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/August: Found match for regex: ::::: I suppose if you limit Recent changes to the Category: namespace you'll only see changes there (including actual edits to categories, but there won't be many of those). What I want to know is, will things only show up if they've been added to the category manually (by typing ] at the bottom, or will things also show up if they're categorized by means of a template? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:27, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026474 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/August: Found match for regex: :::::The added functionality just provides an option to hide/show categorisation changes on Special:RecentChanges and Special:Watchlist. It's not possible to show only category membership changes. But I think, Aɴɢʀ's suggestion is a good workaround for that. Kai Nissen (WMDE) (talk) 17:38, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026474 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/August: Found match for regex: :I do like being able to see when something's been added to an entry maintenance category. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:45, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026474 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/August: Found match for regex: ::: Oh, I have. I was talking about the function in general, not its presence specifically on Recent Changes, which I almost never look at anyway. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:35, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026474 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/August: Found match for regex: :The language code was using Cyrillic е instead of Latin e. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:27, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026474 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/August: Found match for regex: #:  is equivalent to U+0086, which is a C1 control code for "Start of selected area", so I'm surprised it ever worked for you, and not surprised that it doesn't work now. You can also write &dagger; to get † just as you can type — to get —, but AFAIK it's always preferable to just insert the character itself directly, as it makes it easier for other editors to read the contents of the edit box. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:08, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026474 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/August: Found match for regex: ::: I think the double dagger ‡. In Windows, if you type Alt+0134 (using the number pad, not the numbers running along the top of the keyboard) you get † and if you type Alt+0135 you get ‡. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:19, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026474 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/August: Found match for regex: :::: Appendix:Greek verbs also had some instances of  for the em dash. There seem to be a lot of Greek verb pages with these codes on them. Could someone with a bot go through Wiktionary and change all instances of ,  and  to †, ‡, and — respectively? I wonder if there are others (potential ones include  for Š,  for Œ,  for Ž  for – (en dash), &#0154 for š, &#0156 œ, 158 ž, and &#0159 for Ÿ). These are old ASCII codes; see http://www.ascii-code.com/ and scroll down to "The extended ASCII codes (character code 128-255)" for the ones causing the trouble: the ones with decimal codes 128–159 are not in sync with Unicode points. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:45, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026474 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/August: Found match for regex: :::::: Thanks, -sche. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:57, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026474 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/August: Found match for regex: : Thank you all. Obviously a "system characteristic", when I looked at {{temp|el-T-Vs}} a few hours ago  was still showing the † - but not when viewed in preview. Anyway I'll amend my ways and use the wanted character. And thanks to Aɴɢʀ for your editing. — Saltmarsh^{συζήτηση-talk} 10:19, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026474 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/August: Found match for regex: ::: Now they do. I forgot to change the testcases when I changed what ၊ and ။ transliterate as. They used to transliterate as comma and period respectively, which was problematic because we also use the period to transliterate one of the tones, so I changed it to | and ||. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:30, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026475 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/September: Found match for regex: ::::: I'd consider the feminine forms to be inflected forms of the masculine, just as with adjectives. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:39, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026476 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/October: Found match for regex: :::::If it's possible to prevent anons from changing L2 headers while still allowing them to edit the rest of a page, go for it. Otherwise, I support a filter tagging anons' edits to L2 headers. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 05:33, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026476 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/October: Found match for regex: At Talk:nae, someone brought up the fact that <code><nowiki>{{label|sco|Doric}}</nowiki> puts the word into Category:Doric Ancient Greek and provides a link to w:Doric Greek. It should, of course, put the word into Category:Doric Scots and provide a link to w:Doric dialect (Scotland). Another label that covers multiple languages is "Ulster": there is Ulster English, Ulster Irish, and Ulster Scots. In this case, the categories work correctly, but the Wikipedia links all point to w:Ulster, when it would more helpful for them to point to w:Ulster English, w:Ulster Irish, and w:Ulster Scots dialects. Unfortunately, I don't know how to edit Module:labels/data/regional to fix these labels, and any others that may be similar. (The "Munster" and "Connacht" labels also point to the Wikipedia articles on the provinces of Ireland rather than the articles on the dialects.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:13, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026476 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/October: Found match for regex: ::What about making the labels themselves language-specific, e.g. instead of <code><nowiki>{{label|grc|Doric}}</nowiki> and <code><nowiki>{{label|sco|Doric}}</nowiki> we have <code><nowiki>{{label|grc|grc-Doric}}</nowiki> and <code><nowiki>{{label|sco|sco-Doric}}</nowiki>, and likewise <code><nowiki>{{label|en|en-Ulster}}</nowiki>, <code><nowiki>{{label|ga|ga-Ulster}}</nowiki>, and <code><nowiki>{{label|sco|sco-Ulster}}</nowiki>? We'd only need to do that for ambiguous labels; those that are unambiguous could keep their current names. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:43, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026476 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/October: Found match for regex: :::: Because "he current system doesn't allow you to give language-specific data for labels, which is a big shortcoming." —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:59, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026476 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/October: Found match for regex: :::::: Can we at least do something promptly about the fact that of the 19 terms currently in Category:Doric Ancient Greek, 11 are Scots? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:18, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026476 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/October: Found match for regex: :::::::: OK, I did that. Now Category:Doric Ancient Greek contains no Scots words and Category:Doric Scots is not empty. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:01, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026476 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/October: Found match for regex: :{{done}}. {{tl|der3}} doesn't like line breaks. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:30, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026476 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/October: Found match for regex: :I got rid of the module error, but someone who knows Vietnamese should probably double-check that the pronunciation info is correct. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:23, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026476 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/October: Found match for regex: :I've fixed the dative plural of Spesen and the second person singular of werweissen. The other problem is beyond me. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:49, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026476 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/October: Found match for regex: :This is the standard interpretation of ; : in MediaWiki; see and observe how ; item : definition renders there. The semicolon is supposed to introduce a definition list; the first colon in a line that starts with a semicolon is interpreted as a new line starting with a colon. If that's not the behavior we want, we need to write the page differently. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:43, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026476 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/October: Found match for regex: :::I agree; it needs a documentation subpage (Template:es-adj-inv/documentation) to illustrate how to use it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:52, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026476 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/October: Found match for regex: :That's exactly what I do too, so I'm hoping it's right. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:32, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026476 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/October: Found match for regex: :: We don't have a code for Proto-West Germanic; in such cases you can probably use und. However, in this case, I'd rather just leave that step out since there's no consensus among linguists as to whether there ever was a "Proto-West Germanic", and there's no harm in saying the OHG word comes straight from PGmc. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:18, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026476 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/October: Found match for regex: :::Sometimes it helps if you go to the entry, mouse over "More", and select "Null edit"; then go to the category page, mouse over "More", and select "Purge". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:16, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026476 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/October: Found match for regex: :Interestingly, even changing the hyphen to - doesn't fix it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:19, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026477 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/November: Found match for regex: :::::: Using {{tl|term}} without a language code places the affected article in a cleanup category, so I don't see why you think adding a language code to it would be unlikely to be supported by consensus. I cannot think of a single coherent reason to object to the practice, and I'm actually paying Daniel to do it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:49, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026477 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/November: Found match for regex: :::::::: I'm paying him for it because it's work that urgently needs to be done, unlike starting pointless votes on every tiny aspect of editing. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:13, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026477 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/November: Found match for regex: :: Yes, "urgently needs to be done". All text not in English must be labeled with its language code in order for the HTML to be correct, so that fonts render correctly and screen readers work properly. If any non-English text is not labeled with its language code, it is an error. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:21, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026477 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/November: Found match for regex: :::: Maybe Daniel's count will be different from mine, but when I peruse Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2013/April#Template term and lang parameter, I see 7 editors supporting the obligatoriness of the lang parameter (CodeCat, Mzajac, Ruakh, Atitarev, Msh210, ZxxZxxZ, PalkiaX50), 6 editors taking no position on the obligatoriness of the lang parameter (Widsith, Liliana-60, Chuck Entz, Metaknowledge, Mglovesfun, and KYPark), and only 1 editor opposing the obligatoriness of tha lang parameter (Dan Polansky). Add to that the participants in this thread who support obligatory lang (Daniel Carrero, me, Benwing2), plus the supporters of Wiktionary:Votes/2014-08/Migrating from Template:term to Template:m (who can be assumed to support obligatory lang for {{tl|term}} since the language code is obligatory for {{tl|m}}, though opposition to that vote cannot be taken as opposition to obligatory lang), and I'm left with the distinct impression that you're the only Wiktionarian who doesn't want the lang parameter of {{tl|term}} to be obligatory. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:58, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026477 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/November: Found match for regex: :I recently added the combining diacritics to the character insertion box under Miscellaneous. Clicking the tilde after typing a q gives q̃. Is that not what you want? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:44, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026477 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/November: Found match for regex: ::: Do you want any of them besides the macron and breve? I think all of the others have precomposed characters that are already listed under Greek. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:20, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026477 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/November: Found match for regex: :::::: OK. I use the macrons and breves for the w= parameter of {{tl|grc-IPA}}, where the order of the diacritics doesn't matter (ά + combining macron works just as well as ᾰ + acute accent). I'll add them later today. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:16, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026477 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/November: Found match for regex: :::::::: I guess it must have been; at any rate, I always use the combining breves and macrons in it and it works. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:42, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026477 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/November: Found match for regex: :OK, there are now combining diacritics listed in the Greek section. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:07, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026477 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/November: Found match for regex: ::: It is annoying that the headword display and the pronunciation template take different orders, because it would be so easy to just copy the headword display and paste it into {{tl|grc-IPA|w=}}, but I just learned at νίκη that it doesn't work (so what I said above about the order not mattering is wrong!): the headword display has "ῑ + acute accent", while the pronunciation template has to have "ί + macron" or it won't display correctly. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:28, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026477 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/November: Found match for regex: Is it possible to have {{tl|R:DIL}} put an entry in a cleanup category whenever its first positional parameter is absent or consists of anything other than numbers? For example {{tl|R:DIL}} with no parameter, {{tl|R:DIL|foo}}, and {{tl|R:DIL|2 bar}} would all put the entry into (say) Category:RDIL needing cleanup, but {{tl|R:DIL|123}} would not put the entry to the category. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:34, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026477 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/November: Found match for regex: :: If you could make a module for this template, I'd be very grateful. The online Dictionary of the Irish Language recently changed the way the URLs of entries work, so I've had to change the template so the links work. But there are over 800 transclusions of the template and I'll lose track of what's already been fixed if I simply go through WhatLinksHere. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:57, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026477 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/November: Found match for regex: :::: OK, but I don't know how to use it to do what I'm asking for. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:14, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026477 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/November: Found match for regex: :It works great, thanks! And thanks {{ping|Catsidhe}} and {{ping|Embryomystic}} for helping the cleanup efforts! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:01, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026477 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/November: Found match for regex: ::::: You can always suppress transliteration with tr=-, so {{tl|m|gmq-pro|*fō|tr=-}} renders as {{m|gmq-pro|*fō|tr=-}}. That's a few keystrokes fewer than {{tl|m|gmq-pro|*fō|sc=Latn}}, which also renders as {{m|gmq-pro|*fō|sc=Latn}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:24, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026477 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2015/November: Found match for regex: :{{ping|kc_kennylau}} will you take a look at Module:fr-verb? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:31, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026496 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/December: Found match for regex: ::: I've restored the interwiki links to where they belong. Also, on the basis of , I've made postoperative the primary form and post-operative the alternative form. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:19, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026496 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/December: Found match for regex: ::: Like desiderative? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:44, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026496 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/December: Found match for regex: :Fixed. It's always transitive. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:21, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026496 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/December: Found match for regex: ::The Unicode character for the Tironian et is ⁊, which you will find in Miscellaneous edit tools under "Other symbols". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:45, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026496 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/December: Found match for regex: :Surely "perform the role of a host" can refer to any of the meanings of the noun "host", which does seem to cover the various functions you mention in senses 2, 3, and 4. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:43, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026496 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/December: Found match for regex: I have a British coworker who when he wants me to look at something says, "Can I borrow you for a minute?". I don't think our entry for {{m|en|borrow}} has a sense that covers this. Is it just British usage? I don't remember hearing it in the U.S. when I lived there, but I do remember Prof. McGonagle in the first Harry Potter novel saying "Can I borrow Wood for a moment?" in reference to a student named Oliver Wood. I'm not quite sure how to define it; "have a moment of (someone's) time", perhaps? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:41, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026496 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/December: Found match for regex: :: Etymologically, sure, but I think it's taken on a separate meaning of its own, especially since (if my impression is correct) you can't say this in all varieties of English that have sense 1. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:49, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026496 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/December: Found match for regex: ::::But how do we test whether a usage has entered the lexicon or is merely a creative exploitation? The reason I'm even asking about this meaning of "borrow" is because I feel like it has entered some speakers' lexicon, though not mine; and although I do understand it, it still strikes me as an odd use of the verb, even though my coworker says it to me almost every day. I understand it; I know what it means; but it still strikes me as a separate meaning of "borrow" that exists in other people's lexicon but not in my own. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:17, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026496 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/December: Found match for regex: :Doesn't look like you left out anything essential, but inflection and mutation tables are nice to have for Irish entries. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:50, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026496 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/December: Found match for regex: :::::It's certainly possible that {{m|ga|pictiúr}} underwent a clipping to {{m|ga|pic}} in exactly the same way that English {{m|en|picture}} did, but I think it's slightly more likely that Irish speakers (all of whom are, after all, bilingual in English) simply adapted the already clipped English word. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:22, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026496 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/December: Found match for regex: : {{m|ru|комсомол|Комсомол|tr=-}} is an acronym according to sense 2. That kind of acronym is rare in English, but common in Russian, German, and Japanese. The entries for {{m|ru|п. г. т.|tr=-}} and {{m|ru|т/г|tr=-}} say they're pronounced letter-for-letter, making them initialisms. {{m|ru|ноут|Ноут|tr=-}} is a {{tl|clipping}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:59, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026496 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/December: Found match for regex: ::: Me personally or Wiktionarians as a group? I don't have a strong opinion one way or the other. I don't even know if there's a technical term for them. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:58, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026496 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/December: Found match for regex: : I would reserve "abbreviation" for things that are pronounced like the full word even when they're written abbreviated, like English {{m|en|Mr.}}, which is always pronounced "mister", not "murr" or "em ar". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:07, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026496 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/December: Found match for regex: :Well, we have "rare", "very rare", and "formal"; they could be used in combination I guess. Or we could create a new label like "ten-dollar word". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:42, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026496 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/December: Found match for regex: ::::::: The IP address that left that message geolocates to New Jersey, so they probably are a native English speaker. The fact that they consider IPA more obfuscatory than useless respellings like "BAN lees" also makes me unable to take them particularly seriously. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:08, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026496 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/December: Found match for regex: ::::::::: I agree he must have been referring to the French section, and "BAN lees" is a pretty obfuckinfuscatory way of respelling /bɑ̃ljø/. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:35, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026496 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/December: Found match for regex: ::Isn't RFV for entries that already exist? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:14, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026496 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/December: Found match for regex: :: I own a copy of the Oxford Latin Dictionary; {{m|la|syllabus}} isn't in it at all. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:51, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026496 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/December: Found match for regex: ::: Only indirectly in its influence on the old spelling of {{m|fr|sçavoir}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:14, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026496 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/December: Found match for regex: The first etymology section of {{m|en|bow}} is the one that sounds like "beau" and rhymes with "go" and "so". In the verb section of this etymology, are senses 3, 4, and 5 (illustrated by sentences like "The whole nation bowed their necks to the worst kind of tyranny", "Adversities do more bow men's minds to religion", and "Cronenberg’s 'Cosmopolis' bows in Cannes this week"). Are these senses really pronounced this way? Don't they rather belong to the second etymology section, the one that sounds like "bough" and rhymes with "cow" and "how"? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:40, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026496 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/December: Found match for regex: ::I didn't even notice before, but sense 5 under etymology 1 ("to premiere") is basically identical to sense 2 under etymology 2 ("to debut"). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:49, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026496 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/December: Found match for regex: :::I agree that colonel is a homophone of kernel in rhotic accents. Rhotic accents don't have /ɜː/ not followed by /ɹ/. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:46, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026496 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/December: Found match for regex: :{{m|la|] ].}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:06, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026496 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/December: Found match for regex: ::: We could just copy over our own definition of the verb document with "the act of" before it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:22, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026496 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/December: Found match for regex: :My Latin dictionary's definitions of {{m|la|bulla}} include: "boss, stud, knob", so I guess it's etymology 1, senses 1, 3, and 5. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:12, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026496 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/December: Found match for regex: :: Homophones are generally listed in the Pronunciation section using the {{tl|homophone}} template. I've done that at πιο now, assuming in good faith that it's true. (Certainly οι and ι are usually pronounced the same, but I don't know for sure that that's the case here.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:02, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4026497 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/January: Found match for regex: :To judge from the Wikipedia article on the {{w|stopcock}}, Americans don't have them. I'd guess residential water supply is set up differently in the U.S. From my childhood in Texas I vaguely remember my father talking about turning the water off "at the mains" when work needed to be done on the pipes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:19, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026497 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/January: Found match for regex: :Maybe, but since there's no clear definition of the difference between a proper noun and a common noun, it's impossible to know for sure. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:25, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026497 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/January: Found match for regex: :I've restored your preferred sense (reworded somewhat to be a suitable definition for a noun rather than an adjective and to be more concise) but left the "extrovert" sense as well, and I've started a request for verification for both senses so that we can see how the word is actually used in durably archived sources. It's possible, of course, that both senses are attested. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:31, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026497 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/January: Found match for regex: *:: I've made it a redirect. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:14, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026497 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/January: Found match for regex: :No, it's not eye dialect, though "goverment" would be. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:35, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026497 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/January: Found match for regex: :::It's just a nonstandard form. It would only be eye dialect if the standard pronunciation of government were /ɡʌbmɪnt/. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:32, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026497 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/January: Found match for regex: ::::: —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:49, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026497 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/January: Found match for regex: ::::: We could also call it simply an alternative spelling of {{m|en|gubmint}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:51, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026497 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/January: Found match for regex: ::::::: The difference is that eye dialect is a technical term, and cat isn't. Eye dialect is more comparable to {{m|en|felid}}; it has a firm definition in its field, and although nonspecialists may sometimes use it imprecisely, a reference work like a dictionary should be careful to use it in its technically correct sense. So even if we find that {{m|en|eye dialect}} is sometimes used to mean nonstandard spellings that reflect a nonstandard pronunciation, we can add that definition (with an appropriate label like "loosely" or "by extension" or something), but we still shouldn't use the {{temp|eye dialect}} tag in the nonspecialist sense. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:36, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026497 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/January: Found match for regex: ::::::::::I don't feel any particular need to show respect to poorly researched work done in the past. People who don't know what eye dialect is shouldn't go around labeling things {{temp|eye dialect of}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:56, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026497 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/January: Found match for regex: ::Are we talking about the English word? If so, etymology 2 is pronounced just like etymology 1, and they're both homophonous with {{m|en|damn}} and rhyme with {{m|en|ham}} and {{m|en|jam}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 00:13, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026497 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/January: Found match for regex: :It's considered intransitive because the object is in the dative rather than the accusative: Das Essen bekommt ihm (not ihn) nicht. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:14, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026497 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/January: Found match for regex: ::: Yes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:39, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026497 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/January: Found match for regex: :Both Lewis & Short and the Oxford Latin Dictionary say circumseco has no perfect forms. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:25, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026497 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/January: Found match for regex: ** Actually it's a preposition. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:47, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026497 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/January: Found match for regex: :You can get higher resolution by clicking on the image. The only thing I disagree with is its implication that the Indo-European languages are split into two major groups, Indo-Iranian and European. That's a convenient way of thinking about it, maybe, but it has no linguistic basis. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:58, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026497 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/January: Found match for regex: :I'm pretty sure the i is short; it should be {{m|la|meminissem}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:26, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026497 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/January: Found match for regex: ::: Which source is that? I checked three different books on my bookshelf and they all give the ending of the pluperfect subjunctive as -issem, -issēs, -isset, -issēmus, -issētis, -issent; and they all do mark vowels that are long by nature before double consonants (something not all sources do), so the lack of a macron over the i really does indicate a short vowel. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:38, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026497 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/January: Found match for regex: ::::: I trust print sources, which are more likely to have been proofread, over online sources. That link omits the macron over the final e of the 2nd person singular, and the implication that the i was short in the 1st and 2nd plural, but long in all the other persons, strikes me as especially suspect. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:34, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026497 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/January: Found match for regex: ::That wasn't the question, though. The OP was asking about the Old Saxon and Middle Low German spelling egg. I don't know where that comes from, but if it's real, I suspect it's a borrowing from Old Norse, just like English egg is. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:37, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026497 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/January: Found match for regex: :We usually list idiomatic verb phrases as verbs here. See kick the bucket for an English example. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:14, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026498 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/February: Found match for regex: :Well, {{m|de|schwieger-}} is found on adjectives like {{m|de|schwiegermütterlich||mother-in-lawish}} (even though it's pretty clearly {{m|de|Schwiegermutter}} + {{m|de|-lich}}, not {{m|de|schwieger-}} + {{m|de|mütterlich}}), so it can be lower-case. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:24, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026498 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/February: Found match for regex: ::: I don't think it's necessary. Searching for Schwieger- will find schwieger-, and people are far more likely to search for the whole words than for the prefix anyway. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:00, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026498 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/February: Found match for regex: :::: Many morphologists distinguish between suffixes and endings; suffixes alter the meaning of the root, while endings don't (instead they mark grammatical functions like case, gender, number, person, etc.). By that definition, Spanish -a and -o are endings, not suffixes. However, we don't seem to make that distinction here, as we have a fair number of ===Suffix=== entries for endings in various languages, not to mention various categories "Fooish words suffixed with -blah" where -blah is an ending. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:20, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026498 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/February: Found match for regex: :It depends what dialect of Spanish you speak. There are certainly some Spanish speakers who pronounce words like {{m|es|llave}} with a sound very much like Serbian љ, although that pronunciation seems to be losing ground in both Spain and the Americas. We'd probably be better off comparing Serbian љ to Italian gl, since the sound is much more robust in Italian than it seems to be in Spanish. What page did you find the comparison to Spanish on? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:29, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026499 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/March: Found match for regex: :::One British friend told me that in order to be a cookie, it has to have chocolate chips in it, so these are cookies but nothing here is one. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:05, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026499 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/March: Found match for regex: **Yeah, that's probably a result of the common American perception of anything British as automatically sophisticated. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:54, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026499 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/March: Found match for regex: :::::Hm, what Stephen's calling a shopping center is what I would call a shopping plaza or a strip mall. I'm not sure I would use the term shopping center in en-US at all. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:13, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026499 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/March: Found match for regex: :"Simple" isn't always contrasted with "continuous", though. It generally means "formed by inflection" and is opposed to periphrastic. The simple present in English (which is contrasted with the continuous or progressive present) is one example, but there are others, e.g. the simple past in French in German (il alla/er ging), which is contrasted with the perfect (il est allé/er ist gegangen). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:32, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026499 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/March: Found match for regex: ::I wouldn't say {{m|en|it never rains but it pours}} necessarily has a negative valence. It can be said of good things that happen in rapid succession after a long period of nothing good happening, can't it? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:14, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026499 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/March: Found match for regex: ::::This quote from {{w|Anne of Green Gables}} is about never getting a marriage proposal until one is past forty, and then getting three at once. (The woman in question picked the wrong suitor to say yes to, which was negative, but the saying itself was referring to the presumably positive experience of being proposed to.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:43, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026499 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/March: Found match for regex: :Did you read the Etymology section of potluck? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:02, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026499 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/March: Found match for regex: :We do have some e-less first-person singular forms marked as such, e.g. {{m|de|komm}}, {{m|de|trink}}, and {{m|de|sag}}. The prescriptive rules of German call for an apostrophe on apocopated verb forms only if the form would be difficult to read or understand, otherwise not: examples from Duden are {{m|de||daran zweifl’ ich nicht}} (where {{m|de||zweifl}} without an apostrophe would look funny) vs. {{m|de||Das hör ich gern}} and {{m|de||Ich lass das nicht zu}}, where {{m|de|hör}} and {{m|de|lass}} are easy to read and understand without an apostrophe. The same rules apply to the second-person singular imperative, by the way. In spite of the official rules, though, the apostrophe is widespread in actual use, and if someone wanted to created pages like {{m|de|komm'}}, {{m|de|trink'}}, {{m|de|sag'}}, {{m|de|hör'}}, and {{m|de|lass'}}, they would probably be verifiable. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:52, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026499 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/March: Found match for regex: :::If you like, but keep verifiability in mind. Verbs commonly used in the spoken language are much more likely to have e-less forms than verbs like {{m|de|pharyngalisieren}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:21, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026499 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/March: Found match for regex: ::Not all four-year colleges are universities, though. A college that offers a Bachelor's degree is a four-year college; a university has to offer some graduate degree such as a Master's. I think four-year college is idiomatic for the reason Chuck mentioned; also, a student who earns a lot of credit through placement tests could get a Bachelor's in only three years. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:39, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026499 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/March: Found match for regex: :::: Removed. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:21, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026499 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/March: Found match for regex: :{{temp|grc-decl-3rd-N-dn-prx}}. See ὄνομα#Inflection for an illustration of how it works. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:03, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026499 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/March: Found match for regex: :::It looks right to me. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:30, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026499 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/March: Found match for regex: :The documentation should definitely be improved. {{diff|32436749|text=This}} is how to fix it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:50, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026500 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/April: Found match for regex: :::That wouldn't be possible; you have to have a well-formed root before you can start adding interchangeable consonant suffixes to it, and *le- isn't a well-formed root. As for synonyms that differ by only one sound, consider {{m|en|chop}} and {{m|en|lop}}, {{m|en|run}} and {{m|en|rush}}, or the relevant senses of {{m|en|dull}} and {{m|en|dumb}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:49, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026500 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/April: Found match for regex: :: The issue of whether atheism is an ideology or not is an opinion, rather than a verifiable fact, and to some extent depends on what kind of atheism is being discussed (see {{w|Negative and positive atheism}} and {{w|Implicit and explicit atheism}}). Some atheists don't believe in God themselves but do not actively deny the existence of God, and don't particularly care what other people think. That kind of atheism is probably not an ideology. But other atheists (what I consider the Richard Dawkins-style atheists) actively deny the existence of God, and some of them work to persuade others to share their point of view, often with positively evangelical fervor. That kind of atheism is definitely an ideology; some would even call it a religion. And lots of other kinds of atheism exist along the spectrum between these two extremes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:04, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026500 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/April: Found match for regex: ::::: We define ideology as "Doctrine, philosophy, body of beliefs or principles belonging to an individual or group". That's a perfect definition of Dawkins's kind of atheism. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:05, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026500 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/April: Found match for regex: :It it's just an electrical device for moving air that is located in a system consisting of the parts of an engine through which burned gases or steam are discharged, then I'd say it's sum-of-parts and probably doesn't meet CFI. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:09, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026500 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/April: Found match for regex: :::: Even if the thing in your bathroom is called an exhaust fan, it's still a fan for letting foul air out of a room through a register or pipe provided for the purpose. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:58, 4 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026500 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/April: Found match for regex: :::{{b.g.c.|"bleed the patient"}} and {{b.g.c.|"bled the patient"}} give plenty of hits that don't look veterinary to me. On the other hand, humans are animals, so the current definition could still be considered accurate. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:50, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026500 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/April: Found match for regex: :You're right. I'm fixing the U.S. pronunciation information now. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:41, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026500 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/April: Found match for regex: :Why? Does it seem out of date? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:40, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026500 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/April: Found match for regex: ::: I don't think Burmese has ever gone out of fashion. It's always been the more common term. Google Ngrams says it's only been since 2007 that Burmese has been less than a hundred times more common than Myanmarese. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:39, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026500 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/April: Found match for regex: :I think it's more similar to the practice of many English bibles writing Lord in all caps or small caps when it translates {{m|he|יהוה}}; I wouldn't favor including LORD and/or Lᴏʀᴅ for that, though. (Upon hitting Preview, I see that the first of those is already a blue link; oh, well.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:31, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026500 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/April: Found match for regex: :Some uses of it as a verb: , , . Perhaps they meant to put an {{temp|rfdef}} tag on it instead of {{temp|rfd}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:16, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026500 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/April: Found match for regex: ::: As I understand it, {{m|de|Kätzin}} is something of a technical term, used by breeders to refer unambiguously to a female cat, sort of like {{m|en|queen}} in English. The usage note, however, belongs at {{m|de|Kätzin}} once it's created, not at {{m|de|Katze}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:40, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026500 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/April: Found match for regex: ::::: It's not in the declension template, it's in the headword template. Being there doesn't preclude its being a lemma of its own, which it certainly is. I'd say Katze should have two senses: "1. cat" and "2. female cat". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:35, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026500 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/April: Found match for regex: :::::::: Obviously the weird thing about this word is adding the feminine suffix (yes, derivational not inflectional) to a feminine noun. I don't know of any other word where this is done: I've never heard *Entin for a specifically female duck or *Gänsin for a specifically female goose or *Schlängin for a specifically female snake or *Bienin for a specifically female bee or anything like that. That may be why people feel the need to point out the oddity of Kätzin. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:41, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026500 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/April: Found match for regex: ** Yes, the senses should be merged as they refer to the same thing. Yes, in the UK "toilet" is sometimes used to refer to the room. There are numerous stories of Brits visiting America who go to a restaurant and at some point ask the waiter where the toilet is, only to be told, "In the bathroom, of course, where else would it be?". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:52, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026500 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/April: Found match for regex: : The Geiriadur Prifysgol Cymru says it's feminine, and it gives several examples of adjectives undergoing soft mutation after it, which pretty much proves it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:40, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026500 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/April: Found match for regex: ::Done. Just like other dictionaries, we should reserve separate etymologies for things that are really unrelated, not for things like denominal verbs. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:55, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026500 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/April: Found match for regex: :::: I also disagree with Jerome Potts and Aɴɢʀ on this one. As DCDuring wrote, {{m|en|prick|pos=noun}} derives from the Old English noun {{m|ang|prica}}, whereas {{m|en||prick|pos=verb}} derives from the Old English verb {{m|ang|prician}}; and as Leasnam wrote, that noun probably goes back to the Proto-Germanic {{m|gem-pro|*prikô}}, whilst the verb probably goes back to the Proto-Germanic {{m|gem-pro|], ]}}. Of course the noun and the verb derive from the same root ultimately, but the different parts of speech became distinct long ago, and should be kept distinct in the way we present these words. Moreover, the OED keeps the noun and verb distinct; like that dictionary, we should do the same. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 08:21, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026500 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/April: Found match for regex: :::::::: I don't think that noun → verb or verb → noun developments that occurred even as far back as PIE should be given separate etymology sections. I think it makes us look amateurish, as if we didn't understand how etymologies work, if we do. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:43, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026500 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/April: Found match for regex: ::::::::::I dunno, it looks less unprofessional when they do it than when we do. Maybe because their lemmas just modestly say things like ¹prick and ²prick, where the superscripts could be numbering POSes rather than etymologies, whereas we have big-ass headings saying "Etymology 1" and "Etymology 2" (which imply, you know, different etymologies), and you scroll down to etymology 2 only to find it's just a denominal verb from etymology 1 and not really a separate etymology at all. And then you think, "WTF? Who the hell thinks that yellow the verb has a different etymology from yellow the adjective?" —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:12, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026500 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/April: Found match for regex: :::::::::Burmese is another one. I'd love to empty Category:Burmese adjectives and call them all verbs (since they are), but as every Burmese dictionary I've ever seen calls certain verbs "adjectives" based on the English translation, I feel it would be presumptuous of me (since I don't even speak the language) to break with tradition. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:48, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026501 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/May: Found match for regex: :I'm finding a small amount of use of the alternative spelling dushkarma. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:17, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026501 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/May: Found match for regex: We define the noun marine as "a member of a marine corps"; we define marine corps as "a military organization of marines who are trained and equipped to fight on or from ships". A user who didn't already know what a marine was still wouldn't know after reading these definitions, and would probably get the impression that there are some marines who are not "trained and equipped to fight on or from ships", but that those marines do not form a marine corps. I know virtually nothing about the military, but I suspect that isn't the case. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:36, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026501 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/May: Found match for regex: :Like two. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:59, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026501 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/May: Found match for regex: ::::I suppose I, III, IV, V, and VI at least need similar definitions. I don't know how high this pattern goes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:51, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026501 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/May: Found match for regex: :Yes, of course. I fixed it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:29, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026501 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/May: Found match for regex: ::The entry was originally created with an "intransitive" label. It was changed with {{diff|17267797|text=this edit}}, which may have been a simple mistake. {{ping|Lo Ximiendo}}, did you accidentally change the label from intransitive to transitive, or do you know something about Friulian that we don't? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:40, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026501 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/May: Found match for regex: Is the pronunciation given correct? Is the j of this word really pronounced /l/? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:19, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026501 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/May: Found match for regex: A user has added the pronunciation /mɒlt/ to these, tagging it "UK". Quite apart from the fact that "UK" is meaningless in a pronunciation section (there being dozens of different accents spoken across the UK), I can't find /mɒlt/ listed in any British dictionary. The closest I can find is in the Longman Pronunciation Dictionary, where it indicates a realization of /əʊ/ as before in a syllable coda. But I can't find any evidence for /mɒlt/ with the short monophthong of doll anywhere. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:50, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026501 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/May: Found match for regex: :: Hmm, is that what the Macquarie Dictionary says for Australian English? Over the years I've grown to be very skeptical of people's own intuitions about how they say things (including my own). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:57, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026501 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/May: Found match for regex: ::::: If it rhymes with fault, then it's , not , right? Homophonous with {{m|en|malt}}? Same vowel as thought, different vowel from lot? Is it a complete merger, or just for this word? In other words, do {{m|en|bolt}}, {{m|en|colt}}, {{m|en|dolt}}, {{m|en|jolt}} also rhyme with fault? And is it verifiable? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:58, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026501 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/May: Found match for regex: :: How does it differ from malt for you, if at all? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:21, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026501 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/May: Found match for regex: :::: The fact that you're not even sure whether or not they're homophones illustrates beautifully why I prefer to rely on published dictionaries for pronunciation information rather than users' introspection. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:42, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026501 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/May: Found match for regex: ::::::: There are other sources than dictionaries, though. Linguistic descriptions of middle- and working-class accents and of Northern England accents that explain what phonemic mergers have taken place compared to the upper-class Southern accents would be fine too. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:01, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026501 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/May: Found match for regex: :In the song it seems to be deliberately vague, so it probably was in the ad as well. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:46, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026501 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/May: Found match for regex: :{{b.g.c|professionality}} says yes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:38, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026501 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/May: Found match for regex: :::: Charles Möeller, being Brazilian, presumably pronounced his name in some Portuguized way anyway, but I assume his German ancestors were named either Möller or Moeller but not Möeller. German doesn't use tremas very often, but when it does (e.g. {{w|Bernhard Hoëcker}}) the trema goes over the second vowel. On the other hand, there are cases like {{m|de|Müesli}} where the üe is correct because the pronunciation is {{IPAchar|/yːɛ/}}. I suppose it's remotely possible (though not terribly likely) that in the old record you have, Möeller represents a dialectal pronunciation with {{IPAchar|/øːɛ/}} or the like. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:17, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026502 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/June: Found match for regex: :Well, {{w|民法|lang=zh}} is linked to {{w|Civil law (common law)}}, while it's {{w|欧陆法系|lang=zh}} that's linked to {{w|Civil law (legal system)}}, so I'm guessing the former. I don't speak Chinese, though. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:08, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026502 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/June: Found match for regex: :::: I suspect modern scholarly practice has a lot to do with the native language of the editor preparing the text for publication. If your native language writes {{m|en|April}}, you'll probably standardize on {{m|la|Aprilis}}, while if your native language writes {{m|nl|april}} or {{m|fr|avril}}, you'll probably standardize on {{m|la|aprilis}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:13, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026502 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/June: Found match for regex: Can we verify the pronunciation {{IPAchar|/ˈd(j)uːʃi/}}, which (depending on the yod-droppingness of one's accent) is either homophonous or rhymes with {{m|en|douchy}}? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:20, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026502 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/June: Found match for regex: *In the US, too, which is why I'm skeptical that it's ever pronounced "d(y)ooshey". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:39, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026502 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/June: Found match for regex: :: @Aɴɢʀ, SemperBlotto: The OED lists only the pronunciation {{IPAchar|/ˈdʌtʃɪ/}}, which is the only pronunciation I've ever heard (well, more like SB's {{IPAchar|/ˈdʌtʃi/}}, really). — I.S.M.E.T.A. 15:05, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026502 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/June: Found match for regex: ::::Dictionaries, especially older ones, often give /ɪ/ for the final vowel of words like pretty and honey, because that used to be a widespread sophisticated pronunciation in upper-class British English (RP), and was also found in other varieties such as Southern U.S. English. Nowadays dictionaries are moving towards using /i/ instead to reflect the most common vowel in current speech. (See {{w|Phonological history of English high front vowels#Happy-tensing}} for more.) However, what I'm interested in is the first syllable of this word, since our article currently claims there's an alternative pronunciation "d(y)ooshey", which I would like to remove if it can't be confirmed. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:27, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026502 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/June: Found match for regex: **It's a nickname for Charles, but I wouldn't necessarily call it a diminutive. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:00, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026502 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/June: Found match for regex: :Sounds like someone's confusing "suck your stomach in" with "tuck your shirt in". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:30, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026502 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/June: Found match for regex: :The best candidates I found at Wiktionnaire are fr:peuh, fr:pfut, and fr:putt. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:45, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026502 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/June: Found match for regex: ::Some more off the top of my head: {{m|de|Schals}}, {{m|de|Staus}}, {{m|de|Uhus}}; then there are things like {{m|de|Lunchs}}, {{m|de|Sandwichs}}, and {{m|de|Generals}} (attested but less common than {{m|de|Generäle}}) where the -s is clearly not borrowed from English and French since English has -es and French has {{m|fr|généraux}}. Heide Wegener, a professor at Potsdam, has written extensively about the plural in German and has argued that -s is the most productive plural ending in German despite not being the most common plural ending. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:58, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026502 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/June: Found match for regex: :The technical terms are "{{l|en|indicative}}" for {{m|en|wast}} and "{{l|en|subjunctive}}" for {{m|en|wert}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:42, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026503 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/July: Found match for regex: :Not that I know of. I removed it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:17, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026503 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/July: Found match for regex: For anyone interested in words derived from fictional languages, I've created an English entry for {{m|en|silflay}}, with four citations from sources independent of Watership Down and which don't even mention the book. I believe it thus meets WT:CFI. If anyone knows of more cites, feel free to add them. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:59, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026503 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/July: Found match for regex: :That's how I would interpret it. According to the U.S. Census, as of 2010 there were 5170 ± 849 people in the United States who spoke Icelandic at home. I guess this entry would have us believe that some portion of them says {{m|is|kar}} instead of {{m|is|bíll}} for 'car', which seems plausible enough. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:02, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026503 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/July: Found match for regex: :::::: Right, but it could do that in English: "From the first words of the Athanasian Creed, 'whoever wants'." —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:08, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026503 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/July: Found match for regex: :I agree they should be removed, and I do remove them wherever I see them, but what should not be removed are cases where {{IPAchar|/l̩/}} is found after a consonant in an unstressed syllable, e.g. battle, bottle, etc. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 05:19, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026503 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/July: Found match for regex: :::Yes, we found scholarly evidence of a bull/bowl/hull merger in the Pacific Northwest, but it did not say that they merged to /l̩/, and I find that extraordinarily unlikely. They probably merge to /ʊ/, but that's just a guess. The citation is Squizzero, R. (2009). Bulls and bowls in china shops: A perceptual experiment investigating pre-lateral vowels in Seattle English. Undergraduate thesis, University of Washington. I'm trying to think if I know anyone who could put me in touch with someone who's read that or has access to it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:29, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026503 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/July: Found match for regex: :—Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:24, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026503 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/July: Found match for regex: ::: PAM just wrote "points from Allah"; it was Zeggazo who added the word "brownie". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:55, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026503 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/July: Found match for regex: ::The "dated" label on sense 1 implies that it used to be a standard spelling but isn't anymore. (Sort of like {{m|en|shew}}.) I doubt that's true; the very citation we use for "drempt" also uses "undreamt" just a few words before. To be eye dialect, it would have to be used to suggest a lack of education on the part of the person using it, which might be the case in the 1935 quote (since it also has "they was chokin'" to suggest nonstandard usage), but does not seem to be the case in the 1939 quote. I don't think we need to have separate senses for 1 and 2. We could just call it a {{temp|nonstandard spelling of}} and have done with it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:25, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026503 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/July: Found match for regex: :Eisiau is a special case since it doesn't behave like other verbal nouns. For most verbs, we treat the verbal noun as the lemma, meaning they're all in Category:Welsh verbs. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:59, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026503 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/July: Found match for regex: :{{done}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:22, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026503 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/July: Found match for regex: :That was hard to understand. Are you saying our entry {{m|en|straight}} is missing the poker sense? If so, you're right, though that sense does have a translation table. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:37, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026503 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/July: Found match for regex: :Found it! It was accidentally buried in a citation for the previous sense. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:40, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026503 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/July: Found match for regex: :: The quotes using "hagbuttares ... vytin" and "counsall ordains" are in Scots, not English. In fact, most of the quotes appear to be in either Middle English or Scots and are thus inappropriate for an English entry. In "affor the Sacrament" I think it means "before" in the sense of "in front of", but maybe it means "opposite"/"across from" since the Sacrament is usually kept on the south side of the chancel. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:59, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026503 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/July: Found match for regex: :: Oh, and the 1987 quote is totally wrong; it's clearly a nonstandard form of {{m|en|afford}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:00, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026503 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/July: Found match for regex: :: P.S. "hagbuttares" are hagbutters and "vytin" is within. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:06, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026503 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/July: Found match for regex: :: P.P.S. I can't figure out exactly what the quote about the schoolmaster means. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:13, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026503 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/July: Found match for regex: ** I'm pretty sure it's the north side of the aisle, not the north side of the isle. (Holy Trinity Church in Hull isn't on an island, and it's in the south part of town.) As for "ilk honest man that hes bairnis to gif the said doctur his meit about", I think it means "every honest man that has children to give that doctor his meat", i.e. everyone who has children has to pay for the teacher's food, but I'm not sure. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:29, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026503 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/July: Found match for regex: **** According to the Dictionary of the Scots Language, ilk can mean "the same", but it can also mean "each, every", and to judge from the quotes in those two entries, when it means "the same" it's always preceded by something like "the", "this", "that", but when it stands alone it means "each, every". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:38, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026503 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/July: Found match for regex: :::: As a lifelong practicing Episcopalian/Anglican, I must say I have never ever ever heard the altar referred to as the Sacrament. I'm starting to wonder if by "affor the Sacrament" he meant there should be a Eucharist service after his burial, but that seems like an odd thing to stipulate too. Maybe Sacrament has meanings in Yorkshire dialect that I'm unaware of; that wouldn't surprise me. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:36, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026504 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/August: Found match for regex: :::: "Rare" is definitely a better tag than "nonstandard". I may have used this term once or twice myself as an American "back-translation" of flatmate to emphasize that he and I had separate bedrooms, but usually I would say roommate (or flatmate when conversing with British/Irish friends). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:23, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026504 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/August: Found match for regex: ::: Except that now it says pathologic is American English, but actually it isn't used in American English either. It should probably be labeled "rare" or "obsolete" or something else to show that it isn't really used (much). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:42, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026504 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/August: Found match for regex: Is that really a good idea? Is there a difference between the Gheg Albanian language and the Gheg dialect of Albanian? Or should the {{tl|label|sq|Gheg}} senses be broken out and made into separate aln entries? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:20, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026504 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/August: Found match for regex: :All adjectives using {{tl|la-decl-3rd-2E}} are affected by this: the older masculine/feminine nominative/accusative plural ending -īs is not given. I'm not sure if all two-ending third-declension adjectives are attested with the -īs form though. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:05, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026504 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/August: Found match for regex: ** The Irish use (which I've heard but don't use myself) is quite different. There's no suggestion that the listener has any relationship with the person being referred to at all. I was once on top of a cliff in County Donegal with a local, and we were looking down at the beach where there was someone walking. The fellow next to me said, "Look at your man down there ". Or an Irish friend of mine was telling a story of one time when she was in a pub, and she said "...and your man behind the bar said...", when I wasn't even present at the time. It really just means "that guy/the guy". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:33, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026504 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/August: Found match for regex: ******** The first time I heard it I did think, "Why is he my man? What does he have to do with me?" but after hearing it a few times I realized it was just a figure of speech that meant "that guy". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:21, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026504 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/August: Found match for regex: ::: I don't know if I've ever heard it in the wild, but I have heard that some nonrhotic Southern accents drop intervocalic /r/ as well as coda /r/. John Harris once told of his surprise at hearing his surname pronounced /ˈhæ.ɪs/ by a Southerner. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:46, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026505 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/September: Found match for regex: :I'd call them all idiomatic, since it's only in this phrase that "the daily" (etc.) is used to mean "a daily basis" (etc.). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:27, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026505 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/September: Found match for regex: ::: There's also {{m|en|on the regular||on a regular basis}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:05, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026505 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/September: Found match for regex: :Can you give some examples of words in Maroon Spirit Language, Kriol, or Tok Pisin that are miscategorized as English? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:11, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026505 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/September: Found match for regex: ::::: I never noticed this before; is it new? At any rate it seems to me to be a very bad thing that Category:English language is a daughter of Category:Middle English language, which is a daughter of Category:Old English language, which is a daughter of Category:Proto-Germanic language, which is a daughter of Category:Proto-Indo-European language. That's not what membership in a category is supposed to mean. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:03, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026505 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/September: Found match for regex: :: BGC Ngrams confirms that the capitalized form is way more common. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:14, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026505 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/September: Found match for regex: :I'm pretty sure those are all knave, many of them in the meaning "boy" (compare German {{m|de|Knabe}}). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:53, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026505 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/September: Found match for regex: :: There are lots of female homosexuals who dislike the word "lesbian" and refer to themselves as gay. Ellen DeGeneres is, in fact, one of them: if you watch the episode of Ellen where the Ellen Morgan character comes out of the closet, you'll notice the word "lesbian" is never used. Ellen herself, and the other female homosexual characters, are consistently referred to as gay. Using "gay" as a noun is more complicated; I'd never say "Ellen DeGeneres is a gay", but then I'd never say "Tom Daley is a gay", either. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:55, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026505 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/September: Found match for regex: ::::: Using "gay" as a noun sounds odd in the singular and in the plural when it's specific, but sounds find in the plural when it's general: compare ^?"I met a gay at a party last night" and ^?"I met two gays at a party last night" vs. "Gays were outraged by the verdict." The first two sound very odd (and even somewhat offensive) to me; the third sounds fine. The first two also probably refer only to males, but the second easily includes both males and females. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:36, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026505 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/September: Found match for regex: ::::::: For many people, {{m|en|Jew}} also works this way, even though it can only be a noun: "I met a Jew at a party last night" and "I met two Jews at a party last night" sound vaguely offensive to many people, whereas "Jews were outraged by the verdict" doesn't. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:29, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026505 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/September: Found match for regex: ::While we're at it, I really doubt that it's "chiefly Internet". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:02, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026505 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/September: Found match for regex: :::In the Vulgate, it's spelled {{m|la|Ahavva}} anyway. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:48, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026505 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/September: Found match for regex: ::::: In Latin, it is {{m|la|Ahava}} in {{w|Historia Scholastica}}. In English, the Bishops' Bible spells it {{m|en|Ahaua}}, but only because it always uses u for v ("And euen there at the water beside Ahaua I proclaymed a fast, that we might humble our selues before our God"). The usual spelling in modern English Bibles is {{m|en|Ahava}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:56, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026505 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/September: Found match for regex: :"Accent" refers only to pronunciation/phonology, so if Glaswegian is distinct from other varieties of Scots in morphology, syntax, or lexicon, then it's a dialect and not just an accent. I suspect it's a dialect of Scots rather than of English (under our definition of Scots as a separate language from English), but I don't know enough about it to be sure. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:46, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026505 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/September: Found match for regex: :Well whae and didnae aren't English, but ah can be (see ah#Pronoun). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:37, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026505 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/September: Found match for regex: :::When I read Trainspotting, my impression of the dialogue was that it was chiefly Scots/English code-switching. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:44, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026506 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/October: Found match for regex: :Please see our entry for {{m|en|eclectic}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:19, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026506 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/October: Found match for regex: Can someone with access to the OED or some knowledge of geology find a meaning of {{m|en|tan}} related to sedimentary rock? Dinneen's Irish–English Dictionary ({{tl|R:ga:Dinneen}}) says the following in its definition of {{m|ga|leac}}: "any sedimentary rock, a tan; {{...}} {{m|ga||l. liath}}, lime-tan; {{m|ga||l. ruadh}}, iron-tan." I've found nothing in Wikipedia or Webster's Third New International (or the 1828 or 1913 Webster's) or in Google Books (even restricted to the 19th century in case it's an old-fashioned term no longer in use). All I can find is references to various tan-colored rocks, but I don't think that's what Dinneen is talking about. Any ideas? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:32, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026506 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/October: Found match for regex: **Thanks for trying to figure this one out, everyone! {{w|Patrick S. Dinneen}} was from County Kerry; I wonder if it's a word only used in Hiberno-English, or even his local Kerry variety of Hiberno-English, and maybe he didn't realize that people from outside his area wouldn't know this word. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:12, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026506 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/October: Found match for regex: :It's usually spelled dogies, but the origin is unknown. I know it from {{w|Git Along, Little Dogies}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:29, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026506 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/October: Found match for regex: :Kills Moors. It originated with the legend of {{w|Saint James Matamoros}}, also called Saint James the Moor-slayer. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:10, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026506 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/October: Found match for regex: ::: The city in Tamaulipas is named for {{w|Mariano Matamoros}}. I have no idea whether Spanish speakers even think of the etymological meaning of the name. No worse than {{w|Killarney}}, Kilkenny, and {{w|Killowen}} in Ireland (though the kill- element of those names is etymologically unrelated to the verb kill). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:06, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026506 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/October: Found match for regex: :Well, "He was an erudite". I found some noun uses on b.g.c: , , . The first two mean "an erudite person", the third means "being erudite". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:10, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026506 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/October: Found match for regex: :If something unpleasant happens, you can say, "Das ist ja ärgerlich", so in that context it means "annoying" and not "annoyed". I'm not a native speaker, but I would say "Über seine Verspätung war ich wirklich {{l|de|verärgert}}", but maybe other people would say "ärgerlich" there. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:11, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026506 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/October: Found match for regex: :Well, German Wikipedia's article w:de:Mitgift says, " wird vom Vater der Braut (oder ihrer Verwandtschaftsgruppe) an den Vater des Bräutigams (oder seine Verwandtschaftsgruppe) oder direkt an das Ehepaar übergeben" (the dowry is given by the father of the bride (or her kin group) to the father of the groom (or his kin group) or directly to the married couple), so the Mitgift isn't necessarily given to the bride either. At any rate, I don't think there's any substantial difference in meaning between Mitgift and dowry: whatever fine semantic details are found to pertain to the English word will doubtless be found to pertain to the German word as well, and vice versa. Any differences in dictionary definitions are probably more the result of differing cultural attitudes on the part of the various lexicographers. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:24, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026506 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/October: Found match for regex: :I suspect what someone's trying to say is that the baserunner need not have his foot on the base; he's still a baserunner when he's standing a third of the way between his current base and the one he's aiming for (which happens all the time). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:32, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026506 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/October: Found match for regex: :::We do have an entry for the adjective minded. It sounds fine to me, and I'm American. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:30, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026506 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/October: Found match for regex: This redlink is currently at the top of the Wanted entries list. The synonym illapse of the Holy Ghost gets almost as many hits at b.g.c, so if we have one, we should have the other. (And illapse of the Spirit gets even more.) But should we have it? Looking through the uses of both variants at b.g.c, I think it's SOP: it's just an illapse of the Holy Spirit/Holy Ghost. It refers to the Holy Spirit descending upon Mary to get her pregnant with Jesus, but it also refers to the Holy Spirit descending upon other people at baptism and entering the host at Eucharist. I don't think it's a specific enough term to warrant a separate entry. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:15, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026506 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/October: Found match for regex: ::It's been created now, so I've RFD'd it. New thread is at WT:Requests for deletion#illapse of the Holy Spirit. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:09, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026506 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/October: Found match for regex: :: "Chinese young people" sounds fine to me, and gets lots of Google hits, including in edited writing. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:56, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026506 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/October: Found match for regex: :Now fixed; thanks for catching it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:50, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026506 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/October: Found match for regex: :::: Basically, nothing should be labeled {{tl|a|UK}} or {{tl|a|US}} (though a lot of things are). When tidying up pronunciations, please use more specific labels like {{tl|a|RP}} and {{tl|a|GA}}. RP should always be one of the British pronunciations we show, but it needn't be the only one. If you want to add pronunciations for Estuary English or Devonshire or the North of England or Wales or Scotland or Northern Ireland or what have you, that's fine too, but RP should be there as a minimum, and should not show /ɹ/ before a consonant, even in round brackets. At the end of a word, on the other hand, there may be an argument for including /(ɹ)/ to show the r-sound that appears when the next word starts with a vowel. Thus I can live with transcribing star as /stɑː(ɹ)/ since star is is /stɑːɹ ɪz/. But start should only be /stɑːt/ since there's never an /ɹ/ in that word in RP. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:56, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026506 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/October: Found match for regex: :::::: I change {{tl|a|UK}} and {{tl|a|US}} wherever I see them, but I'd rather do it manually than by bot so that any errors in transcription can be fixed at the same time. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:37, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026506 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/October: Found match for regex: ::I think people say it to mean "murder will out". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:40, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026506 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/October: Found match for regex: :To your third question, there's some interesting discussion at w:Mozarabic language#Native name. Basically, in early Medieval Spain, Spanish speakers called their language "Latin" (it was, after all, descended from the local variety of Vulgar Latin) primarily to distinguish it from Arabic. For whatever reason, over time it was only the Spanish Jews who continued to call their language that, while the Christians called their language Spanish or Castilian. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:09, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026506 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/October: Found match for regex: :The script is Oriya. The first word means "Wikipedia". I don't know about the rest. Oriya isn't available at Google Translate. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:36, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026506 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/October: Found match for regex: ::People say crib note (probably more common in the plural) as a synonym of cheat sheet, though. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:23, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026506 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/October: Found match for regex: ::Kluge's Etymologisches Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache says it comes from OHG {{m|goh|mulināri}} but that it's unclear whether that's an internal OHG formation from {{m|goh|mulīn}} or whether the word as a whole was borrowed from Medieval Latin {{m|la|molīnārius}}. If it were a modern German formation from {{m|de|Mühle}} we'd expect a long vowel (*Mühler) rather than a short vowel ({{m|de|Müller}}). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:29, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026506 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/October: Found match for regex: :According to w:de:Maien (Zweig), a Maien is a sapling or fresh twig or branch. It gets its name from the month of May, but it doesn't mean 'May'. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:53, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026506 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/October: Found match for regex: :Oh wait, according to w:de:Maien it's also a poetic word for May, which makes more sense in the song you linked to. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:59, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026506 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/October: Found match for regex: :From w:Neoteny: "human evolution's trend toward neoteny may have been caused by sexual selection in human evolution for neotenous facial traits in women by men with the resulting neoteny in male faces being a "by-product" of sexual selection for neotenous female faces. Jones said that this type of sexual selection "likely" had a major role in human evolution once a larger proportion of women lived past the age of menopause. This increasing proportion of women who were too old to reproduce resulted in a greater variance in fecundity in the population of women, and it resulted in a greater sexual selection for indicators of youthful fecundity in women by men." —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:56, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026506 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/October: Found match for regex: :::: The sources are in the article. This particular study was published in 1995, in Current Anthropology 36 (5): 723–748. The article has a whole section on Attractive women's faces (I don't know if that's or ) with other sources by other authors coming to basically the same conclusion: babyish faces are felt to be more attractive than non-babyish faces. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:05, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026506 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/October: Found match for regex: ::::::: Also, someone could be butt-ugly and still be an attractive candidate for a job, or something like that. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:29, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026506 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/October: Found match for regex: :: Not surprising, considering the wide variety of unrelated foods called "nut" in English. Most people are aware that peanuts are not true nuts; many fewer people are aware that almonds, brazil nuts, cashews, macadamias, pecans, pine nuts, pistachios, and walnuts are not true nuts either, though people with nut allergies have to avoid them all in addition to true nuts like chestnuts and hazelnuts. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:54, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026506 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/October: Found match for regex: :::: Our current definition is only the culinary one; we should probably add the botanical one. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:12, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026506 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/October: Found match for regex: :Czech. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:08, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026507 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/November: Found match for regex: :: I suspect it's that same set of verbs that don't take do-support in questions and negatives: "Are you" not "*Do you be", "You will not" not "*You do not will", etc. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:39, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026507 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/November: Found match for regex: :: Yes, the majority of our audio files for French nouns include the definite article. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:59, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026507 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/November: Found match for regex: :The only verb forms that Allen & Greenough mention as exceptions to the stress rule are things like beneˈfacit and caleˈfacit, so the {{w|argument from silence}} (which is a red link here!) is that these compounds take normal stress, as otherwise they would have mentioned them as exceptions too. Not terribly strong evidence, I know, but it's all I got. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:42, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026507 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/November: Found match for regex: :: I'd say the Hindi pronunciation is {{IPAchar|}} with the labiodental approximant that doesn't occur in English. English speakers perceive it as a cross between (because it's labiodental) and (because it's an approximant, not a fricative). Partially for that reason, and partially because of the alternative spelling Divali, you're probably as likely to hear English speakers pronounce it with as with . —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:53, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026507 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/November: Found match for regex: :Done. Next time you can change it to {{temp|m|cu||tr=myjati||to mew}} and that will put it in Category:Old Church Slavonic terms needing native script. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:39, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026507 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/November: Found match for regex: :I think bitter cup (with almost 90,000 Google Books hits) is the more common equivalent. English Bibles usually use "cup" rather than "chalice" in their translations of Matthew 26:39–42, Mark 14:36, and Luke 22:42. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:46, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026507 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/November: Found match for regex: {{ping|Daniel Carrero}}, {{ping|Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV}}, and anyone else who speaks Portuguese: is {{m|pt|membra}} real? A new user just added it, and I'm skeptical. I don't want to RFV it if a reliable Wiktionarian says it's a real word. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:58, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026507 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/November: Found match for regex: :: OK, obrigado. He also added a link to it from {{m|pt|membro}} which I deleted. You can put that back if you like. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:06, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026507 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/November: Found match for regex: :German does allow consonant gemination across the two elements of a compound (and verbs with separable prefixes act like compounds), e.g. {{m|de|Brennnessel}} also has /n.n/. Our German entries don't have a lot of consistency. Ideally they should all conform to Appendix:German pronunciation but in practice a lot of them don't. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:19, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026507 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/November: Found match for regex: :::Those aren't the best examples of minimal pairs, though, because of the glottal stop before the vowel-initial morpheme: {{m|de|einordnen}} isn't , it's . Likewise a word "Zeitakt" would be . However, Zweitakt (as in {{m|de|Zweitaktmotor||two-stroke engine}}) is a good near-minimal pair with Zeittakt . Another minimal pair using a nonce word is {{m|de|Beiname||byname}} vs. theoretical Beinname "leg name" (y'know, if you want to name your leg); these would be vs. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:14, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026507 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/November: Found match for regex: :: The sentence is referring to places, not languages: "in Cataluña , in Provence ". But we do say Catalonia, not Cataluña, in English. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:54, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026507 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/November: Found match for regex: **I've expanded on SemperBlotto's go, as his example sentence struck me as a nonidiomatic usage as opposed to the modern youth-slang version I assume Renard Migrant was talking about. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:42, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026507 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/November: Found match for regex: ****You haven't missed much. I suspect in three years no one will be saying it anymore, but I am amused by its intensified version "I have lost the ability to even". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:50, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026507 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/November: Found match for regex: ** I think it's rare outside the first person singular present tense, but I can easily imagine "She said she couldn't even". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:28, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026507 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/November: Found match for regex: :::Having read through the examples listed at {{w|adynaton}}, I don't think this is an example of it at all. And while it started out as aposiopesis (which could be mentioned in its etymology), it is no longer that, as the quote Smurrayinchester gave shows. It's similar to the slang "It'll be very!" in {{w|Heathers}}, which is etymologically but not syncronically aposiopesis. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:47, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026507 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/November: Found match for regex: :See Help:Starting a new page for information on how to do it. If have more questions, feel free to ask me on my talk page. I also know some Irish, so I may be able to help you with content as well as formatting. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:50, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026507 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/November: Found match for regex: :: I played cello for 20 years and never once heard "upstroke/downstroke" as synonyms for "upbow/downbow". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:30, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026507 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/November: Found match for regex: :: The Longman Pronunciation Dictionary agrees with the OED: either /ˈɔːltə/ or /ˈɒltə/ in RP, with preference for the first. In American English it appears to be /ˈɔltɚ/ (GenAm not having distinctive vowel length) in all varieties without the {{w|cot-caught merger}} and /ˈɑltɚ/ in varieties that merge cot/caught to /ɑ/. It appears that {{m|en|alter}} is always a homophone. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:15, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026507 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/November: Found match for regex: ::::Well what do you gotta do that for? Messing up my tidy generalizations. Geez, there's one in every crowd. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:08, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026507 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/November: Found match for regex: :::::: Yes, the Longman dictionary, like Wiktionary and virtually every dictionary and textbook that uses IPA for American English, uses /ɔ/ (actually, /ɔː/) to symbolize the unmerged thought vowel, regardless of whether the actual realization of that phoneme is open enough to justify a transliteration . In fact, the first edition of the Longman dictionary did use /ɒː/ in its transliteration of American English, but then switched to /ɔː/ in later editions. (One of my biggest pet peeves with Longman is its use of length marks for American English, even for the "short o" of the lot vowel: it transcribes American hot as homophonous with RP heart, i.e. /hɑːt/, which really rubs me the wrong way.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026507 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/November: Found match for regex: ::: I agree; ellipsis is a regular part of English grammar and doesn't make this string of words idiomatic. If this were RFD I'd say delete. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:36, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026507 Wiktionary:Tea room/2015/November: Found match for regex: ::::::::: Well, there's {{m|ga|cailín}}, {{m|ga|gasóg}}, and {{m|ga|stail}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:26, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026509 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/January: Found match for regex: :::: {{m|ine-pro|*h₁és-}} had zero grade in the plural, though, so {{m|la|sumus}} and {{m|la|sunt}} probably always had initial s-. Perhaps they are what influenced sum (*h₁esmi would normally have given *em in Latin), just as the singular apparently influenced estis. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:36, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026509 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/January: Found match for regex: :The PIE word is more usually listed in its e-grade {{m|ine-pro|*pesd-}}. I don't know if its anterior etymology is known, but it's presumably related to {{m|ine-pro|*perd-}} of the same meaning; perhaps one was originally a euphemism for the other. I don't know if or how {{m|pl|pizda}} is related; it seems somewhat unlikely both phonologically and semantically. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 00:25, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026509 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/January: Found match for regex: ::: Pali has it too; see at the bottom of the page (sense 6). Nevertheless I find it kind of difficult to believe that a Sanskrit/Pali word is the source of this 1920s American slang word. I bet it's something more prosaic like mo- from {{m|en|money}} plus sense 3 of {{m|en|-ola}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:08, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026509 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/January: Found match for regex: :I don't have a source for the etymology, but I can confirm that {{m|en|word}} and {{m|en|Lord}} are pronounced differently. The two words do not rhyme. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:40, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026509 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/January: Found match for regex: :Sounds good to me. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:27, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026510 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/February: Found match for regex: :The geographic barrier isn't that large when you realize that the {{w|Varangians}} were Norsemen who lived in Constantinople. Granted, they lived there while Constantinople was still Greek-speaking, but Turkish and Arabic speakers weren't that far away. Besides, where else would Norse get a word for 'elephant' from? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 23:10, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026510 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/February: Found match for regex: :::: I suspect the Norse word actually comes from Arabic, without the intervention of any form of Turkish. That's what 𒄠𒋛#Descendants says, too. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:14, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026510 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/February: Found match for regex: :I don't think there's anything wrong with using the symbols the sources use, especially if those are what readers familiar with Arawak historical linguistics will be expecting. I would use /¢/ instead of /c̷/ (which has display issues), though. You could also use plain, unadorned /c/ if that symbol doesn't already mean something else. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:18, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026510 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/February: Found match for regex: ::: If most scholars use /ts tʃ ʃ/ rather than /¢ č š/, then I'd we should too. Ideally we shouldn't be using just one source anyway. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:30, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026510 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/February: Found match for regex: :::: I just found ȼ, which (if you do use those symbols) is a better choice than either ¢ or c̷. I just moved the entries for "tooth" and "horn" to {{m|awd-pro|*ahȼe}} and {{m|awd-pro|*ȼiwi}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:19, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026510 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/February: Found match for regex: {{user|Á}} has added information to {{m|en|half}} and its Germanic cognates claiming that Proto-Germanic {{m|gem-pro|*halbaz}} is a loanword from Proto-Finnic, sourced to this Finnish-language web page. I can't read Finnish; so my questions are (1) does that web page really say the Germanic word comes from Finnic, and (2) if so, is that web page likely to be reflecting scholarly consensus? Pinging User:Hekaheka in particular, but also anyone who can read Finnish and knows something about historical linguistics. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:51, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026510 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/February: Found match for regex: ::: So what shall we do with the recent edits? We certainly shouldn't just baldly state that *halbaz is a Finnic loanword without some sort of disclaimer that that's just one person's suggestion, but should we mention it at all? The diss is new enough that it hasn't really had time for other linguists to respond to it yet, but if the association between *halbaz and halpa has both semantic and chronological difficulties that even we amateurs notice, it seems unlikely ever to become consensus. (Which is not to say that other Uralic-to-Germanic loanwords proposed in the diss won't be accepted, just not this one.) So should we annotate the recent edits to indicate that this is a minority view, or should we just remove them? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:10, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026510 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/February: Found match for regex: :I've added the Finnic theory to Appendix:Proto-Germanic/halbaz, but I've removed it from the etymologies of the modern languages' words. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:36, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026511 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/March: Found match for regex: :Somebody already asked about this word a few months ago. My own speculation was the only answer we got. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:45, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026512 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/April: Found match for regex: :I think it's pretty uncontroversial that it is from English {{m|en|orchestra}}. If it were from any other European language, it would almost certainly be {{m|ja|オルケストラ|tr=orukesutora}} instead of {{m|ja|オーケストラ|tr=ōkesutora}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:40, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026512 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/April: Found match for regex: :: I removed the nonsense about a PIE word for book, but an actual source for the etymology would be good anyway. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:14, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026512 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/April: Found match for regex: ::: Those are some ways Chinese has become phonologically simpler, but it may have become more complex in other areas of the language. Also, according to Wikipedia, "Most scholars now believe that Old Chinese lacked the tones found in later stages of the language", which means that even within the phonology, while the language has gotten simpler in terms of consonants, it's gotten more complex in terms of tones. I think it's pretty clear that loss of complexity in one area must be compensated for with increased complexity in some other area, otherwise after 50,000 years of using language, we'd all be saying nothing but ta ta ta ta nowadays. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:46, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026512 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/April: Found match for regex: ::::::: But having homonyms that are also semantically roughly similar leads to ambiguity, with the result that the situation is unstable. People tend to avoid homonyms if they could be confusing. In places in the U.S. where pin and pen are homophones, for example, the terms sewing pin and writing pen are gaining prominence. It isn't the homonymy itself that adds to complexity, it's they way people avoid it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:21, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026513 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/May: Found match for regex: :Looks like it, but it was put together in Middle French, not in English. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:31, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026513 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/May: Found match for regex: :The LSG entry for the prefix ἀ- says that the alpha privativum is often long in adjectives starting with three short syllables, so presumably it's lengthened for metrical reasons (since most forms of Greek poetry don't allow three short syllables in a row) rather than for etymological reasons. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:20, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026513 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/May: Found match for regex: :This page shouldn't exist in the first place since the word is generally not believed to have existed in PIE, but rather to have arisen somehow (presumably a loanword) in Celtic and Germanic alone. (And if the page is kept, it should be called Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/marḱos or /markos or /márḱos or /markos in accordance with our naming conventions.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:52, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026513 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/May: Found match for regex: ::: In order to avoid putting too much emphasis on them, I'd only put them in the etymology section of {{l|gem-pro|*marhaz}} (and {{l|cel-pro|*markos}} if and when that gets created) rather than in the etymology sections of the attested words. And I still see no reason to have an entry for a PIE word that apparently no one believes to have existed in PIE. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:45, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026513 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/May: Found match for regex: :::: I thought medial -ρρ- was always represented as -ῤῥ-. Shouldn't all these words be spelled with -ῤῥαφία, and {{m|grc|διάῤῥοια}} instead of {{m|grc|διάρροια}}? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:14, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026513 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/May: Found match for regex: :::::: I've started a thread at Wiktionary talk:About Ancient Greek#Double rhos about the possibility of hard-redirecting such forms. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:41, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026514 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/June: Found match for regex: Old English {{m|ang|flǣsc}} cannot come directly from Proto-Germanic {{m|gem-pro|*flaiską}}, because that would have given ^×flāsc. The Old English word has to come from something like {{m|gem-pro|*flaiskją}} (or maybe {{m|gem-pro|*flaiski}}, but neuter i-stems are very rare). What about the other old Germanic words? Do any of them prove it has to have been {{m|gem-pro|*flaiską}} and not {{m|gem-pro|*flaiskją}}, or are they ambiguous? The Old Norse byform {{m|non|fleski}} also looks suggestive. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:31, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026514 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/June: Found match for regex: ::Thanks, John. Maybe the entry should indicate the other possible reconstructions. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:08, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026514 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/June: Found match for regex: :How about "{{temp|affix|nl|hoofdstad|-lijk}} with vowel alteration taken over from {{temp|m|nl|stedelijk}}"? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:54, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026515 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/July: Found match for regex: Do other people like this idea, and if so, would someone be willing to implement it? That would be way beyond my module-editing capabilities. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:14, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026515 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/July: Found match for regex: :: As far as I know, nothing. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:37, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026515 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/July: Found match for regex: :: The other ablaut grades may be easily derivable from the full grade, but the reverse isn't always true. If I encounter a zero grade *ḱun-, for example, I don't know if the full grade is *ḱwen- or *ḱewn-. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:15, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026515 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/July: Found match for regex: :Is it knowable? It looks like all descendants (those you mention as well as {{m|sa|गुरु}}) derive from the zero grade. Maybe this is one of those irregular roots like {{m|ine-pro|*bʰuH-}} that didn't have a full grade. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:06, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026515 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/July: Found match for regex: ::: Their preconceived expectations? Anyway, I just discovered {{m|gem-pro|*kwernuz}}, which looks like it has the full grade in the order -er-. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:16, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026515 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/July: Found match for regex: ::::: Fair enough, but it could be the reason why some authors committed themselves to {{m|ine-pro|*gʷerh₂-}}. And if the full grade is *gʷreh₂-, it will be indistinguishable from the zero grade *gʷr̥h₂- in many languages (~~Indo-Iranian~~, Italic, Celtic), which makes the decision more difficult. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:31, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026515 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/July: Found match for regex: ::::::: I was mistaken about Indo-Iranian. I was thinking -r̥H- became -rā- before a consonant there, but it doesn't, it becomes (at least in Sanskrit) -īr- or -ūr-. But this root seems mostly to have -r̥H- before a vowel, which means H-loss doesn't trigger compensatory lengthening. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 05:01, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026515 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/July: Found match for regex: ::::::: BTW, Sihler reconstructs it *gʷr̥ru- without a laryngeal and just says "the obvious inference is that *gʷr̥- before a vowel gives L gra-". He also thinks that {{m|la|prae}} < *pr̥h₂ey shows a parallel change of prevocalic *pr̥- to pra- and suggests that {{m|la|trāns}} might also show *tr̥- to tra-. As for the reason why he reconstructs *gʷr̥ru- without a laryngeal, he just says "Evidence bearing on *gʷr̥Hu- is meager by comparison , but the evidence against a laryngeal is better than the evidence in favor of one." Unfortunately he doesn't say what that evidence is. With or without a laryngeal, the problem is that there are so few instances of a syllabic sonorant before a vowel that it's hard to figure out what the "normal" outcome would be. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:32, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026515 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/July: Found match for regex: ::::::::: I don't think he was actually proposing a geminate; at the same time he was writing *gʷr̥ru- he was referring to it as a syllabic sonorant followed by a vowel, so he was clearly thinking of it as *gʷr̥u-. Maybe he was thinking /gʷr̥u-/ phonemically and phonetically, though he doesn't seem to come out and say that in so many words, or maybe it was a misprint. I don't know how old the Germanic -uRV- forms are; I can imagine many of them are analogical rather than inherited. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:26, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026515 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/July: Found match for regex: :Back to the original question, {{m|sa|ग्रावन्}} looks like it can only come from *gʷreh₂-, since *gʷr̥h₂u- gave guru- and *gʷr̥h₂w- would have given gūrv-. So maybe this is a case of Schwebeablaut, with *gʷreh₂- in Indic and *gʷerh₂- in Germanic (assuming the "millstone" word is from the same root as the "heavy" word). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:50, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026515 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/July: Found match for regex: :Looks like bullshit to me. Incidentally, the Etymology scriptorium is the usual venue for questions like this. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 05:12, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026515 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/July: Found match for regex: :/t/ became /d/ after a vowel in Vulgar Latin, so de+expetere > despedir is expected; /d/ disappeared after a vowel in early Iberian Romance, so de+expedire > despir (with no consonant between the p and the r) is also expected. The only way de+expedire could become despedir in Spanish and Portuguese is if it were a learnèd borrowing from Latin rather than an inherited word. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:32, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026516 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/August: Found match for regex: :Kluge's etymological dictionary also suggests a connection of {{m|de|Hafer||oats}} (< {{m|gem-pro|*habrô}}) with {{m|ine-pro|*kapro-||goat}}, but I'm unconvinced. It seems like wishful thinking to me. The PIE "goat" word is attested in Proto-Germanic {{m|gem-pro|*hafraz}}. A connection of {{m|la|avēna}} with {{m|la|ovis}} seems even more far-fetched. I'm no zoologist, but I thought goats were browsers rather than grazers. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:22, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026516 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/August: Found match for regex: :This is usually said to be from {{m|cel-pro|*ɸotlom}} with compensatory lengthening for the loss of the t, though I can't say where the short o came from since Latin {{m|la|pōculum}} points to *pōtlom < {{m|ine-pro|*peh₃tlom}}. Maybe before ō became ā in Proto-Celtic it shortened to ŏ before clusters like tl? That's not an environment for {{w|Osthoff's law}}, though. Hmm... —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:57, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026516 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/August: Found match for regex: :In my opinion, the "analogy with the full grade" argument is weak, because what would be the source of the analogy? Vowel assimilation is possible, I suppose, but it's kind of a copout since there are so many words where a...o didn't assimilate to o...o. And I don't know what Dybo's law he's talking about since the only {{w|Dybo's law}} I've ever heard of applies only in Slavic and is an accent shift, not a vowel shortening. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:42, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026516 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/August: Found match for regex: :Yes, you're right that δ was pronounced /ð/ already in Koine Greek, which is still well within what we consider Ancient Greek, so you can say the Arabic word is from <code><nowiki>{{etyl|grc-koi|ar}} {{m|grc|ὀρθόδοξος}}</nowiki>. The code grc-koi can be used as the first parameter of {{tl|etyl}}, but is otherwise not a recognized language code; use grc instead. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:40, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026516 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/August: Found match for regex: ::::Actually we have a separate code for Byzantine Greek, gkm. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:18, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026516 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/August: Found match for regex: :No one says that ius comes from aevum or from jugum; that would be silly. We do say that the PIE root that ius comes from itself comes from the same root as aevum. Cal Watkins, whose scholarship I tend to believe, takes it back only as far as {{m|ine-pro|*h₂yew-}}, without claiming that {{m|ine-pro|*h₂yew-}} comes from {{m|ine-pro|*h₂ey-}} as we do. I don't see any possible way it could come from {{m|ine-pro|*yewg-}}, and I've removed that bit of nonsense from the Wikipedia article. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:06, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026516 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/August: Found match for regex: ::Blood is also the sort of thing that could be subject to taboo avoidance and thus replacement by another word. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:50, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026517 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/September: Found match for regex: :: We have a template {{tl|calque}}, maybe we should have one for partial calques, or modify {{tl|calque}} so it accommodates partial calques. A famous English example is {{m|en|liverwurst}}, where we translated the {{m|de|Leber}} part of {{m|de|Leberwurst}} but borrowed the {{m|de|Wurst}} part. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:26, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026517 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/September: Found match for regex: :: It even used to be spelled {{m|en|Porto Rico}}; see note a at w:Puerto Rico#Notes. And it still is spelled that way in French, Italian, and Portuguese, of which it could be considered a translation only in Portuguese (to be a translation in French it would have to be "Port-Riche" and in Italian it would have to be "Porto Ricco" with a double c). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:25, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026517 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/September: Found match for regex: : I don't quite see how any of the attested forms could have come from {{m|gem-pro|*klibjaną}}. Where did the -j- go in Old Norse? Shouldn't it be klifja? And why no gemination in West Germanic? Shouldn't it be clibban in Old English? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:13, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026517 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/September: Found match for regex: :: If this word were attested in Gothic it would be els (e is always long in Gothic). The vowel that shows up in Gothic as e and in North and West Germanic as ā (but ǣ in Old English and ē in Old Frisian) is usually reconstructed as *ē, sometimes written *ē₁ or *ǣ. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:18, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026517 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/September: Found match for regex: **It's called WT:BJAODN. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:49, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026517 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/September: Found match for regex: **Not so much a strong tendency as a law. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:59, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026517 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/September: Found match for regex: **** (edit conflict) There was voicing assimilation already in PIE. Anything spelled -ǵʰt- for morphological reasons would have been pronounced -ḱt- in PIE and would (barring analogical re-formation) have developed exactly like any other -ḱt-. If any Slavic language truly has phonetic in this (or any other) word, it can't be very old, but must be a relatively new case of analogy/paradigm leveling. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:02, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026517 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/September: Found match for regex: **** P.S.: word-initial ъ got prothetic v in PS, so *ъsti and *ъzti would be *vъsti and *vъzti respectively. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:04, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026517 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/September: Found match for regex: ***** {{Ping|Wikitiki89}} Sorry for the confusion on my part. My guess of word-initial *ъ stemmed from a lack of knowledge of how word initial PIE *u descended into PS. My long-winded and tangential answer was to say that the full-grade stem form prevented either infinitive from being a direct PIE descendant regardless of PIE assimilation rules. Also, Aɴɢʀ is absolutely correct that *-ǵʰt- would become *-ḱt- in PIE. —John C5 16:15, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026518 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/October: Found match for regex: Regarding {{diff|34502986}}, is Crimean Gothic descended from Wulfilan Gothic? I thought it was a separate East Germanic language. Pinging {{ping|Ivadon}} as the one who made the edit in question. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:13, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026518 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/October: Found match for regex: ::But make sure that my change is really what you want. I wasn't sure what fix you were going for. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:56, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026518 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/October: Found match for regex: :::It can also mean 'disreputable; ignoble'. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:06, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026518 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/October: Found match for regex: ::::: I've never heard the word pronounced, but my instinct says it should have same stress pattern as photography, i.e. main stress on the "sog". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:26, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026518 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/October: Found match for regex: :According to Wikipedia, the {{w|Old Novgorod dialect}} lacks the second palatalization even in root-initial position (where it's unlikely to have been undone by analogy), suggesting that the second palatalization was not complete in Proto-Slavic. If that's so, we should move {{l|sla-pro|*cěsarjь}} to {{l|sla-pro|*kěsarjь}} and {{l|sla-pro|*cьrky}} to {{l|sla-pro|*kьrky}} (apparently attested as {{m|orv|кьркы}} in Old Novgorodian), and keep {{l|sla-pro|*gvězda}} and {{l|sla-pro|*květъ}} where they are. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:26, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026518 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/October: Found match for regex: ::::::::: I don't know about anyone else, but I don't agree with it. It's highly improbable that the West Slavic forms are derived from forms with alveolar affricates that turned into velar stops in West Slavic; rather, they stayed velar stops in West Slavic and never got affricated in the first place. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:48, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026518 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/October: Found match for regex: ::::::::::: WT:ASLA calls them "palatal alveolar consonants", and it's disingenuous to pretend we can use the symbols c dz for a Slavic language and have readers interpret them any way other than {{IPAchar|}}. If the problem with using k g is that there's no progressive palatalization after the i that comes from an older diphthong, then we can write that vowel as i₂ (as some authors already do, so that's not an invention of ours) to distinguish it from the i < ī that does trigger progressive palatalization. Or, if absolutely necessary, ḱ ǵ (as well as x́ rather than ś, cf. Old Novgorodian {{m|orv|вьхо||all}}), but using c dz is simply misleading, no matter how much we tell ourselves that they're purely algebraic symbols with no phonological interpretation. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:25, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026518 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/October: Found match for regex: ::::::::::::: I don't know. All I know about Old Novgorodian is what's in the Wikipedia article. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:43, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026518 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/October: Found match for regex: ::::::::::::: Except before v, where most lexicographers of Proto-Slavic use k g. Following most lexicographers means keeping the status quo. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:17, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026518 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/October: Found match for regex: ::::::::::::::: Precisely. So if we feel we do have to deviate from the majority of lexicographers in order to make correct predictions, then in my opinion we should follow the principle of least astonishment and use the symbols k g x (or at least ḱ ǵ x́) to indicate sounds that uncontroversially come from PBSl. k g x and that remain k g x in Old Novgorodian and, before v, in West Slavic. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:01, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026518 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/October: Found match for regex: ::: It's not unusual for a language to pick a calque that's phonologically reminiscent of the source word. Irish has several examples; the one that stands out in my mind most is {{m|ga|teilifíseán}}, which is morphologically {{m|ga|teili-||tele-}} + {{m|ga|fís||vision}} + {{m|ga|-án|pos=diminutive}}, but it was clearly picked for the similarity of sound (it sounds roughly like "telly-fee-shawn") to English television; there would be no other reason to use such a rare and archaic word as {{m|ga|fís}} for the "vision" part instead of one of the usual words like {{m|ga|radharc}} or {{m|ga|amharc}}, nor for using {{m|ga|teili-}} instead of the native {{m|ga|fada|fad-}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:36, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026518 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/October: Found match for regex: :: A loanword from Low German, perhaps? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:37, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026518 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/October: Found match for regex: :Done. They're from two full-fledged Ancient Greek words, though the meanings are different. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:00, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026518 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/October: Found match for regex: : I don't think it's plausible at all. The semantics "site, situation, camp" > "hole" are not obvious, nor is the sound change g > h in High German. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:13, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026518 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/October: Found match for regex: {{ping|Martinus Poeta Juvenis}} and anyone else who knows their way around Hungarian etymology:  (U+F062) is not a valid Unicode character (I think it's in the user-defined range). What letter is it supposed to represent? It was added in {{diff|35183564|text=this edit}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:29, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026519 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/November: Found match for regex: :I suspect someone is trying to say "borrowed from Gascon" and is confusing {{m|en|borrow}} and {{m|en|lend}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:52, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026519 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/November: Found match for regex: :Seems like it might be a good idea. Were you thinking of a category of the native words that have been replaced or a category of the Latinate words that have done the replacing? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:57, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026519 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/November: Found match for regex: ::Hi Aɴɢʀ, I was thinking of doing it for common words like "color", "question" and "magic", instead of the scientific/technical lexicon. (8mike (talk) 16:22, 20 November 2015 (UTC))
Page 4026519 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/November: Found match for regex: ::: But do you want the category to list terms like color, question, and magic, or do you want it to list terms like blee, frain, and dwimmer? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:34, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026519 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/November: Found match for regex: ::Yes, it is. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:09, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026519 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/November: Found match for regex: :: It's even more difficult to explain how Old French came in contact with Gothic. The vowel could be from Old English, though Old French borrowings from Old English must be few and far between. The usual Germanic source for French words is Frankish, but I don't know what the PGmc. ai diphthong became in Frankish. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:32, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026519 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/November: Found match for regex: :::: As far as I can tell, the Gothic word isn't attested either. At least, nothing containing the stem haimat- can be found at oldwikisource:Bible, Gothic, Ulfila or at http://www.gotica.de/skeireins/text.html or at https://archive.org/stream/grammargothicla00wriggoog#page/n338/mode/2up. And even attested Gothic is the language of Wulfila, not the language of the Visigoths and Ostrogoths who were in France, about which we know nothing. So, all the more reason to believe it's from Norse. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:01, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026519 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/November: Found match for regex: ** The modern Romance languages have borrowed a lot of words from Latin, in addition to the ones they inherited. Sometimes there are doublets, e.g. French {{m|fr|légal}}, which is borrowed, and {{m|fr|loyal}}, which is inherited. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:32, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026520 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/December: Found match for regex: ::::::::::: Surely not a separate phoneme, since it occurs only before /n/ and is in complementary distribution with both /b/ and /m/ there. But it is possible that the phonemic contrast between /b/ and /m/ was lost before /n/. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:23, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026520 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/December: Found match for regex: :Tocharian is more likely to have Turkic loanwords than Uralic ones, and I don't see how to accommodate the difference between Germanic l and Tocharian r, so neither hypothesis seems very likely. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:38, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026520 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/December: Found match for regex: ::: The l-r alternation is found in Indo-Iranian, and can be found spontaneously as assimilation or dissimilation where the two sounds are close to each other, or in metathesis (e.g. Latin {{m|la|arbor}} > Spanish {{m|es|árbol}}; Latin {{m|la|miraculum}} > Spanish {{m|es|milagro}}), but I don't think it's a regular feature of Tocharian historical phonology. Anyway, if we accept Adams's etymology, there are no more l-sounds around to worry about. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:19, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026520 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/December: Found match for regex: ::Sihler (p. 120) also proposes a lengthened grade in the nominative singular which was then generalized to the other cases, then goes on to say "a secondary full grade *^e/oH₃kʷ- is thinkable". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:17, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026520 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/December: Found match for regex: :Hmm, good question. The Online Etymology Dictionary also gives the "back-formation from mixt from Latin {{m|la|mixtus}}" etymology, but it seems to me that if Old English {{m|ang|mixian}} is really attested (and it's not in Bosworth-Toller, only {{m|ang|miscian}} is), then that seems more likely to be the source. I'd always pick an attested Old English verb over a back-formation. Interestingly, Etymonline also says that OE {{m|ang|miscian}} is itself a loanword from Latin, but we say it's from Proto-Germanic and is merely cognate with, not descended from, the Latin. Sometimes I wish DNA testing on words was possible. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:00, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026520 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/December: Found match for regex: :: I wonder if "*mesko-" is a misprint in Matasović; it must be *miskos. The vowel i lowered to e before ā in the following syllable so mescaid can come from *miskāti with no problem, while mysgu comes from some form with a different vowel in the second syllable. A form *mēskos would have become *míasc in Old Irish and *mwysg in Welsh, and the vocalism of *meskos would be unexplainable (and probably couldn't yield Welsh mysgu either). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:42, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026520 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/December: Found match for regex: ::However, these terms entered Germanic or English at different times, so it's hard to generalize. The words 'dog', 'pig', and 'sheep' all replaced words with good IE pedigrees in their primary meaning, but the old words were retained with semantic narrowing as {{m|en|hound}}, {{m|en|swine}}, and {{m|en|ewe}}, but at different times ('ewe' was replaced by 'sheep' as the general term already in Proto-Germanic; the replacement of 'hound' and 'swine' didn't happen till Middle or Early Modern English). 'Shark' didn't appear until the 16th century (there are sharks in the waters around Great Britain; presumably there was simply no cover term for them other than fish). Roosters and rabbits weren't known to Germanic peoples until contact with the Romans, so it's not surprising there's no ancient word for them. I don't know why etymonline is skeptical of the connection of 'horse' with {{m|ine-pro|*ḱers-}}; it seems quite plausible to me. That basically leaves {{m|en|lamb}} as the only word from the list where a PIE word ({{m|ine-pro|*h₂egʷnos}}) was replaced in Germanic by a word of unknown etymology. (I wonder what a PG {{m|gem-pro||*akʷnaz}} would have looked like in Modern English; "acquen" or "acken" or something?) As Stephen points out, words of non-IE original aren't that uncommon in Germanic, but I don't think there's anything specifically about animal names that lends them to replacement. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:42, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026520 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/December: Found match for regex: ::::: {{ping|CodeCat}}, does that mean you're doubting the accuracy of the etymology of {{m|en|yean}} and/or the reconstruction {{m|ine-pro|*h₂egʷnos}}? {{ping|Leasnam}}, you're right about 'rooster', but {{m|gem-pro|*hasô}} is really 'hare'. Until they got domesticated, the range of the European rabbit was far away from Germanic speakers. Our entry {{m|en|rabbit}} does not really make it clear that rabbits are generally distinguished from hares, though both are leporids. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:42, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026520 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/December: Found match for regex: :::Probably, but there's a lot of overlap between the two senses because sharks² are perceived as being just as predatory as sharks¹. I never knew there were two etymologies until just now; I always assumed the senses listed under etymology 2 were figurative extensions of etymology 1, and I bet I'm not the only one. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:23, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026520 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/December: Found match for regex: :I've cut it down to a simple dictionary entry on the basis of the Wikipedia article, which, to judge from its talk page, has also been subject to the same nationlistic nonsense. It's easier to eliminate here because it simply isn't dictionary material. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:40, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026520 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/December: Found match for regex: {{outdent}} I haven't read every word of this thread, so maybe someone already said this, but if dominiōnem was syncopated to domniōnem, then donjon is the regular outcome. Vulgar Latin /mnj/ became /ndʒ/ in {{m|fro|songe}} < {{m|la|somnium}}, so presumably it would in this word as well. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:03, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4026520 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2015/December: Found match for regex: ::I think it would have or at least could have. I'm not sure syncope is always predictable; sometimes it fails to happen in environments where it might be expected. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:22, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4026521 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/December: Found match for regex: :: Also, at least in English, 19th-century writers used commas and semicolons much more loosely than they do today. Maybe that's true of Spanish as well. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:24, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026521 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/December: Found match for regex: :Where did you encounter the term? All Google seems to know is breakfast menus at cafés called Atomic. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:04, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026521 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/December: Found match for regex: :I've added the ancestors you requested. Old Anatolian Turkish doesn't have an ISO 639 code (the code "1ca" is the Linguist List's code; ISO 639 codes never use numerals). If it's unacceptable to use any of the Ottoman Turkish code ota, the Old Turkic code otk, or the Old Uighur code oui for Old Anatolian Turkish, we could invent a code of our own for it, e.g. trk-oat. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:48, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026521 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/December: Found match for regex: :::If neither otk nor oui is ancestral to Turkish, then the options are (1) treating Old Anatolian Turkish as an early variety of ota, and (2) creating a Wiktionary-specific code for Old Anatolian Turkish. I don't know enough about the history of Turkish to have an opinion on which option is better. And I've fixed the ancestor of peo (the ancestor of ira-pro was already set to iir-pro). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:17, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026521 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/December: Found match for regex: :We call the language Hungarian here; its code is hu. See {{diff|35965525|text=here}} for corrections, to give you an idea how to format Hungarian entries in the future. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:49, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026521 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/December: Found match for regex: ::One question: is it usually written lower-case isten veled? Or is it usually capitalized Isten veled? According to our entries {{m|hu|isten}} and {{m|hu|Isten}}, Hungarian seems to follow the same principle as English: lower-case isten is any old god (especially one in polytheism), while upper-case Isten refers to the monotheistic God. The second seems more likely to me in a traditionally Christian country like Hungary. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:54, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026521 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/December: Found match for regex: ::::{{ping|Panda10|Tropylium}}, what do you guys say? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:14, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026521 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/December: Found match for regex: :It probably means to use the "W", "A", "S", and "D" keys on your keyboard to move around. They should serve the same functions as the arrow keys: W = up, A = left, S = down, D = right. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 00:32, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026522 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/January: Found match for regex: :We don't care how prescriptivist you are in your own usage, as long as your entries are written from a descriptivist POV rather than a prescriptivist one. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:26, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026522 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/January: Found match for regex: :It's not a joke. {{m|de|Schülerin}} and {{m|de|Pastorin}} should be in it, and {{m|de|Hündin}} should be in its subcategory Category:de:Female animals. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:47, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026522 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/January: Found match for regex: ::Sounds like a pun on cold-blooded. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:01, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026522 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/January: Found match for regex: :It can't be translated without context; there are simply too many unknown variables. Can you give a complete sentence? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:39, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026523 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/February: Found match for regex: :We're interested in words that are already in use for more than a year by multiple authors. In this case, {{m|en|judgmentality}} gets over 300 hits on Google Books (including about 50 for {{m|en|non-judgmentality}}), so you weren't the only person to coin this term, and we could probably include it. Someone would have to look and see if the way it's used in those books corresponds to your proposed meaning, though. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:56, 6 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026523 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/February: Found match for regex: :The closest English parallel I can think of is cannot, which we simply call a verb, not a contraction (the contraction being can't). German does the same thing with {{m|de|derselbe}}, which we call a pronoun (though I'd say it's a determiner), not a contraction. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:29, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026523 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/February: Found match for regex: ::::: "On each page"? How many pages are we talking about? Why not just call {{m|nl|dezelfde}} a determiner that means "] ]"? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:12, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026523 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/February: Found match for regex: ::::::: Well, {{m|en|cannot}} wouldn't be idiomatic if it were written as two words either, but it isn't (at least not with the relevant meaning), so we list it and give it a full definition. The only difference is that {{m|en|cannot}} is just a single form, while {{m|nl|dezelfde}} is (if the list you linked to is exhaustive) one of six forms. If you balk at listing very similar definitions six times (which doesn't seem excessive to me, but maybe it does to you), you could call the others pseudo-inflected forms of {{m|nl|dezelfde}}, e.g. by defining {{m|nl|diezelfde}} as "{{temp|form of|masculine, feminine or plural distal|dezelfde|lang{{=}}nl}}". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:30, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026523 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/February: Found match for regex: ::::::::: So? We don't have entries for SOP phrases written with a space; we have an entry for {{m|en|cannot}} only because it's written together, but we don't have entries for parallel constructions written separately like {{m|en|could not}}, {{m|en|may not}}, {{m|en|would not}}, {{m|en|ought not}}, etc. (We have {{m|en|must not}} because its scope is unexpected.) For Dutch we only have to worry about the ones that are written together, not the ones that are written separately. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:33, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026524 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/March: Found match for regex: ::There are other ways, too. There's a box below the text box when you're editing a page that allows you to click to insert special characters. I also use the Windows {{w|Character Map}} utility; for IPA I use the Transliterator add-on for Firefox, and for Burmese I use a Myanmar character picker. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:22, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026524 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/March: Found match for regex: :: Other examples are Prod and its synonyms. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:43, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026524 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/March: Found match for regex: ::Probably the easiest way to find this out on your own would have been to go to Category:English terms derived from Medieval Latin and see how an existing entry does it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:56, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026525 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/April: Found match for regex: :No. It's entirely based on self-reporting. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:40, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026525 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/April: Found match for regex: :::: Good luck! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:20, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026526 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/May: Found match for regex: :: There's a textbook for linguistics at Wikibooks, so it's online and free, but I don't know how good it is or how easy it would be for a middle-schooler to understand. Linguistics isn't usually taught before the undergraduate university level, so that is usually the target audience for textbooks. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:16, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026526 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/May: Found match for regex: :The first place I'd look is in the books cited in the footnote section of {{w|Navarro-Aragonese}}. It doesn't actually have an ISO code; do we want to create one for it, or shall we consider it an archaic variety of Aragonese (code an) and tag it with a context label like {{temp|label|an|Navarro-Aragonese}}? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:16, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026526 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/May: Found match for regex: ::: The easy way is to create a redlink on an existing page and then click that. For example, if you type ZORI in the search box, it just takes you to the page zori (which is a relatively new feature; when the help page was written that didn't happen), but if you make the link ZORI on a page and then click it, you can start a new page. (You don't even have to save the page with the redlink on it; just click "Show preview" and then click the redlink.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:32, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026526 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/May: Found match for regex: :Probably the best way would be to make a redirect from Pes, který štěká, nekouše. to pes, který štěká, nekouše here at en-wikt as well as a redirect in the opposite direction at cs-wikt. That way the bots will connect one language's entry to the other language's redirect and vice versa, and both pages can be found. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:43, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026527 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/June: Found match for regex: :{{l|en|positive}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:09, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026527 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/June: Found match for regex: :: Also, not all languages follow the same rules of syllable structure as English does. Just because English doesn't allow syllables like /napn/, that doesn't mean Icelandic doesn't. In Icelandic, /napn/ might really be a single syllable, in which case there shouldn't be a syllabic diacritic under the /n/. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:43, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026528 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/July: Found match for regex: :It seems to be very rare; it gets only 5 hits at {{b.g.c|sporographic}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:58, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026529 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/August: Found match for regex: ** I don't know about the anonymous OP, but I just tried that on my phone and it doesn't work, at least not via the Wiktionary app (as opposed to using Wiktionary directly via Chrome or another browser). With the app, you can't enter URLs directly, you can just search for a term like face, and if you want the Latin section you literally have to scroll all the way through the English entry to get to it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:35, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026529 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/August: Found match for regex: **** Yes, we have had one since 2012. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:19, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026529 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/August: Found match for regex: **** I tried that, it didn't work. Also, I've discovered it is possible to log in, but only by attempting to edit. If you click Edit or a red link, you're taken to a page where you can choose to log in. Editing is pretty complicated, though. I just did {{diff|34071044|text=this}}, but I'm probably never going to try that again. Way too much work. And still no tabbed languages! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:15, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026529 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/August: Found match for regex: *** Not on mine at any rate. Tabbed languages are not active if you're not logged on, and I don't see any way to log on via the app. Wikipedia's app allows users to log on, but AFAICT Wiktionary's doesn't. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:19, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026529 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/August: Found match for regex: :: That's how I've done it in the past. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:42, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026529 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/August: Found match for regex: :I would say Modern Greek word is using the noun attributively. That's how it works for language names like {{m|en|Sanskrit}} that aren't also adjectives. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:44, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026530 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/September: Found match for regex: :Late Latin is what we call an "etymology-only language". We consider it a form of Latin, but we categorize it separately from Classical Latin for purposes of etymologies. That means you can use LL. inside {{tl|etyl}}, but inside {{tl|m}} (and {{tl|l}} and {{tl|t}} for that matter}}, you have to use la: <code><nowiki>{{etyl|LL.|ang}} {{m|la|bisaccium}}</nowiki>. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:49, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026530 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/September: Found match for regex: :I would not call it a direct descendant of {{m|ine-pro|*ḱwṓ}}. PG {{m|gem-pro|*hundaz}} is presumed to come from {{m|ine-pro||*ḱuntós}}, which is comes from the same root as {{m|ine-pro|*ḱwṓ}} does, but there is (AFAIK) no extra-Germanic evidence for {{m|ine-pro||*ḱuntós}}, so we can't be sure that the form with the dental extension is even IE in provenance. It's a descendant of the root {{m|ine-pro|*ḱun-}} for sure, but not of the noun {{m|ine-pro|*ḱwṓ}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:44, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026530 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/September: Found match for regex: ::::: She probably wants to know whether she can use {{tl|inherited}} all the way back to PIE or whether it needs to stop at PGmc. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:26, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026531 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/October: Found match for regex: :Definitely, but I have no idea who to report it to. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 05:23, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026531 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/October: Found match for regex: :I'd use {{m|cy|ysgyfaint}} as the lemma form; the GPC entry makes it pretty clear that {{m|cy|ysgyfant}} is a back-formation, and not even a particularly common one. In fact {{m|cy|ysgyfaint}} even has a plural of its own, {{m|cy|ysgyfeiniau}}/{{m|cy|ysgyfeinau}}, which presumably means "pairs of lungs", suggesting that before the back-formation was created, {{m|cy|ysgyfaint}} wasn't even felt as a plural. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:27, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026531 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/October: Found match for regex: ::To judge from the discussion at Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2015/October#Lingwa de Planeta, this suggestion appears have no consensus. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:29, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026532 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/November: Found match for regex: ::Since the lunar calendar is 11 days shorter than the solar calendar, it's possible for a holiday that occurs annually in the lunar calendar to occur twice in the same Gregorian year. But that's probably not what you meant. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:47, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4026532 Wiktionary:Information desk/2015/November: Found match for regex: :I think this is covered by sense 6 of {{m|en|bear}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:54, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4032530 Wiktionary:Language treatment requests/Archives/2020-24: Found match for regex: I suppose we can keep fiu-pro as an etymology-only variant of urj-pro if it's important. What do others think? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:29, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4032530 Wiktionary:Language treatment requests/Archives/2020-24: Found match for regex: :::: The only codes in the qaa-qtz range we actually use are qfa as a prefix for otherwise unclassified families and qot for Sahaptin (a macrolanguage that wasn't given an ISO code of its own), right? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:55, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4032530 Wiktionary:Language treatment requests/Archives/2020-24: Found match for regex: :That's not at all the impression I get from {{w|Chinese Pidgin English}}. It seems to be a distinct language to me, as much as any other English-based pidgin. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:45, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 4032530 Wiktionary:Language treatment requests/Archives/2020-24: Found match for regex: :::I know we did, but I didn't participate in that discussion (only 3 people did), and I disagree with it too, probably even more strongly than I disagree with merging cpi. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:02, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 4119016 Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2015-03/User:Mr. Granger for admin: Found match for regex: # {{support}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:17, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4119017 Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2015-03/User:I'm so meta even this acronym for admin: Found match for regex: # {{support}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:17, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
Page 4140241 Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2015-04/User:Connel MacKenzie for de-sysop and de-checkuser: Found match for regex: # {{support}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:46, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4140241 Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2015-04/User:Connel MacKenzie for de-sysop and de-checkuser: Found match for regex: # {{support}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:46, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Page 4158016 Wiktionary:Translation requests/archive/2015: Found match for regex: :::I don't know Burmese well enough to know what people actually say to each other on their birthday, but {{l|my|မွေးနေ့မင်္ဂလာပါ}} means "birthday greetings" and seems eminently plausible to me. The pronunciation is {{IPA|my|/mwénḛ mìɴɡəlàbà/}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:05, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4171706 Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2015-05/User:Kephir for de-sysop: Found match for regex: # {{abstain}}. This vote has no legitimacy as it was started prematurely and by a nondisinterested party. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:56, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Page 4175966 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2015-05/Normalization of entries: Found match for regex: # {{abstain}} WT:NORM is utterly irrelevant and no more time should be wasted on it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:52, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
Page 4263056 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2015-07/Disallowing extending of votes: Found match for regex: # {{abstain}} We shouldn't be making important decisions by means of such a blunt instrument as a vote in the first place. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:33, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4263056 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2015-07/Disallowing extending of votes: Found match for regex: #:: I have no opinion on the proposal at hand. Issues should be discussed until a consensus is reached, in which case a vote is superfluous, or until it's clear that no consensus will not be reached, in which case a vote is pointless. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:49, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4263056 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2015-07/Disallowing extending of votes: Found match for regex: #:::: In other words, the proposal didn't have consensus, but by making a vote you were able to force it through anyway. That's why polls are evil. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:57, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4266390 Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2015-07/User:Benwing for admin: Found match for regex: # {{support}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:53, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Page 4284719 Wiktionary:Word of the day/Nominations/Archive 2015: Found match for regex: * ~~Is it too late to nominate {{wotd-nominee|Birds' Wedding}} for 25 January? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:15, 22 January 2015 (UTC)~~ (set for 2016)
Page 4293641 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2015-08/Templatizing usage examples: Found match for regex: # {{abstain}} This is already longstanding practice; there's no need to vote on an existing consensus. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:29, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4298664 Wiktionary:Votes/bt-2015-08/User:TweenkBot for bot status: Found match for regex: # {{support}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:01, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 4337801 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2015-09/Using macrons and breves for Ancient Greek in various places: Found match for regex: # {{abstain}} This vote is superfluous because as the various discussions show, the editors of Ancient Greek reached a consensus on this issue about a year and a half ago. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:03, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4337801 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2015-09/Using macrons and breves for Ancient Greek in various places: Found match for regex: # {{abstain}} This vote is superfluous because as the various discussions show, the editors of Ancient Greek reached a consensus on this issue about a year and a half ago. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:03, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4337801 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2015-09/Using macrons and breves for Ancient Greek in various places: Found match for regex: #: @Aɴɢʀ Please provide the links to the discussion of a year and a half ago from which we can see the consensus. --Dan Polansky (talk) 10:41, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4337801 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2015-09/Using macrons and breves for Ancient Greek in various places: Found match for regex: #:: The fact that Ancient Greek editors started adding macrons (and sometimes breves) to entries about a year and a half ago, and that other Ancient Greek editors did not revert those changes but started doing the same thing themselves is evidence of consensus. Wiktionary is not a bureaucracy; not everything requires a discussion if everyone finds themselves in agreement with what's going on, and if there is a discussion and consensus emerges from it, no vote is necessary. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:49, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4352581 Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2015-09/User:DTLHS for admin: Found match for regex: # {{support}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:10, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 4352581 Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2015-09/User:DTLHS for admin: Found match for regex: #::: If I were the closing admin and felt unable to tell whether someone supported or opposed because of a condition on the future, I would count that vote as an "abstain", not as an "oppose". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:36, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4352929 Wiktionary:Votes/2015-09/Creating a namespace for reconstructed terms: Found match for regex: # {{support}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:05, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4352929 Wiktionary:Votes/2015-09/Creating a namespace for reconstructed terms: Found match for regex: #::: Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2006-12/Proto- languages in Appendicies is when it was decided that reconstructed terms did not meet CFI for the mainspace and so belonged in Appendix: space instead. It was already the general practice before that vote, but then some reconstructed entries were created in mainspace, leading first to Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2006-12/PIE, where a proposal to remove all traces of Proto-Indo-European from Wiktionary was rejected, and then to the vote I mentioned first, resulting in the compromise solution that reconstructed terms are allowed at Wiktionary, but only in appendices, not in mainspace. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 00:09, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
Page 4369469 Wiktionary:Votes/2015-10/Matched-pair naming format: left, space, right: Found match for regex: # {{abstain}} I have no objection but I don't feel this issue requires a vote. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:15, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4379196 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2015-10/Headword line: Found match for regex: # {{abstain}} This is already standard practice; a vote on it is superfluous. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:59, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4379196 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2015-10/Headword line: Found match for regex: # {{oppose}} If we're going to rewrite what WT:EL says about headword lines, it should mention that for many languages, headword lines may differ from page names in showing diacritics (macrons in Latin and Old English, acute accents in Russian, pitch accent marks in Serbo-Croatian and Lithuanian, etc.). We should mention that romanization is automatic for some languages but needs to be added manually for others. Finally, rather than speaking of a word's "inflections" we should use the conventional term "principal parts" for the inflected forms that appear on the headword line. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:08, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4405927 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2015-10/Entry name section: Found match for regex: # {{abstain}} pending the addressing of Dan Polansky's concerns, which seem justified to me. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:59, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4427401 Wiktionary:Votes/2015-11/Language-specific rfi categories: Found match for regex: # {{abstain}} or to be more specific, Meh. Doesn't seem harmful. Worrying about the precise name of the categories involved seems like pedantry. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:41, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
Page 4438139 Wiktionary:Votes/bc-2015-11/User:Chuck Entz for bureaucrat: Found match for regex: # {{support}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:10, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
Page 4458240 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2015-12/Language: Found match for regex: # {{abstain}} I agree that it needs to be written more clearly, but I'm definitely in favor of saying something about the L2 language heading at WT:EL. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:58, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4458908 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2015-12/Entry name: sign languages: Found match for regex: # {{support}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:40, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4458908 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2015-12/Entry name: sign languages: Found match for regex: # {{support}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:40, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4459333 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2015-12/References: Found match for regex: # {{support}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:43, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4459334 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2015-12/Remove "The essentials": Found match for regex: # {{support}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:56, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 4459580 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2015-12/EL introduction: Found match for regex: # {{support}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:44, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4459580 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2015-12/EL introduction: Found match for regex: #*: I have no objection. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:38, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4461787 Wiktionary:Votes/2015-12/Install Extension:Variables: Found match for regex: # {{support}} if it can be made to work. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:27, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473341 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/December: Found match for regex: :::The website for the Spiral Wishing Well calls them coin funnels. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:27, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473341 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/December: Found match for regex: :: I agree with the others: it means "they hold hands and do other such romantic stuff". But it does have the potential of being a dirty double entendre. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:55, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473342 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/January: Found match for regex: :The term we use for German spellings that were valid until 1996 and are still widely used by people who don't care for or care about the reformed spelling is "superseded". We have the template {{tl|superseded spelling of}} for that. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:51, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473342 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/January: Found match for regex: ::::I find "erroneously" fine in reference to spelling, since spelling has nothing to do with language, and is very much regulated by authorities. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:37, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473342 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/January: Found match for regex: ::: I'm not aware of a Proto-Germanic one, but Proto-Indo-European had {{m|ine-pro|*h₃yebʰ-}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:14, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473342 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/January: Found match for regex: :It's Irish and pronounced {{IPAchar|/ˈkloʊdə/}} to rhyme with {{m|en|Rhoda}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:18, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473342 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/January: Found match for regex: :Sounds like her parents decided to merge the names Chloe, Cleo, and Fiona; perhaps with a nod to {{w|Cleona, Pennsylvania}}, into the mix. It's certainly not a traditional Gaelic name in Ireland, though that doesn't mean it's never used there. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:39, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473342 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/January: Found match for regex: ::I've discovered that there is a traditional Irish Gaelic name Clíona/Clíodhna (pronounced roughly KLEE-na, not klee-OH-na; see {{w|Clíodhna}}), so Chleona is probably an anglicized spelling of that. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:24, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473343 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/February: Found match for regex: :::My best guesses are also and , but identifying sounds on the basis of their acoustics alone without any knowledge of the phonological system they belong to is very tricky. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:12, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473343 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/February: Found match for regex: ::In Ireland, though, they do say "amn't I?" for that, which I rather like. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:30, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473343 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/February: Found match for regex: :We absolutely do. In fact, I consider it one of our strongest selling points. It's difficult for us to compete with professionally edited dictionaries for English definitions and for widely studied foreign languages like German, French, Spanish, etc., but we have the potential to be unbeatable when it comes to small and threatened languages. I'm pretty sure we are the only Lower Sorbian–English dictionary in the world. There is a print Upper Sorbian–English dictionary, but I don't think there's one for Lower Sorbian. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:51, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473343 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/February: Found match for regex: :I feel like if a word only occurs in the genitive, then make the genitive the lemma for that word, even if for most nouns the nominative is the lemma. That's certainly what we do for Primitive Irish, where the vast majority of nouns are attested only in the genitive. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:21, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473343 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/February: Found match for regex: :: I wouldn't call {{m|en|photo}} an abbreviation but a clipping. Things like Dr/Dr. for doctor and pp. for pages and ff. for following are abbreviations. I suppose they go under alternative forms, though I wouldn't be adverse to a separate L4 "Abbreviations" header. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:26, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473343 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/February: Found match for regex: ::: Most modern Germanic languages do use an auxiliary to form a future tense, although in some cases the auxiliary isn't necessary and the simple present can stand in for the future. In English, consider "I'm flying to Vienna tomorrow", which uses a present progressive with future meaning, and "If you see Alejandro, tell him hello from me", which uses a simple present with future meaning. In the second example, the simple present is obligatory: *"If you will see Alejandro" is ungrammatical (or at best, means something different). The older Germanic languages (Old English, Old Norse, Gothic) don't even have auxiliaries for the most part but simply use the present tense with a future meaning. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:37, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473343 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/February: Found match for regex: ::::: Well, not directly. You can tell from the semantics of "If you see Alejandro, tell him hello from me" that "you see Alejandro" refers to the future. But in "If my husband is in here, I'm going to ring his neck!", the "my husband is in here" refers to the present. But grammatically, there's no difference between those two sentences in English. Irish, on the other hand (and maybe Romance languages as well), distinguishes the sentences grammatically, using the future tense in "if you see Alejandro" but the present tense in "if my husband is in here". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:44, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473343 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/February: Found match for regex: ::::::: He'd better hope not! ;) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:08, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473344 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/March: Found match for regex: :: I agree with Ungoliant. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:05, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473344 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/March: Found match for regex: ::::: Just to confirm what Chuck Entz said: not all native Spanish speakers in the U.S. are immigrants or recent descendants of immigrants. Some Spanish-speaking families have been there since before Texas independence and the Mexican-American war. Their variety of Spanish is similar but not identical to that of northern Mexico, and is characterized (among other things) by a large number of English loanwords and calques of English expressions. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:37, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473344 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/March: Found match for regex: ::::::: I wouldn't necessarily consider {{w|New Mexican Spanish}} a variant of Mexican Spanish, but I would consider it part of Latin American Spanish. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:57, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473344 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/March: Found match for regex: : The copula is very often omitted in Latin when it would be present indicative, and not just in periphrastic verbs. I wouldn't say it's omitted in ablative absolute constructions, though, because absolute constructions by definition don't have a finite verb. In other words, it would be ungrammatical for a copula to be present in an ablative absolute. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:40, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473344 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/March: Found match for regex: : Here's a source. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:42, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473344 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/March: Found match for regex: ::: Well, it's certainly true that the copula can be understood in abl.abs. constructions, and it may need to be supplied in English translations of them, but it is never explicitly present in them. Thus they're different from main clauses like "Tu coniunx", which could also grammatically be "Tu coniunx es". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:26, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473344 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/March: Found match for regex: :I'd say so. If you do a Google Images search for "plastic basin" you get almost exactly the same results. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:34, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473344 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/March: Found match for regex: :As long as you're not violating the dictionary's copyright by copying its text wholesale. I don't think you need to provide citations unless someone RFV's them, but obviously it's a good idea to provide a reference so other people can check your work if they want to. And although WT:CFI allows terms in less-documented languages like Occitan that have but one single mention in a reliable source (e.g. a printed dictionary that everyone who knows Occitan agrees is a good source), I generally try to verify words even in small languages in at least two sources, just to avoid the possibility of ghost words and fictitious entries getting into Wiktionary. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:24, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473344 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/March: Found match for regex: :I wouldn't mind having a list or automatically generated category or something of English words with no rhymes, except that it will be difficult to separate its entries from a list or category of English words that have a rhyme but that no one has added to a Rhymes page yet. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:05, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473345 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/April: Found match for regex: :I'm an admin and have been here for over 10 years and I can't figure out how to fix it either. I assume the problem you're talking about is the circumflex accent in the forms beginning with "νῦκτ-", which should be an acute since the upsilon in this word is short. There must be some error in Module:grc-decl, but module editing is so extremely esoteric that only a handful of our editors know how to do it. Perhaps ObsequiousNewt can figure out what's going wrong and will be able to fix it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:47, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473345 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/April: Found match for regex: ::: All fixed as far as I'm concerned. (I can only assume that this was the problem Derfner was talking about.) So the problem was not in the module, but in the parameters for the template. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:55, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473345 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/April: Found match for regex: :: I think what meli#Hawaiian says is OK. The word was coined in Hawaiian by being borrowed from Ancient Greek. It wasn't borrowed into Hawaiian in the way loanwords are usually borrowed. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:17, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473346 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/May: Found match for regex: :::: So would I. In my opinion, the criterion for including romanizations should not be "not everyone can type in" the native script, not "many browsers might not even display the symbols", but rather "the majority of reference works (dictionary, grammar books, textbooks, etc.) present this language in romanization and not in the native script. Thus, I have supported romanization entries for Gothic and Primitive Irish and do support them for Proto-Norse, the Anatolian languages, and Sumerian, but I would not support them for Ancient Greek, Old Church Slavonic, Classical Arabic, and Biblical Hebrew. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:18, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473346 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/May: Found match for regex: :I would not capitalize century. The 21st century isn't a proper noun, it's just a description. I would capitalize dynasty and province in the names Tang Dynasty and Henan Province, though, just like New York City and New York State. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:10, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473346 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/May: Found match for regex: :::::* The front page is for people who just want to read Wiktionary, not those who want to edit it. I don't think it's too much to expect editors to be aware of the Wiktionary namespace. What I use is User:Kephir/gadgets/xte, which gives you a button that lets you search by language name to find the code and by code to find the language name. Entering the language code as the positional parameter of {{tl|\}} returns the language name as well, i.e. {{tl|\|de}} returns {{\|de}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:32, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473346 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/May: Found match for regex: :::::::* Anyone who wants to become an editor is going to have to find the Wiktionary namespace right quick, and not just for this. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:09, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473347 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/June: Found match for regex: :What's it a dialect of? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:26, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473347 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/June: Found match for regex: ::: Do we want to treat it as a dialect of Ladino or as a separate language? If we want to treat it as a dialect, do we want the category to be called "Category:Haketia" or "Category:Haketia Ladino"? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:20, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473347 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/June: Found match for regex: ::::: {{done}} {{diff|38665670|text=here}}. The labels {{tl|lb|lad|Haketia}}, {{tl|lb|lad|Hakitia}}, and {{tl|lb|lad|Haquitía}} should now all categorize into Category:Haketia, unless I did something wrong. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:46, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473348 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/July: Found match for regex: ::::Except that the audio file is valid only for the noun, not the verb. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:40, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473348 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/July: Found match for regex: ::I wonder why there are so many /ʃ/-like sounds in this set. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:26, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473348 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/July: Found match for regex: :::: I know; but in addition to the Arabic and Hebrew, the katakana represents /ʃi/, the Devanagari represents /ɕ/, and the Cyrillic represents /ʒ/ (or /ʃ/ word-finally). I feel like this can't be a coincidence. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:31, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473348 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/July: Found match for regex: :: I would be in favor of ordering by frequency except that it's essentially impossible to quantify objectively. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:22, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473348 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/July: Found match for regex: :::: Participles behave like lemmas in a lot of ways, including being fully inflectable in a lot of languages. I wouldn't object to {{m|nl|afstotend}} having a ====Derived terms==== section simply because it's a participle. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:15, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473349 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/August: Found match for regex: ::* That's explained at WT:ALA. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:14, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473349 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/August: Found match for regex: :I'd prefer to do away with the "Zootomy" label. It's a very rare word, and frankly there's so much overlap between human and nonhuman anatomy that it seems like kind of a pointless distinction for us to be making. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:07, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473349 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/August: Found match for regex: ::: I agree with Stephen. Admins don't have any more authority than anyone else, just more tools. I see nothing wrong at all with having the majority of our most active editors having the admin tools. Deleting mistaken pages and blocking vandals are things any trusted user should be able to do, and only users with the "admin" or "sysop" flag can do that. It's a good thing for most active editors to be given those tools as soon as they've been around long enough that people trust they won't abuse them. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:10, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473349 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/August: Found match for regex: ::: In Pullum and Ladusaw's Phonetic Symbol Guide (2nd edition, 1996, p. 89) it's called "Long-Leg Turned Iota" and it extends below the baseline. They say of it, "The sound denoted is essentially a syllabic , which is why the IPA does not recognize any special symbol for this sound." —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:51, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473350 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/September: Found match for regex: *** "Eines Tages" is interesting because you can also say "eines Nachts" even though the genitive of "eine Nacht" is einer Nacht. In the last case, I wouldn't call it possession either: Susan doesn't possess her cousin in any jurisdiction where slavery is illegal. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:43, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473350 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/September: Found match for regex: ::That section is about Polish, though, not English. I can't imagine English speakers borrowing case forms from inflecting languages, though German sometimes used to, at least in a highly literary/religious register, where, for example you'll find {{m|de|Mariä}} and {{m|de|Christi}} as the genitive of {{m|de|Maria}} and {{m|de|Christus}} respectively, and sometimes maybe even {{m|de|Mariä}} and {{m|de|Christo}} as the dative and {{m|de|Mariam}} and {{m|de|Christum}} as the accusative. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:39, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473350 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/September: Found match for regex: ::::::::::::::: I'm not sure what makes you think the vote wasn't implemented. WT:ATTEST, which is part of WT:CFI, says "For languages well documented on the Internet, three citations in which a term is used is the minimum number for inclusion in Wiktionary. For terms in extinct languages, one use in a contemporaneous source is the minimum, or one mention is adequate subject to the below requirements." Old English is an extinct language, so we need one use in a contemporaneous source. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:56, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473350 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/September: Found match for regex: So what's attested is a Latin proper noun {{m|la|Veleda}} with a possibly Celtic etymology. Nothing to do with Old English at all. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:50, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473350 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/September: Found match for regex: :Of course I undid your Latinization. Lepontic entries should be written in Old Italic, not in Latin, and everyone else but you accepts that. And your little quip above about "Not as big a mess as when your abortion failed" is sufficient grounds for a permanent ban from Wiktionary as far as I'm concerned. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:29, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473350 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/September: Found match for regex: :Here is a table of known inflectional endings for Lepontic. Much less ambitious, and much less implausible, than the tables created by our learned friend. I wonder if it's really worthwhile even having inflection tables for Lepontic; it has such a small corpus that there are probably very few if any nouns attested in more than one case. I also see our friend has decided that the accusative singular should be the lemma form, hence {{l|xlp|𐌖𐌋𐌊𐌏𐌌}} (originally created at {{l|xlp|ulkom}}), even though the word is attested in the nominative singular as 𐌖𐌋𐌊𐌏𐌔 (ulkos). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:51, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473350 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/September: Found match for regex: :::: Incidentally, I've moved the word in question to the attested form {{m|xlp|𐌖𐌋𐌊𐌏𐌔}}. We need to check all the words with LexLep before moving them to Ital so that we move them to the actually attested forms rather than whatever form our friend created them with. I'm not sure he really does understand these subjects though; it took him a long time to grasp that the only way a Goidelic word can be descended from Proto-Brythonic is if it's a loanword. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:40, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473350 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/September: Found match for regex: :::: I've now added the attested declension information to WT:AXLP and nominated all five declension tables for deletion. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:03, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473350 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/September: Found match for regex: ::::: You're not interested in rectifying the situation. You're only interested in making it worse, which is pretty much all you've been doing since you joined Wiktionary. You make mistake after mistake, and get stubborn and aggressive when called out on it. You refuse to listen to anyone's opinion but your own, you refuse to acknowledge that there are standards in place for how ancient languages are represented, you refuse to understand how historical linguistics works, and you make enormous messes that other people then have to clean up after you. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:47, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473350 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/September: Found match for regex: ::::::::: "Doesn't provide sources as a reference"? It provides photographs of the inscriptions, e.g. , which pretty clearly shows that the ś letter is a allograph of 𐌑, not of 𐌆. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:00, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473350 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/September: Found match for regex: :Found it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:31, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473350 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/September: Found match for regex: :Found it again. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:33, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473350 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/September: Found match for regex: :Sorry, you're wrong. 𐌆 is a different letter. Look at the inscriptions at Lexicon Leponticum. Granted, the letter transcribed ś looks a bit more like the rune ᛗ than like the rune ᛖ or the Latin letter M in most inscriptions, but in the Old Italic alphabet they're just allographs of the same glyph. 𐌑 is the correct Unicode character to use. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:57, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473350 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/September: Found match for regex: :::: I too had no idea that the little raised dot between a non-Latin entry and its transliteration linked to the transliteration explanation page. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:16, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473350 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/September: Found match for regex: ::Here is a video of people making the recipe. They say they also tried to research the word and couldn't find it anywhere else but in that book. One of the guys looked to see if {{m|en|pendant}} had ever been used to refer to food, but couldn't find anything. They can't quite decide whether to consider them a type of pancake or a type of fritter, or just a cookie that's been fried rather than baked. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:41, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473351 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/October: Found match for regex: :: Right, Welsh underwent devoicing of liquids in word-initial position, so /r/ became /r̥/ and /l/ became /l̥/, which became /ɬ/. Devoicing is a kind of fortition, and fortition of sonorants in word-initial position is really common in Insular Celtic. Other examples are /w/ → /ɡw/ in Brythonic, /w/ → /w̥/ → /f/ in Old Irish, and /n l r/ → /n͈ l͈ r͈/ in Old Irish. There was fortition of word-initial /j/ in Romance languages too, first to /dʒ/ as still in Italian (e.g. {{m|it|giovane}}), then to /ʒ/ as still in Romanian, French and Portuguese ({{m|ro|june}}, {{m|fr|jeune}}, {{m|pt|jovem}}), then to /ʃ/ → /x/ (→ /h/) in Spanish ({{m|es|joven}}). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:38, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473351 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::: OK, cool. It wasn't mean to be an exhaustive list, just a representative sampling of the "big five". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:46, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473351 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::::: I guess it's /dʑ/ in Romansh {{m|rm|giuven}}, and w:Franco-Provençal language#Orthography suggests it's /dj/ in FP. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:22, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473351 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/October: Found match for regex: :::: How else would you transcribe it? Modern Greek β is always /v/, isn't it? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:42, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473351 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/October: Found match for regex: :I feel like what it boils down is simply that we don't know whether it was masculine or neuter. Can't we just leave it at that? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:39, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473352 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/November: Found match for regex: ::: Our definition at WT:Obsolete and archaic terms is "Virtually no one would currently use the word or meaning, and very, very few would understand the word or meaning if it were used in speech or text." That certainly doesn't apply to daß, and probably doesn't apply to the Dutch words NINTENPUG is asking about. Daß is still actually widely used in handwritten and otherwise unedited/unproofread German. Indeed, for spellings (as opposed to meanings or whole terms) the second clause of our definition probably doesn't apply at all. Consider the following from the opening of The Faerie Queene: {{m|en|holinesse}}, {{m|en|foule}}, {{m|en|errour}}, {{m|en|defeate}}, {{m|en|hypocrisie}}, {{m|en|entrappe}}, {{m|en|entreate}}. All of those are obsolete in the sense of the first clause of our definition, but everyone understands them. So maybe we need to say that obsolete spellings are those that virtually no one would currently use, even if they are easily understood. But even the first clause doesn't apply to pre-1996 German spellings like daß, so they really can't be called obsolete. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:31, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473352 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/November: Found match for regex: ::::: I guess that could work, but {{m|en|supersede}} means to "displace in favour of another", which I feel like is exactly what's happened to spellings like daß. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:14, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473352 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/November: Found match for regex: ::::::: Why not? It's been displaced in favor of actie. That doesn't imply that actie was formerly deprecated. Which reminds me, {{tl|deprecated spelling of}} is another possible name for forms like this. It's currently a redirect to {{tl|superseded spelling of}}, but maybe some people would prefer its wording. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:52, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473352 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/November: Found match for regex: :You can use the parameter |nocap=1 to put it in lower case. You can also use the parameter |nodot=1 to remove the period/full stop, if you want to do that. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:42, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473352 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/November: Found match for regex: ::: I do this all the time for Irish outdated spellings of nonlemma forms. I think it's very helpful for users to know both the corresponding lemma form, which is also an outdated spelling, and the current spelling. Maybe it would be beneficial to allow templates like {{tl|superseded spelling of}} and {{tl|obsolete form of}} to generate outputs like "superseded spelling of the plural of {{l|nl|actie}}". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:37, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473352 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/November: Found match for regex: ::I wouldn't bother making separate entries for substantivized adjectives unless they have some lexicalized meanings distinct from "a/the X one/thing/man/woman" or unless (as in German) they're spelled differently when they're substantivized. Note that we don't have entries for substantivized adjectives like "hungry" and "rich" in "He hath filled the hungry with good things, and the rich he hath sent empty away." —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:02, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473352 Wiktionary:Information desk/2016/November: Found match for regex: :: I prefer having the ablative the way it is, rather than creating a whole separate etymology section for it, but I would delete the vocative singular line from nebula. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:42, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473354 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/December: Found match for regex: :It isn't necessary, and I'm removing it. {{m|en|cindynics}} is certainly from the Ancient Greek word anyway. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:46, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473354 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/December: Found match for regex: : "Slavic quas" is presumably {{cog|sla-pro|*kvȃsъ}}, but it doesn't mean "feast". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:06, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473354 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/December: Found match for regex: ::In Standard German, the plural {{m|de|Raben}} is commonly pronounced /ˈʁɑːbm̩/; it's not very far from there to the Luxembourgish form. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:29, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473354 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/December: Found match for regex: :The Online Etymology Dictionary and American Heritage agree with us, but dictionary.com agrees with you. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:07, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473354 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/December: Found match for regex: :This book also suggests it comes from the fizzy drink called Kali. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:23, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473354 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/December: Found match for regex: ::I wouldn't say it's a calque of anything, because neither cybernetics nor its French and Ancient Greek ancestors has anything corresponding to {{m|nl|-kunde||-ology}}. It's just a Dutch combination of {{m|nl|sturen}} and {{m|nl|-kunde}}, with sturen being a translation (or single-part calque, if there is such a thing) of {{m|grc|κυβερνάω}}. We could say it's formed on the model of the English, perhaps, but I wouldn't call it a calque. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:58, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473354 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/December: Found match for regex: :::: I don't mean it always corresponds to -ology in the English translations of the Dutch words, but its semantics are those of -ology. Physics, mathematics, and chemistry are all ologies even though the words themselves don't end in -ology. But the fact that the words don't end in -ology does mean that natuurkunde isn't a calque of physics, and wiskunde isn't a calque of mathematics, and scheikunde isn't a calque of chemistry, and stuurkunde isn't a calque of cybernetics. But {{m|nl|aardkunde}} could be a calque of {{m|en|geology}} or, more likely, {{m|la|geologia}}. (Incidentally, I never realized before that {{cog|nl|aardkunde}} and {{cog|de|Erdkunde}} are false friends, but they are: the German word means geography, not geology.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:22, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473355 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/January: Found match for regex: ::: {{m|de|Laib}} is another one. Many of them serve to distinguish homophones, e.g. {{m|de|Laib||loaf}} vs. {{m|de|Leib||body}}, {{m|de|Waise||orphan}} vs. {{m|de|Weise||method}}, {{m|de|Laiche||spawns}} vs. {{m|de|Leiche||corpse}}, {{m|de|Saite||string}} vs. {{m|de|Seite||side}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:46, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473355 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/January: Found match for regex: ::: Sometimes, but sometimes the homophones are both spelled with ei, e.g. {{m|de|weiß||white}} (= Yiddish {{m|yi|ווײַס}}, from PGmc {{m|gem-pro|*hwītaz}}) vs. {{m|de|weiß||(I) know, (s/he) knows}} (= Yiddish {{m|yi|ווייס}}, from PGmc {{m|gem-pro|*wait}}). And sometimes the spelling contrast doesn't correspond to an etymological difference, e.g. {{m|de|Rain||balk}} and {{m|de|rein||clean, pure}} both come from PGmc forms with ai. {{m|de|Hain||grove}} has a different etymology (it started as a dialectal variant of what would normally have become Standard High German {{m|de|Hagen}}, which survived only as a name), and there isn't a German word {{m|de|hein}} or {{m|de|Hein}} as far as I know. So while there may be a slight tendency to use ai for words that come from PGmc ai and ei for words that come from PGmc ī, it's far from being a hard and fast rule, even when restricted to homphonous pairs. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:40, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473355 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/January: Found match for regex: ::: itc-ola. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:35, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473355 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/January: Found match for regex: ::::: Maybe this could even be a separate tab, like Citations are. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:52, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473355 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/January: Found match for regex: Hi all, in particular Leasnam Andrew Sheedy Giorgi Eufshi Μετάknowledge Renard Migrant Korn CodeCa Aɴɢʀ (thanks for your feedback!). I have submitted the grant proposal and now need your support. If you think the project is interesting and feasible, and or if you feel you would like to volunteer, please post at the end of the new grant page here! Thanks a lot in advance.
Page 4473355 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/January: Found match for regex: Hi all Leasnam Andrew Sheedy Giorgi Eufshi Μετάknowledge Renard Migrant Korn CodeCat Aɴɢʀ I'm working on the etymology visualization application and I have a few questions.
Page 4473355 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/January: Found match for regex: ::thanks a lot Μετάknowledge! Trying to ping them again Leasnam Andrew Sheedy Giorgi Eufshi Renard Migrant Korn CodeCat Aɴɢʀ ObsequiousNewt I was thinking, how do you guys then fill Descendant lists if a descendant was borrowed from the ancestor? see damph for example. Epantaleo (talk) 10:38, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473355 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/January: Found match for regex: :Of course they've grown less similar over time. That's what usually happens when two languages descended from a common ancestor diverge. That would happen even without the influence of neighboring languages, but it's probably more pronounced because of the influence Dutch and Low German have had on Frisian, compared to English which was more influenced by Norse and French. The divergence began as soon as English speakers left the mainland for Britain, if not sooner. Old English and Old Frisian were probably mutually intelligible, but even then they weren't the same language. It's probably almost impossible to pinpoint the exact moment when they stopped being mutually intelligible, but I suspect it would be shortly after the Norman Invasion, when the thoroughly Germanic Old English evolved into the highly frenchified Middle English. If there were playwrights familiar with Frisian during the Middle English period, it was probably more a matter of learning it as a foreign language than understanding it as a close relative of one's own. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:48, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473355 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/January: Found match for regex: ::The Norman Conquest didn't cause Old English to turn into Middle English, no; you're right that it would have happened anyway. But it did have a lot to do with what Middle English looked like. If it hadn't been for the Norman Conquest, the opening 18 lines of The Canterbury Tales almost certainly would not have included most if any of the words "perced", "veyne", "licour", "vertu", "engendred", "flour", "inspired", "tendre", "cours", "melodye", "nature", "corages", "pilgrimages", "palmeres", "straunge", and "specially". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:58, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473355 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/January: Found match for regex: ::::: Wikitiki, I guess it depends on what you mean by "the nature of English". The huge influx of French loanwords certainly changed the face of the English lexicon and resulted in the phonemicization of /v z dʒ/, which had hitherto been allophones of /f s j/. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:26, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473355 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/January: Found match for regex: :::::::::Leasnam, are you asking about the alternation between houe and houes? If so, then no, that alternation is not due to French influence: that's the Old English distribution of /s/ at the end of a word and /z/ between vowels. But when you contrast sip and zip or rice and rise, that phonemic distinction probably wouldn't have happened without French. (But it's possible that the contrast would have arisen at least word-finally without French, cf. the noun houe < OE {{l|ang|hus|''hū''}} vs. the verb to houe < OE {{l|ang|husian|''hū''''ian''}}.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:31, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473355 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/January: Found match for regex: :Indeed, French isn't responsible for the differentiation of /θ/ and /ð/, which is probably why the functional load of that distinction is so much smaller than the functional loads of the /s ~ z/ and /f ~ v/ distinctions. Minimal pairs are rare; there's thy/thigh (caused by the change of /θ/ to /ð/ word-initially in function words, which has parallels in other languages), and ether/either (with a Greek loanword), and not much else. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:15, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473355 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/January: Found match for regex: ::: That's true; there's wreath/wreathe and mouth (n.)/mouth (v.). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:51, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473355 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/January: Found match for regex: :: I think they're supposed to be the participles of {{m|grc|ἄνειμι||go up}} and {{m|grc|κάτειμι||go down}}, which really do have the neuter present participles {{m|grc|ἀνιόν}} and {{m|grc|κατιόν}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:56, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473355 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/January: Found match for regex: ::We treat {{m|ine-pro|*dʰewh₂-||close, finish, come full circle}} and {{m|ine-pro|*dʰew-||die}} as two separate roots, but I think some sources, noticing the semantic similarity of "finish" and "die", treat them as the same root. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:54, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473355 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/January: Found match for regex: ::::Which etymologists? I assume you mean {{cog|la|fūnus||funeral, death}} rather than {{m|la|fūnis||rope, cord}}; our entry for {{m|la|fūnus}} says it comes from {{m|ine-pro|*dʰew-||die}}, which makes sense, but our entry for {{m|grc|θνῄσκω}} (same root as {{m|grc|θάνατος}}) indicates uncertainty as to which root it comes from, but doesn't even suggest {{m|ine-pro|*dʰew-}} as a possibility. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:28, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473355 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/January: Found match for regex: {{ping|Zezen}} and anyone else interested in Proto-Slavic: What's the evidence that this is *molditi and not *modliti? Only the cognates from outside Slavic? Because the Slavic words listed have to go back to a *modliti (l in East and South Slavic; dl in West Slavic). They cannot possibly go back to a *molditi, which would give *molod- in East Slavic, *mlad- in South Slavic, and either *mlad- or *mlod- in West Slavic. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:51, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473355 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/January: Found match for regex: @Aɴɢʀ : Thank you for asking. It is Mr Max Vasmer who claimed so, not only me. If you read Russian, that is what he wrote about *mold directly in Proto-Slavic, pacem our Russian wiki colleagues: Происходит от праслав. *molditi..., etc. Do you have sources that claim otherwise? Zezen (talk) 19:24, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473355 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/January: Found match for regex: :I don't read Russian; does he say anything about metathesis? Because only a very early metathesis of *molditi to *modliti could have resulted in the attested forms. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:26, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473355 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/January: Found match for regex: :::: Yes, ca > cha didn't happen in Old Northern French, while the "soft c" was ch rather than c/ç/ss. This accounts for the doublets {{m|en|catch}} and {{m|en|chase}}: both are from the same Latin word, but catch is from Northern French while chase is from a more southerly variety corresponding to modern standard French {{m|fr|chasser}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 05:58, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473355 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/January: Found match for regex: ::::::I assume so; I think the voicing of intervocalic singleton stops happened everywhere in Western Romance. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:09, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473356 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/February: Found match for regex: :I just removed that bit; it's nonsense. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:30, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473356 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/February: Found match for regex: :{{m|ga|ceol}} is Modern Irish, not Proto-Celtic. I'm not certain what the Proto-Celtic form would have been, but it strikes me as very unlikely to be connected to your northern Italian surname. The languages traditionally spoken in Trentino are not standard Italian at all, but the Romance languages Ladin, Lombard, Venetan, and the German varieties Mòcheno and Cimbrian, none of which follow Italian's rule of requiring content words to end in a vowel. There are thus many other languages that your name is more likely to come from than Celtic. The similarity to the Irish word (which is pronounced roughly "kyoal") is certain to be a coincidence. The results of your DNA test will also not tell you what language it is, since language is not transmitted sexually. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:04, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473356 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/February: Found match for regex: :::::: If cauponari exists in (Vulgar) Latin, it's a deponent infinitive. We use the first-person singular present indicative as the lemma form, though, so it should be changed to {{m|la|cauponor}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:50, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473356 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/February: Found match for regex: :It's entirely plausible that the "evil spirit" sense first came from some other language, like Dutch, and then the computing sense came about as a calque of the English term. English is not the only European language that Japanese borrows from. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:59, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473356 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/February: Found match for regex: :"{{smallcaps|mean1}}" refers to the "signify; intend" sense. So he thinks they're from the same root, with "opinion" sometimes moving to "complaint". (I know lots of people whose opinions always seem to be complaints.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:03, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473357 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/March: Found match for regex: *{{done}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:40, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473357 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/March: Found match for regex: :I don't trust any etymology that uses "A" in a PIE form. {{m|ine-pro|*(s)ker-}} could easily have dental extensions {{m|ine-pro|*(s)kerd-}} (in Germanic) and {{m|ine-pro|*(s)kert-}} (in Italic). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:13, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473357 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/March: Found match for regex: :Sihler doesn't mention frico, but he does say that word-initial gʰr usually becomes either gr (e.g. gradus < *gʰredʰ-) or r (e.g. rudus < *gʰrewd- or ravus < *gʰrōwo-). So it would have to be an irregular sound change. (He says that gʰ > f before u is regular but that fundo is the only example.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:18, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473357 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/March: Found match for regex: :That's the same etymology as Corinne has had since 2007 and Corinna has had since 2008, so either they're all wrong or they're all right. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:44, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473357 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/March: Found match for regex: ::Well, Duden marks it as meaning {{m|de|Weizenbier}}, but it doesn't say that it's etymologically from {{m|de|Weizenbier}}. I can certainly imagine a dialectal form like *Weizbier becoming Weißbier by folk etymology, but I don't know if there's any evidence that that's the actual etymology as opposed to straightforward {{m|de|weiß}} + {{m|de|Bier}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:54, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473357 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/March: Found match for regex: :::: It's possible. But Grimm's dictionary also says it's simply from {{m|de|weiß||white}}, pointing specifically to senses pertaining to food that is lighter in color than related foods: "häufig terminologisch zur unterscheidung einer helleren von einer dunkleren sorte derselben ware und allgemeiner zur unterscheidung einer helleren von einer dunkleren gattung derselben art; die entfernung von der reinen farbqualität geht dabei verschieden weit. von hier aus entwickeln sich zahlreiche compositionen; vgl. z. b. weiszer wein — weiszwein, weiszes brot — weiszbrot, weiszer kohl — weiszkohl". Of course {{m|de|weiß}} and {{m|de|Weizen}} are etymologically related themselves, but so far no dictionary is claiming that {{m|de|Weißbier}} is etymologically anything other than {{m|de|weiß}} + {{m|de|Bier}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:47, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473357 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/March: Found match for regex: :::::: I don't know. But I still don't want to include an etymology unsupported by published research, however plausible it may seem. Maybe someone somewhere has published the claim that Weißbier is etymologically from Weizenbier, but Duden and Grimm aren't that someone. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:22, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473357 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/March: Found match for regex: :::Well no, because it still doesn't say that's the etymology of Weißbier. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:06, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473357 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/March: Found match for regex: ::::::This all reminds me of the time I was at a barbecue restaurant in Texas where you had your choice of two types of bread. The server asked me, "Do you want white or wheat?" I said, "What?", and she gave me white. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:38, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473358 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/April: Found match for regex: {{ping|Alifshinobi|Wyang}}, and anyone else who may know: is {{cog|my|ဆင်||elephant}} a loanword from a Tai language and thus ultimately from {{cog|tai-pro|*ɟa:ŋᶜ}}? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:40, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473358 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/April: Found match for regex: :::Wow, thank you for that comprehensive if slightly overwhelming answer. I've tried to boil it down to 25 words or less at ဆင်#Etymology; please take a look and see if I've summarized it correctly. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:37, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473358 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/April: Found match for regex: :{{m|grc|], ]}}, the Epic aorist of {{m|grc|ἔρχομαι}}. Also {{cog|sga|luid||went}} and {{cog|xto|läc||went}}. Jasanoff (Hittite and the Indo-European Verb p. 223) calls {{m|ine-pro||*h₁ludʰ-é/ó-}} "easily the best-established thematic aorist in the PIE lexicon". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:09, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473358 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/April: Found match for regex: ::: It's already linked to from {{l|grc|ἦλθον}}. I don't know whether it was only aorist in PIE; Greek has it also in the future and perfect, but in Irish it's only in the preterite (from the aorist). I don't know about Tocharian. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:54, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473358 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/April: Found match for regex: ::::English is full of proverbs and pithy sayings that are misquotations or paraphrases of quotations, why shouldn't Latin be? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:05, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473358 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/April: Found match for regex: :::::: No idea, but keep in mind Latin survived the Ancient Romans by many centuries. It could be first attested in Late Latin, Medieval Latin, Renaissance Latin, or New Latin and still count as Latin. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:43, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473358 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/April: Found match for regex: ::Germanic þ is definitely not equivalent with Slavic v; it can only match with Slavic t. Still, in principle the basic root could be the same, but with different consonant extensions in Germanic and Slavic (*mel-t- in Germanic, *mel-w- in Slavic). That sort of thing is quite common in Indo-European. However, Germanic {{m|gem-pro|*melþōną}} cannot come from PIE *meldʰ- (which would give something like *meld-/mald-/muld- in Germanic) as our entry currently claims, but only from PIE *melt-. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:09, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473358 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/April: Found match for regex: :::: If it is, then the Germanic has to be {{m|gem-pro|*meldōną}}, not {{m|gem-pro|*melþōną}}. All the attested forms have d anyway, it looks like. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:34, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473358 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/April: Found match for regex: :It's another sense of the same root. "Protector" came to mean "shepherd", which was then reinterpreted as "feeder, grazer". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:52, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473359 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/May: Found match for regex: :It seems to be pure speculation, but not implausible. I've stripped it down and added the Greek script. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:54, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473359 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/May: Found match for regex: ::::waddjus is attested AFAICT only in {{m|got|𐌱𐌰𐌿𐍂𐌲𐍃𐍅𐌰𐌳𐌳𐌾𐌿𐍃}}, {{m|got|𐌲𐍂𐌿𐌽𐌳𐌿𐍅𐌰𐌳𐌳𐌾𐌿𐍃}}, and {{m|got|𐌼𐌹𐌳𐌲𐌰𐍂𐌳𐌹𐍅𐌰𐌳𐌳𐌾𐌿𐍃}}. I'd be in favor of moving {{m|got|𐍅𐌰𐌳𐌳𐌾𐌿𐍃}} to {{m|got|*𐍅𐌰𐌳𐌳𐌾𐌿𐍃}} since it's unattested by itself. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:17, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473359 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/May: Found match for regex: :::::: For Gothic we've always created the lemma form, even when the word is actually attested only in an inflected form—at least in cases where the lemma form is obvious. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:05, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473359 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/May: Found match for regex: :::::::: For Gothic, the only inflected forms I would bother creating are the attested ones, unlike Latin where we create all inflected forms. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:48, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473359 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/May: Found match for regex: :::::::: Also, I don't know if the nominative plural of -waddjus is ever attested, but I'm willing to bet €10 it wasn't *-waddjjus. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:52, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473359 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/May: Found match for regex: :::::::::::: If I were designing Gothic, I would make the plural waddijus or waddjus (identical to the singular), but in fact there are very few nouns in -jus and none of them appear to be attested in the nominative plural. {{ping|CodeCat}}: why is the PGmc nominative plural ending *-iwiz anyway? Doesn't it come from PIE *-ewes? Why wasn't it *-ewez? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:26, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473359 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/May: Found match for regex: :I've looked in several sources and can't find any anterior etymology of either of these words. Maybe the Latin is a loanword from the Greek? Otherwise, if it looks too good to be true, it probably is. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:47, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473359 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/May: Found match for regex: :Pokorny doesn't use laryngeals or stress marks in his transcriptions, so his *ētmen- is equivalent to *h₁eh₁tmén-. Which looks very odd; it must be some sort of reduplicated noun (rare but not nonexistent) from a root {{m|ine-pro|*h₁et-}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:36, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473359 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/May: Found match for regex: ::: It's just that usually PIE roots don't repeat the same consonant except by reduplication (one exception may be s, but even then evidence is scanty). There aren't roots like ^×pept- or ^×nent- or ^×lelt-, so ^×h₁eh₁t- would also be unexpected. The only other reduplicated noun I can think of off the top of my head is {{m|ine-pro| *kʷékʷlos}} from {{m|ine-pro|*kʷel-}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:06, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473359 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/May: Found match for regex: ::::: Those would have given Germanic *ō instead of *ē₁, wouldn't they? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:27, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473359 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/May: Found match for regex: ::::::::: But Old Saxon had {{m|osx|āthom}} and Old English had {{m|ang|ǣþm}}, both of which can only be from {{m|gem-pro|*ēþmaz}}, not {{m|gem-pro|*ēdmaz}}. Perhaps there was a Verner's alternation going on that got leveled out differently in different languages. Is the word attested in Gothic or Norse? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:43, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473359 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/May: Found match for regex: ::::::::::: I guess, yeah. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:06, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473359 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/May: Found match for regex: :In fact, I'd say the citation given isn't even referring to mountains per se, but to towns whose names end in -berg. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:31, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473359 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/May: Found match for regex: :::How about {{m|la|incorruptus}} + {{m|la|-tiō}}? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:54, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473359 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/May: Found match for regex: :::::: The previous existence of corruptio would do a lot to allow incorruptus + -tio to surface as incorruptio. It's sort of like English {{m|en|unemployment}}: semantically it's {{m|en|unemployed}} + {{m|en|-ment}}, but it appears as {{m|en|unemployment}} rather than *unemployedment because the word {{m|en|employment}} already exists. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:45, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473359 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/May: Found match for regex: :Cyprium is an adjective. A better literal translation would be "Cyprian brass". The genitive of Cyprus is Cypri with just one "i". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:16, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473359 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/May: Found match for regex: :Wrong St. Gerard. The one invoked for gout is {{w|Gerard of Toul}} (935–994). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:17, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473359 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/May: Found match for regex: :::: I'm finding a small amount of usage of the spelling "Romaniots" ,. Note that {{m|en|Cypriot}} and other English words suffixed with -iot are usually spelled without the final -e. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:44, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473360 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/June: Found match for regex: :I'd have to double-check to be 100% sure, but I suspect that the vowel is long in all these words, and that the words that don't show a long vowel were taken from dictionaries where vowel length isn't shown before consonant clusters. Some Latin lexicographers care only about vowel length with respect to poetry scansion, so they don't bother marking vowels before clusters since all vowels are "long by position" there. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:34, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473360 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/June: Found match for regex: ::: Lewis & Short mark {{m|la|atrox}}, {{m|la|atrocitas}}, and {{m|la|atrociter}} with ā̆, suggesting that it sometimes scans long and sometimes short. That's only expected for inherently short vowels before "muta cum liquida" clusters, suggesting that these are actually {{m|la|ătrox}} etc., which in turn suggests either that {{m|la|atrox}} and {{m|la|āter}} are unrelated or that {{m|la|atrox}} comes from a different ablaut grade (e.g. {{m|la|āter}} could be from full grade *h₂eh₁tro- and {{m|la|atrox}} from zero grade *h₂h₁tro-). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:47, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473360 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/June: Found match for regex: Modern {{cog|he|פסחא}} is "ikely a reborrowing from Aramaic פַּסְחָא (pasḥā) or Ancient Greek πάσχα (páskha, Passover), ultimately from Biblical Hebrew פֶּסַח (pésaḥ, Passover)." Normally when a term in language X is a loanword from language Y, which in turn borrowed from language X, we call it a "twice-borrowed term". But in this case, the word was borrowed from language Y, which in turn borrowed it from an older stage—an etymology-only language stage—of language X. So do we want to put this in Category:Hebrew twice-borrowed terms, or in Category:Hebrew terms derived from Biblical Hebrew? I would be prefer the former, but in order to achieve that we have to write "from Biblical {{tl|der|he|'''he'''|פֶּסַח|tr=pésaḥ||Passover}}", rather than what we usually do in such cases, "from {{tl|der|he|'''hbo'''|פֶּסַח|tr=pésaḥ||Passover}}". When I wrote the former, Wikitiki89 changed it to the latter, which also changed the category to Category:Hebrew terms derived from Biblical Hebrew. So how do we want to proceed? Ideally, it would be great if the modules recognized terms borrowed from an etymology-only language into the corresponding primary language as twice-borrowed terms, so that we could write {{tl|der|he|hbo}} and still get the twice-borrowed term category. Is it possible to edit them to do that? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:07, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473360 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/June: Found match for regex: ::: So we agree that Category:Hebrew twice-borrowed terms is the appropriate category, rather than Category:Hebrew terms derived from Biblical Hebrew? How do we implement that? Currently, the only way is the cumbersome "from Biblical {{tl|der|he|he}}". {{ping|CodeCat}}, can you edit the relevant modules so that "from {{tl|der|he|hbo}}" will categorize in the desired way? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:38, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473360 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/June: Found match for regex: ::::: Looks good, CodeCat, thanks! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:45, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473360 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/June: Found match for regex: ::: I've tidied up the three entries mentioned above and removed the {{tl|calque}} template, since these words are not calques within Latin, German, and Russian respectively. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:54, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473360 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/June: Found match for regex: :The difference is probably due to stress placement: *éssere > être but *esserā́t > sera. The original final stress is shown by the modern forms in Italian {{m|it|sarà}}, Spanish {{m|es|será}}, Portuguese {{m|pt|será}}, etc.; these also suggest that loss of the initial e happened already in VL. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:06, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473360 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/June: Found match for regex: :::::::: My guess is that of is a typo for or, LSJ refers to {{w|A Greek–English Lexicon}}, and "AmH" refers to either the American Heritage Dictionary as a whole or specifically to its Appendix of Indo-European Roots. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:35, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473360 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/June: Found match for regex: :I don't know, Germanic speakers surely encountered churches and may have needed a word for them even before they themselves were christianized. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:21, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473360 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/June: Found match for regex: :::::: We don't have a code for Proto-West-Germanic, and many linguists believe there never was such a thing. It is labeled "West Germanic" as a kind of dialect of Proto-Germanic. At any rate, it seems unlikely to have been borrowed more than once, since there's such a small window in which {{m|grc|κυριακόν}} rather than {{m|grc|ἐκκλησία}} (the only term used in the New Testament) was the usual word. BTW, why do we assume the word was borrowed via the Goths when the word isn't attested in Gothic? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:09, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473360 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/June: Found match for regex: :::::Considering the y- variant isn't even attested in Middle English or Old English, let alone outside the English branch of Germanic, it seems overly optimistic to reconstruct {{l|gem-pro|*gaaunōną}} for Proto-Germanic. "Yean" probably doesn't have the ge- prefix it all; it's probably just a sporadic variant of "ean", perhaps by hypercorrection in a dialect that says "east" for "yeast". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:18, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473360 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/June: Found match for regex: :Probably from the shape and bloodiness of the placenta. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:28, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473360 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/June: Found match for regex: ::Per Wiktionary:Entry layout#Headings after the definitions, synonyms come after Inflection, before Coordinate terms, Derived terms, and Descendants. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:29, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473360 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/June: Found match for regex: ::: The script is exactly the same; individual words may be spelled differently in Hindi and Sanskrit, though. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:45, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473360 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/June: Found match for regex: :I feel that both {{l|ine-pro|*eiḱ}} and {{l|ine-pro|*eiǵ-}} should be changed to {{l|ine-pro|*h₂eyǵ-}}. That is incidentally the form it's given at Appendix:List of Proto-Indo-European roots/h₂. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:07, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473360 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/June: Found match for regex: ::: Probably. Buck and Pokorny won't have written *h₂, but the others may have. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:22, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473360 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/June: Found match for regex: ::::: Yes, "ei" and "ey" are exactly the same thing, just two different transcription conventions. Wiktionary follows the "ey" convention. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:16, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473360 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/June: Found match for regex: ::: Also a lot of verbs had alternations between /tʃ/ before a vowel and /k/ before a consonant which were then leveled out differently, e.g. {{m|ang|sēċan||to seek}} ~ {{m|ang|sēcþ||(he) seeks}} generalized the /k/ in Modern English, but {{m|ang|besēċan||to beseech}} ~ {{m|ang|besēcþ||(he) beseeches}} generalized the /tʃ/ in Modern English. So between the /k/ of the noun, Scandinavian influence, and preconsonantal position, there were probably lots of paths for {{m|ang|wyrċan}} to generalize /k/. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:00, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473361 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/July: Found match for regex: :I'd say they are really doublets. Why wouldn't they be? They're just a very specific kind of doublet. Parallels in English are mead²/{{m|en|meadow}} and {{m|en|shade}}/{{m|en|shadow}}, which come from different cases of the same Old English word. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:33, 3 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473361 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/July: Found match for regex: ::: The Turkish word looks to me like a conflation of the Greek and Arabic words. If it's just from Greek, why isn't it *vırça? I think /v/ is a perfectly ordinary consonant in Turkish. And if it's just from Arabic, why isn't it *fırşa? Again, /ʃ/ is a perfectly ordinary consonant in Turkish. Instead it looks like speakers took advantage of the overall similarity of the two words, but got the /f/ from Arabic and the /tʃ/ from Greek /ts/. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:41, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473361 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/July: Found match for regex: :::: So the Arabic word might be showing signs of folk etymology? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:01, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473361 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/July: Found match for regex: ::::::::: It doesn't matter, though. The important thing is that no Slavic variety contrasted /ɡ/ and /ɣ/ phonemically, so the Greek letter gamma could be borrowed for any Slavic language's reflex of PSl. *g, regardless of its phonetic realization. And no Slavic language ever had /ð/, so the Greek letter delta could be borrowed for stop /d/, even if it wasn't a stop in Greek. But since /b/ and /v/ did contrast in Slavic, they needed separate letters, so they took Greek beta for /v/ (as it was also pronounced in Greek at the time), and modified it for /b/ (which existed in Greek only as an allophone of /p/). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:04, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473361 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/July: Found match for regex: :: ɸ is lost word-initially in all attested unambiguously Celtic languages, but it leaves traces in other positions (e.g. sɸ- is distinct from both s- and sw-; intervocalic -ɸr-/-ɸl- becomes -br-/-bl-). And then there are ambiguous cases that might indicate a word-initial consonant in Proto-Celtic, but not necessarily. The Latin place names {{w|Hercynia}} and {{m|la|Hibernia}} seem to show /h/ in words that would be reconstructed with word-initial ɸ, but (1) word-initial /h/ was lost early on in Latin anyway, so these spellings may not actually indicate a true /h/, and (2) the etymology of Hercynia isn't entirely certain. Then there are Lusitanian words spelled with p that come from PIE p (e.g. {{m|xls|porcom||pig}}), but Lusitanian might not be descended from PC. If it is, however, then it's possible that Lusitanians used the letter p to stand for /ɸ/, meaning that {{m|xls|porcom}} would be pronounced /ɸorkom/ and be descended from {{m|cel-pro|*ɸorkos|*ɸorkom}}. Since word-internal ɸ is definitely needed for PC reconstructions, and since word-initial ɸ might be needed for them, it seems safest to reconstruct it everywhere it's expected. All modern Celticists I'm aware of regularly use ɸ (or f to stand for the same thing) in their PC reconstructions. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:43, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473361 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/July: Found match for regex: :::::::: Partly because that's what the sources do (all Celticists I'm familiar with would reconstruct it as *sextam and not *seɸtam~*seftam) and partly because you can't tell from a or cluster in PC whether it goes back to PIE / or /, so if there was a word with an unknown etymology you wouldn't be able to decide between them. As for which symbol we use, I have no particular objection to using "f" instead, and some sources (e.g. Matasović 2009) do use "f", but I think "ɸ" is a little more common. Maybe "ɸ" is good because of its visual similarity to "∅", thus reminding us that in most contexts it disappeared (became zero). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:15, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473361 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/July: Found match for regex: :::::::::: Modern sources consistently show word-initial ɸ/f, though sources from a hundred years ago, like {{tl|R:MacBain}} and Pedersen's Vergleichende Grammatik der keltischen Sprachen didn't. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:35, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473361 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/July: Found match for regex: :::::::::::: Yes, it's really the case that they do so. As to why, maybe it's because in sextam there's still something holding the place of ɸ, while in ēskos there wouldn't be. Or because, as Hibernia, Hercynia, and porcom show, there is still a chance that Proto-Celtic had a genuine ɸ in ɸēskos before it broke up, but there's not the slightest indication that it ever had anything but /x/ in sextam. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:48, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473361 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/July: Found match for regex: :The full stop in both of those forms is an error, not part of the transliteration. The only language I'm aware of in which we use a full stop as part of the transliteration is Burmese. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:16, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473361 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/July: Found match for regex: ::: Yes, the slash is used in these PIE lists to separate stages of the same language, e.g. Old English/Modern English, Old Persian/Modern Persian, Old High German/Modern German, etc. The semicolon is used to separate words in the same language. I strongly suspect Kashmiri and Kamviri should not have full stops in transliteration. Hittite definitely shouldn't: the "Tarx.u" given on the page should probably be "Tarḫu". And Kashubian is written in the Latin alphabet and so shouldn't be using transliteration at all. According to {{w|Kashubian alphabet}} the diacriticked forms of "o" are ò, ó, and ô. I have no idea which one "taro.n" is supposed to have. These PIE lists are an almighty mess anyway. I've half-heartedly tried to clean some of them up in the past, but I don't have the patience. All the words really ought to be cited in the original script and linked to with {{tl|l}} or {{tl|m}} (with automatically generated transliterations where possible), rather than the way they are now. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:39, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473362 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/August: Found match for regex: ::::: My favorite example of backwards synonyms comes from Welsh, where the word for "now" is {{m|cy|nawr}} in the south and {{m|cy|rŵan}} in the north, completely coincidentally of course. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:52, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473362 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/August: Found match for regex: :Not taking a stand on the etymologies in question, but I do want to point out the fact that a particular word is a loanword does not imply that the concept for which it stands was unknown before the loanword was borrowed. Languages replace existing native words with loanwords all the time; and anyway, this word didn't replace the Germanic wash word and (to judge from the modern descendants in English, Dutch, and German) wasn't a perfect synonym of wash anyway. The Online Etymology Dictionary also assumes a Latin loanword, incidentally. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:57, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473362 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/August: Found match for regex: Am I correct in thinking that neither "inherited" {{tl|inh}} nor "borrowed" {{tl|bor}} is really right for, say, Esperanto words derived from modern European languages, or Haitian Creole words derived from French, and that "derived" {{tl|der}} is the only real option for such words? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:56, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473362 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/August: Found match for regex: :: Actually, I suppose an argument could be made that all Esperanto words are borrowed. Also, I guess it's still possible for Haitian Creole to have borrowed words from other languages (e.g. English), isn't it? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:41, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473363 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/September: Found match for regex: :PIE o-stems ended in -ons in the accusative plural, from which we'd expect PSl. -ǫ after hard consonants and -ę after soft consonants. So I'd say the question is rather where does the -y in hard o-stems come from? Maybe from the accusative plural of neuter u-stems, which in PIE was -uh₂? PSl. does seem to have mixed up the o-stems and the u-stems. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:27, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473363 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/September: Found match for regex: ::: Maybe the fronting of o after soft consonants inhibited that sound change, so that -ons > -uns > -ūs > -y after hard consonants, but -ons > -ens > -ę after soft consonants. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:33, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473363 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/September: Found match for regex: ::: Some languages do use loanwords for their numerals. Japanese has multiple names for numerals, but the basic "ichi, ni, san, shi" series that people learn first are all from Chinese. I once watched a Tagalog weather forecast on TV and noticed that the temperatures were all given in Spanish. There are claims that some languages don't really have words for numbers, just "one, a few, a lot" and the like; it's quite plausible that such a language would use loanwords for numerals after coming in contact with a language that does have words for numbers. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:56, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473363 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/September: Found match for regex: :If it's like other Romance words for "go", then some forms will be from {{m|la|vado}} and some from {{m|la|ambito}} and/or {{m|la|adito}}, and maybe some from {{m|la|eo}} as well. See the Etymology section of {{m|it|andare}}. The problem in this case is just that the full conjugation isn't given. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:26, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473363 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/September: Found match for regex: :::: In this case, surely Category:Proto-Indo-European thematic verbs and Category:Proto-Indo-European athematic verbs would be more relevant if they existed. In either case, though, "thematic" basically means there's a vowel e/o between the root and the ending, while "athematic" means the ending is attached directly to the root without any vocalic "glue" between them. When I was a student of {{w|Jay Jasanoff}} (a leading expert in PIE verbs), he taught that the 3rd person singular ending of the thematic verbs was -e, e.g. the third person singular of {{m|ine-pro|*bʰer-}} was {{m|ine-pro|*bʰére}}, not {{m|ine-pro|*bʰéreti}} (which was a later form created by tacking the athematic ending -ti onto the original form). To the form {{m|ine-pro|*bʰére}}, it was possible to add the "hic et nunc" suffix -i found throughout the present tense, yielding {{m|ine-pro||*bʰére-i}}, the source of {{cog|grc|φέρει}}, the third person singular present of {{m|grc|φέρω}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:13, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473363 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/September: Found match for regex: ::::::: Pace Matasović, the Brythonic words are much more likely to be borrowed from Latin (as GPC says) than inherited from Proto-Celtic. I have no idea where the Goidelic words come from, but it's definitely unlikely that sga generalized a lenited form, when exactly the opposite is what usually happens (and is apparently precisely what happened in gd, where the diminutive iaróg became feòrag). If this is a Proto-Celtic form, I'd say the sga word is more likely to be a dissimilation of *wiw- to *iw-, but in fact more than the missing f is problematic. Old Irish íaru is an n-stem and looks at first blush like it ought to come from *ērVCū/ērVCon-, where V is some back vowel (since the r isn't palatalized) and the C is some consonant that disappears between vowels (like a glide or s). The initial ē could have come from iwe- or īwe- I suppose (just as {{m|sga|Ériu}} comes from *ɸīweryū), but that still leaves open the question of what the -VCon- is and where it came from. The later Goidelic vowels are all over the place too; if the sga word is íaru there's no obvious reason why the ga word isn't *iara (with a long diphthong) instead of iora (with a short vowel) or why the gd isn't *fiarag instead of feòrag. And why does Matasović reconstruct the word as a masculine when it's feminine in both branches of Celtic as well as in Latin? Even Homer nods... —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:23, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473363 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/September: Found match for regex: :They both have to go back to an immediate pre-form with the i, but that could go back to an earlier form without it. Matasović reconstructs it without the i because he wants to take it back to a PIE *kr̥yeh₂. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:54, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473363 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/September: Found match for regex: ::: I think there's something Sievers-like in Celtic, but it may not have depended on the weight of the preceding syllable. If *karyā had gone straight into Old Irish it would probably be *cair /karʲ/ and in Welsh it would probably be *cair /kair/. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:26, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473363 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/September: Found match for regex: ::::: {{ping|CodeCat}} It occurs to me that in Old Irish, all yo- and yā-stem nouns end in -e, suggesting that they all ended in -iyos/-iyā before the loss of final syllables. In Welsh, on the other hand, they do not all end in -ydd/-edd, suggesting that only some of them ended in -iyos/-iyā, and some of them ended in -yos/-yā. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:16, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473363 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/September: Found match for regex: ::::::: Strictly speaking, I suppose it could have, but that would have involved a nonsyllabic y becoming syllabic e, which is a little less likely than syllabic i becoming syllabic e. But basically it's probably fair to say that pre-Irish is like Latin here: there is no meaningful distinction between CiyV and CyV. Some other data to keep in mind, which I haven't entirely figure out yet, are: 3rd person singular present conjunct {{m|sga|·gaib}} < *gab(i)yet(i) < {{m|ine-pro|*gʰeh₁bʰ-|*gʰh₁bʰ-yéti}} contrasting with {{m|sga|·léici}} < *linkʷeyet(i); but 2nd person singular present conjunct {{m|sga|·gaibi}} < *gab(i)yes(i) < *gab(i)yih(i) contrasting with {{m|sga|·bir}} < *berih(i) < *beres(i); and genitive singular {{m|sga|céili}} ({{cog|pgl|ᚉᚓᚂᚔ}}) < *kēl(i)yī contrasting with {{m|sga|maicc}} ({{cog|pgl|ᚋᚐᚊᚔ}}) < *makʷkʷī. I wonder if there are any Primitive Irish forms in -(i)yos attested. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:17, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473363 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/September: Found match for regex: :Well, you wouldn't expect a Latin loanword to have geminate /dd/ since {{m|la|crēdō}} has a singleton /d/. But both Welsh and Irish have /d/, which can only come from /dd/. Also the Celtic words have a short /e/, while the Latin has a long ē. So a Latin loanword should have given *crwyddu in Welsh and *créidid /ˈkʲrʲeːðʲiðʲ/ in Old Irish. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:11, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473363 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/September: Found match for regex: ::: No problem. I think I was the one who said the Goidelic words were Latin loanwords in the first place, so it's my own mistake I fixed. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:51, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473363 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/September: Found match for regex: :I don't know why the n of {{m|sga|canaid}} isn't palatalized—it isn't in one of the usual depalatalization environments—but the 3rd person singular conjunct is {{m|sga|·cain}} (likewise the 2nd person singular imperative is {{m|sga|cain}}) and the imperfect passive is {{m|sga|cainte}}, both with a palatalized n where you'd expect it in a plain e/o-verb. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:35, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473363 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/September: Found match for regex: :: I doubt the two would be different in Old Irish. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:05, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473363 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/September: Found match for regex: : Presumably because the descendants don't let us decide on a particular nominative case. Maybe it should be called a root instead, though. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:59, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473363 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/September: Found match for regex: :As to point one, it isn't just PIE. Any language's "Category:XXX terms with IPA pronunciation" is included in that language's "Category:XXX entry maintenance", though it isn't clear to me why that should be so. The entry maintenance categories are usually for problems that need to be solved, but obviously having an IPA pronunciation isn't a problem that needs to be solved. On the other hand, I wonder why there are any PIE terms with IPA pronunciation since the pronunciation of PIE is purely speculative. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:41, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473363 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/September: Found match for regex: ::: Yes, the c in this word represents /ɡ/, which comes from /*ŋk(ʷ)/. It seems to come from *linkʷīti/*linkʷeyeti, but I don't know why it comes from that rather than from *linkʷeti, which would have given the same absolute form {{m|sga|léicid}}, but would have given the conjunct {{m|sga||*·léic}} rather than attested {{m|sga|·léici}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:35, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473363 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/September: Found match for regex: ::::: I'm trying to figure out what "lautgesetzliches *li° analogisch nach Konj. ersetzt durch *lē°" means. Normally *-ink- becomes /iɡ/ in OIr. (e.g. {{m|sga|·icc}}), while /eːɡ/ comes from *-enk- or *-ank-. Is McCone saying that the subjunctive started with *lankʷ- or *lenkʷ-? Why would it? Unfortunately I only started receiving Ériu in 1994, so I don't know what Schrijver said, nor do I have access to the Watkins Festschrift, so I don't know what McCone said. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:43, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473363 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/September: Found match for regex: ::::::: But the nasal present stem should be lic-, not léic-. If the subjunctive stem was {{m|cel-pro||*lēkʷ-ā-}} (from the full grade with no nasal infix) and the present indicative stem was {{m|cel-pro||*linkʷe/o-}}, then maybe the vowel of the subjunctive and the consonantism of the present indicative joined up to give {{m|cel-pro||*lēnkʷ-}} throughout the paradigm. Then Osthoff's law shortened that to {{m|cel-pro||*lenkʷ-}}, which is the source of Old Irish léic-. Still no explanation for why it's an ī (eye/o) present instead of a plain thematic present, though. If nothing unphonological had happened, the present would be *liccid, ·licc and the subjunctive would be *líachaid, ·líacha. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:56, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473363 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/September: Found match for regex: :::::::: Ironically enough, the modern Irish verb is {{m|ga|lig}}, exactly the form we would have expected from {{m|cel-pro||*linkʷeti}} (or {{m|cel-pro|*linkʷīti}}). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:58, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473363 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/September: Found match for regex: ::: I don't know either, but my historical linguist's intuition says it's probably analogy. There was probably some verb or group of verbs that had a causative ending in -payati for a good phonological reason (e.g. a root ending in p), and in these verbs the p was reinterpreted as part of the suffix, so at some point speakers started treating -payati as the postvocalic allomorph of the usual causative suffix -ayati. Whitney's Grammar discusses these forms here but he doesn't venture any explanation of their origin. If you have access to old issues of Language, {{w|Franklin Edgerton}} has an article in Vol. 22 (1946), pp. 94–101 on "Indic Causatives in -āpayati (-āpeti, -āvei)", which is on Scribd but I can't get to it without a subscription. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:49, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473363 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/September: Found match for regex: ::::: I certainly would. The causative was quite productive in Sanskrit, so I wouldn't take the presence of any causative—even a canonical one in -ayati—as evidence of a PIE causative unless it had parallels in other IE languages. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:54, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473363 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/September: Found match for regex: ::::::: Well, maybe someone has come up with something in the 70 years since Edgerton's paper, but if so, I couldn't find it after a 3-minute Google search! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:19, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473363 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/September: Found match for regex: :Jeezum Crow, even if it's attested as a surname, that doesn't make the surname the etymology of the common noun. Just remove it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:05, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473363 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/September: Found match for regex: ::: I'd put them in the etymology if they're from an earlier stage of the language (e.g. Middle English) and into the citations if they're from the same stage of the language (e.g. Early Modern English). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:17, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473363 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/September: Found match for regex: :The Online Etymology Dictionary says "from late 18c. slang get (or have) one's gruel 'receive one's punishment'". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:01, 1 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473364 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/October: Found match for regex: :Catgut was formerly used in surgery; it may have something to do with that. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:29, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473364 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/October: Found match for regex: :I don't think so. The word is barely attested in Celtic; mostly in names, many of which have derivational suffixes added to them. But nothing is really inconsistent with its being a u-stem either. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:54, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473364 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::: I can't find the name in any entry in DIL, so I don't know what its genitive is. The plural of Welsh {{m|cy|befer}} is {{m|cy|beferod}}, and GPC says it's a loanword from Old English anyway. It's apparently not attested until the 14th century, and the attested spellings listed in GPC are {{m|cy|befyr}}, {{m|cy|befer}}, and {{m|cy|befar}}. But Welsh doesn't usually spell its epenthetic vowels; if it were actually inherited from a PC {{m|cel-pro|*bebrus}}, we'd expect the spelling {{m|cy||*befr}} to predominate. (On the other hand, it's not a very well attested word anyway; the usual Welsh word for beaver is {{m|cy|afanc}}.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:01, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473364 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/October: Found match for regex: :::::: The closest thing to an attestation that unambiguously means "beaver" is the Gaulish place name {{m|cel-gau|Bebriacum}}, which Tacitus says means "locus castrorum". The next closest thing is Vulgar Latin {{m|la|*biber}}/{{m|la|beber}}, which is presumed to be a loanword from Gaulish (the Italic inherited word being {{m|la|fiber}}). Welsh {{m|cy|befer}} and Old Breton {{m|obt|beuer}} unambiguously mean "beaver", but they don't unambiguously come from Proto-Celtic as they could also be loanwords. And no, nothing in Celtic has to come from a u-stem. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:44, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473364 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/October: Found match for regex: :I'm not sure any Insular Celtic language would have different outcomes for *tāti and *tāyeti, and Matasović doesn't list any Continental descendants. He reconstructs it as *tā-yo- but doesn't say why it's that and not *tā-. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:58, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473364 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::: It could also have simply lost the reduplication of {{m|ine-pro|*stísteh₂ti}} since reduplication in Celtic marked the future and ~~subjunctive~~ preterite but not the present indicative. Our entry {{l|ine-pro|*steh₂-}} indicates that Balto-Slavic and Germanic both have verbs coming from *steh₂-ye-ti; maybe Matasovic reconstructs {{m|cel-pro|*tāyeti}} simply to bring it into line with those rather than for inner-Celtic phonological reasons. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:26, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473364 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::::: Sorry, I meant preterite, not subjunctive. And y disappeared between vowels, so I don't think it would surface in any way. The fact that the oldest form of the 1st person singular is ·táu, while {{m|ga|táim}} appears only much later, could be taken as evidence of an original thematic conjugation, since *tāyū would have given ·táu, but *tāmi wouldn't. The conjunct forms come from PC forms with an early apocope of final -i, so *tāti > *tāt > ·tá (but also *tāyeti > *tāyet > ·tá, so it's no help). The absolute form *táith is attested only with suffixed object pronouns ({{m|sga|táthum||there is to me → I have}} etc.), but it could be equally well from *tāyeti as from *tāti. The 1st person singular is really the only thing I can think of that says "old thematic form". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:00, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473364 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::::::: {{reply to|CodeCat}} Well, {{m|sga|nóïd||praise, extol}} is a hiatus verb; with suffixed pronouns in the 1st and 2nd person singular we get {{m|sga|nóithium||extols me}} and {{m|sga|nóithiut||extols you}}. AFAIK the 3rd singular absolute ending -id only shows up as d before suffixed pronouns if it is synchronically preceded by an unstressed vowel. If the vowel before the /θ/ is syncopated, regardless of whether it's a hiatus verb or not, then the voicing to /ð/ doesn't happen: *beirith + i > {{m|sga|beirthi||(he) carries it}}, but *sóerafaith + ut > {{m|sga|sóerfudut||(it) will free you}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:20, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473364 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/October: Found match for regex: :The sole citation for {{m|mga|andaid}} in DIL is from {{w|An Leabhar Breac}}, which is Middle Irish. That could mean that {{m|mga|andaid}} is a back-formation from {{m|sga|ad·annai}}, or it could mean the unprefixed version was always extremely rare, and almost by accident the one time it did get attested it happened to be in a late text. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:11, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473364 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::: Actually, maybe we can create {{m|sga|andaid}} for Old Irish: finite forms aren't attested, but the participle {{m|sga|andithe}} (Ml. 56d3) and the verbal noun {{m|sga|andud}} (Ml. 131d14) are. As for the conjugation class, the final vowel of {{m|sga|ad·annai|ad·annai}} strongly suggests it was {{m|cel-pro|*andīti}}. VKG (I, 457) says, "Das Verbum war wohl ein -ī-Stamm mit zum großen Teil verlorener Mouillierung" ({{m|de|Mouillierung}} being Pedersen's word for palatalization). As to the origin of {{m|cel-pro|*andīti}} itself, I have no idea. Matasović doesn't list it, and Pedersen's etymology is wild speculation. As for {{m|sga|·icc}} and {{m|sga|·muinethar}}, I see your point, but I wasn't sure where else to put their etymologies without redundancy. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:43, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473364 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/October: Found match for regex: {{ping|Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV|Daniel Carrero}} and anyone else interested in Portuguese historical linguistics: The etymology of {{m|pt|frol}} says this is a metathesis of {{m|pt|flor}}, from Latin {{m|la|flōrem}}, but since /l/ regularly becomes /r/ after labials in Portuguese and its closest relatives (e.g. {{m|pt|praia}} from {{m|la|plagia}} and {{m|pt|branco}} from {{m|la|*blancus}}), isn't it more likely that it's a dissimilation of {{m|roa-opt|fror}}, which is the expected form? The modern standard form {{m|pt|flor}} would then either also be a dissimilation (in the opposite direction) or a learned re-borrowing of the Latin. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:20, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473364 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/October: Found match for regex: :Well, the oldest form of the word appears to be {{m|sga|bodb}}, which Matasović takes back to {{m|cel-pro|*bodwos}}, {{m|cel-pro|*bodwā}}. The only other Celtic cognate he mentions is {{cog|obt|bodou||heron}}. He connects the Celtic word with {{cog|gem-pro|*badwō||battle, fight}}, saying "the crow is the bird symbolizing the carnage in battle". If 'battle, fight' is also the oldest meaning in Celtic, then the goddess's name could come directly from that, and the meaning 'crow' could come either directly from 'battle, fight' or from the goddess's name. The latter seems a little more plausible to me. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:16, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473364 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/October: Found match for regex: :I don't know anything more about the etymology of Merfyn than what it already says at Mervyn#Etymology. Besides "marrow", the first element could also mean "lake". I can't find any Welsh word myn that means "eminent, famous", just words that mean "kid, young goat", "will, wish, desire", "crown, wreath of flowers". But what makes you think this even has Proto-Brythonic and Proto-Celtic forms? Maybe it was coined in Welsh. As for Cado/Cadwy, it's pretty much inconceivable that a name would be a compound of which the second element is a preposition. It's probably a clipped form of some name or name beginning with {{m|cy|cad||battle}}, like Cadogan/Cadwgan or Cadwaladr. If it is a full name on its own, all I can think of is cad + {{m|cy|gwy||water, liquid}} or {{m|cy|ŵy||egg}}, but neither "battle water" nor "battle egg" is really the sort of thing ancient Celts would be likely to name their sons. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:33, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473364 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::According to {{w|Old Welsh}}, the 570s is after Welsh separated from Proto-Brythonic; it belongs to the period known as Archaic Welsh or Primitive Welsh. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:58, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473364 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/October: Found match for regex: :: Maybe there's some descendant of {{m|gem-pro|*steuraz}} in early Yiddish that got replaced by {{m|yi|ביק}}. It's not really that odd for that sort of thing to happen. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:59, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473364 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::::What a peculiar word. It sounds so un-Yiddish. It's reminiscent of {{m|es|buey}}; I wonder if it's from Romance. Do you or Wikitiki89 have access to a Yiddish etymological dictionary? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:13, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473364 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/October: Found match for regex: {{ping|Embryomystic}}: are you sure about the etymology of {{m|ga|-is}}? I'm not aware of an Old Irish {{m|sga|-as}} that forms language names, though to be honest I'm not sure how language names are formed in Old Irish at all. I always sort of assumed that, just like English {{m|en|-ese}}, Irish {{m|ga|-is}} was a borrowing from Latin {{m|la|-ēnsis}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:45, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473365 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/November: Found match for regex: ::::::::: I've certainly never heard that, and nowadays I think being polyamorous carries more of a stigma than being gay does. Leasnam's "stricter note" sounds to me like the definition of {{m|en|pansexual}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:42, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473365 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/November: Found match for regex: :Matasović says it "is best explained as the result of assimilation (n...bʰ > n...m)", which to me is no "explanation" at all but merely naming the phenomenon. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:15, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473365 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/November: Found match for regex: ::::No; more likely the bʰ was simply replaced by the m. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:04, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473365 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/November: Found match for regex: ** Is it possible that {{m|ja|ボール}} is from {{cog|fr|bord}} rather than {{cog|en|board}}? It's phonologically way more likely, but the semantics are kinda wonky. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:01, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473365 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/November: Found match for regex: :::: But "board" shouldn't give {{ja-r|ボールド}} in the first place, as Japanese invariably uses nonrhotic English as its source. {{cog|nl|boord}} and maybe (if the vowel length can be explained away) {{cog|de|Bord}} or {{cog|pt|bordo}} could be the source of a {{ja-r|ボールド}} (and is that hypothetical or attested?) but it would be unprecedented for {{cog|en|board}} to be the source. And Japanese truncation usually exploits vowel shortening before it starts deleting things, so if they wanted to reduce {{ja-r|ボールド}} to three moras, surely {{ja-r|ボルド}} would be the truncation of choice, wouldn't it? Still, if that's what all the published sources say, that's what we need to report, however unlikely it seems. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:44, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473365 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/November: Found match for regex: :No, it's not plausible. I'm removing it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:27, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473365 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/November: Found match for regex: :: Standard Arabic j comes from earlier g, and it still is /ɡ/ in some dialects like Egyptian. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:33, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473365 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/November: Found match for regex: :: The o in Old English is unexpected; *furduz should have given ^×furd. It looks like the Old English comes from a byform *furdaz. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:59, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473365 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2016/November: Found match for regex: :Off the top of my head, it's possible that κλῖμαξ has compensatory lengthening and comes from something like *klismaks. The PIE root is {{m|ine-pro|*ḱley-}}, so ī isn't expected anywhere unless it was actually {{m|ine-pro||*ḱleyH-}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:21, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473366 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/December: Found match for regex: :Our definition of {{m|en|gulf}} says in part "a partially landlocked sea", so I don't see (ha-ha) why not. Gulfs are a particular kind of sea. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:41, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473366 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/December: Found match for regex: ::I've removed it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:18, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473366 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/December: Found match for regex: :Yes, it is. See Wiktionary:Criteria for inclusion#Independent: there must be at least three independent uses, which means other authors besides the coiner have to use the term. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:03, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473366 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/December: Found match for regex: ::::: If one doesn't remember this proverb, one may be said to cut off one's nose to spite one's face. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:38, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473366 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/December: Found match for regex: :{{tl|nonstandard form of}}, perhaps? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:22, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473366 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/December: Found match for regex: :{{reply to|KarikaSlayer}} It's written with a smooth breathing in the Septuagint at Genesis 4:1 and 4:25 and in the New Testament at 1 Timothy 2:13 and 2 Corinthians 11:3. I can't find it with a rough breathing in the Bible at all, but maybe it is in other works. As for the Latin, it's spelled {{m|la|Hava}} at Genesis 4:1 (her name isn't mentioned at 4:25 in the Vulgate) and {{m|la|Eva}} in the NT both times. I don't find {{m|la|Heva}} in the Vulgate, but again, maybe it's spelled that way in other works. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:21, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473366 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/December: Found match for regex: :No, that's nonsense. It's just an alternative spelling. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:08, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473366 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/December: Found match for regex: :Google Translate says it means "Everyone knew it." —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:09, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473366 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/December: Found match for regex: ::: What the guy who ran the hardware store in your town should have been called is {{m|en|de facto}} mayor. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:40, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473366 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/December: Found match for regex: ::::: This is probably one of the least offensive images of toplessness at Commons, except maybe this one. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:43, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 4473366 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/December: Found match for regex: :::::: I definitely wouldn't use an image of a male, because the term topless almost always refers to women. The corresponding term referring to a male is {{m|en|shirtless}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:53, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 4473366 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/December: Found match for regex: ::: Or with an immersion blender. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:11, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 4473366 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/December: Found match for regex: ::::::: I would say we can merge (in the sense of "put all the lexical information in one entry and leave the other as an {{tl|alternative spelling of}}"), but we can't redirect because purée is also a French word, while puree isn't; puree is also an Italian word, while purée isn't; and puree and purée are apparently two distinct and unrelated words in Finnish. So a redirect is out of the question. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 23:07, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 4473366 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/December: Found match for regex: ::::::::: Ah. To me, "redirect" always means using #REDIRECT. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 23:17, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 4473367 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/January: Found match for regex: ::: I do think we need a sense of dead that's wholly or partially synonymous with necrotic. I'm not sure if dead skin is considered necrotic, though. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:40, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473367 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/January: Found match for regex: :: Trawling through Google Books I'm not finding much besides the yearbook of the University of Utah and a song called "Utonian Automatic". There's this that uses it as an adjective synonymous with Utahn/Utahan, and then there are this and , which are only snippet views, so I don't have enough context to figure out what they're referring to. I suspect they're referring to a fictional country being used as a placeholder in an example scenario, but I'm not sure. Otherwise just incorrectly spaced scannos for Plutonian and the like. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:03, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473367 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/January: Found match for regex: :::::: The usual German word for a legal minor is {{m|de|Minderjähriger}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:22, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473367 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/January: Found match for regex: ::::::::Yes, to the best of my knowledge German law does stipulate that the word Kind in any statute refers to a person under 14 years old, while the word Jugendlicher refers to a person between 14 and 17 inclusive. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:44, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473367 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/January: Found match for regex: :I've never heard of iċ being pronounced /ik/ in Old English; what's the evidence for it? Campbell's Old English Grammar doesn't mention it, but he does say that affrication was blocked/undone before a consonant, so it's possible that if /ik/ is real, it started out as a variant form before a verb starting with a consonant, while /itʃ/ was used elsewhere. He does also mention the variant {{m|ang|ih}} in Northumbrian, and says this is probably the origin of the modern English word. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:13, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473367 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/January: Found match for regex: :Oh, now I see northern Middle English and Scots ik. Campbell mentions that the lack of affrication in northern dialectal forms {{m|en|brig||bridge}}, {{m|en|rig||ridge}}, {{m|en|steek||stitch}}, {{m|en|eg||edge}}, {{m|en|seg||sedge}}, {{m|en|weg||wedge}}, {{m|en|birk||birch}}, and {{m|enm|benk||bench}} is attributable to "complete failure to assibilate by Scandinavian settlers"; so maybe ik is also Scandinavian influence from ON {{m|non|ek}}. At any rate, now I'm thinking dialectal variation is more likely than free variation within a single dialect. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:22, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473367 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/January: Found match for regex: :I interpret this to mean that "abature" is singular and "abatures" is plural, but that the plural form is the one that usually occurs, while the singular is rare. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:27, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473367 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/January: Found match for regex: ** en-GB does have {{m|en|honourable}} though, right, not {{m|en|honorable}}? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:31, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473367 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/January: Found match for regex: :No, I agree, "Mir ist es kalt" isn't possible. Nevertheless, "Mir ist kalt" isn't quirky case either. The sentence simply has no expressed subject. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:50, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473367 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/January: Found match for regex: ::Google Books can't even find enough instances of "mir ist es kalt" to make an ngram comparison of it with "mir ist kalt". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:01, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473367 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/January: Found match for regex: ::: Our definition doesn't say a unicorn is a horned horse, it says it resembles "a horse with a single, straight, spiraled horn projecting from its forehead". It is true, though, that unicorns as depicted in art from the Middle Ages on are different from horses in more ways than just the horn. The painting we use to illustrate shows a beast with cloven hooves and a beard, which horses don't have, though the tale looks more like a horse's tail than a lion's tail to me. But these details are probably best kept in the encyclopedia article rather than here. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:53, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473367 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/January: Found match for regex: ::::: There are plenty of books in English describing the unicorn as having cloven hooves and a beard, e.g. , . —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:19, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473367 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/January: Found match for regex: Is there anyone around who knows Indonesian? Johanna-Hypatia, Malaysiaboy, Taxman1913, anyone else? Is {{diff|36204145|text=this edit}} legit? Normally I'd be inclined to revert an anon who changes both the etymology and the meaning of a word, but in fact I am more inclined to believe that Indonesian borrowed the Dutch word for "bomb" than that it borrowed the Dutch word for "tree". Or are they both right (in which case we need to list two separate etymology sections)? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:11, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473367 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/January: Found match for regex: *OK, thanks everyone! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:29, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473367 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/January: Found match for regex: : Aɴɢʀ, Malaysiaboy, Renard Migrant, Μετάknowledge, Anatoli T.: Sorry for joining in so late. 'Bomb' is the only meaning of bom to which I can attest. It is a very common word and used frequently on television news. The official dictionary of the language the government publishes has three entries for bom. The first is 'bomb'. The second entry is as Johanna-Hypatia says: 1. a pole for pulling a carriage or cart; 2. a joist; 3. a boom - this is really any type of pole from which things like sails or anchors on a ship or a mosquito net over one's bed are hung; 4. gate at a tollbooth. This second entry is obviously derived from the Dutch {{l|nl|boom}}. But there's no indication that it means 'tree' in Indonesian. The common word for 'tree' is {{l|id|pohon}}. The definition in the second entry is not marked archaic, as the government usually does with words that are nearly obsolete. My wife, a college-educated native speaker, is unable to attest to this second sense of the word. The third entry is a word from the {{w|Biak language}} that the government has judged is used commonly enough in Indonesian to merit a dictionary entry. It is defined as a 'spear used as a dowry'. I doubt anyone other than those familiar with the culture of Biak Island could attest to this definition. Taxman1913 (talk) 05:29, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473367 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/January: Found match for regex: :::::: It's old-fashioned enough to be dated perhaps, but not really archaic. I wouldn't be surprised to see it in a book from the 1940s; I don't expect to have to look all the way back to the King James Bible or Spenser to find it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:39, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473367 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/January: Found match for regex: :::::::: You mean more common in the second sense than in the first? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:10, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473367 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/January: Found match for regex: :This page translates Italian {{m|it|balme|g=p}} as "rock shelters", and this page translates it as "protruding rocks". It's very hard to search for because of the large amount of interference from words meaning {{m|en|balm}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:04, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473367 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/January: Found match for regex: {{ping|Hekaheka}} and anyone else who does Finnish: is {{m|fi|symbooli}} a common enough misspelling to warrant keeping, or should we RFD it? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:31, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473367 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/January: Found match for regex: :Of course. The use of "ax" for "ask" goes clear back to Old English. There's nothing modern about it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:55, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473367 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/January: Found match for regex: :::ಠ_ಠ —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:17, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473368 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/February: Found match for regex: :They're called guide words (a term we don't have, but see ). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:48, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473368 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/February: Found match for regex: :: Merriam-Webster, Oxford Dictionaries, and American Heritage all include the {{IPAchar|/ɡɹɪ.ˈmeɪs/}} variant. Can't say I've ever heard it myself, but it's in them. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:17, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473368 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/February: Found match for regex: ::{{w|Garner's Modern American Usage}} quotes someone who claims that /ɡɹɪˈmeɪs/ was the preferred pronunciation until the 1970s and it was only the introduction of the character Grimace in McDonald's advertising that switched the pronunciation to /ˈɡɹɪmɪs/, but I don't believe for a moment that McDonald's singlehandedly all but eliminated the older pronunciation from modern speech. I wonder what the oldest dictionary is that sanctions the modern pronunciation. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:30, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473368 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/February: Found match for regex: ::Being widely used isn't one of our Criteria for inclusion, but being idiomatic is. And a woodwind player is still just a ] ], so there's no need for a separate entry. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:14, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473368 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/February: Found match for regex: ::::: "Properly" meaning giving your preferred pronunciation first, as opposed to the one used by the majority of Americans? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:00, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473368 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/February: Found match for regex: ::::::: Where did you get the idea we give mergerless pronunciations first? I'm unaware of that convention and have never followed it. Especially in a pronunciation labeled General American, a nonmerged pronunciation is quite marginal, since most Americans without the merger don't speak GenAm, but rather a Northeastern or Southern variety. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:21, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473368 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/February: Found match for regex: :::{{m|en|queue}}, {{m|en|aloud}}, and {{m|en|symbol}} don't have separate lines for RP and GA, and the latter two don't have any homophones. It might be confusing to illustrate the use of {{tl|hyphenation}} with a word that doesn't hyphenate. {{m|en|altar}} has the same problem as {{m|en|carrot}}, namely two different pronunciations in GA (depending on presence vs. absence of the cot-caught merger this time instead of the Mary-marry-merry merger), but really at this point the only controversy with {{m|en|carrot}} is which GA pronunciation to list first, and I don't think that's an important enough issue to disqualify it from being used as an example. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:58, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473368 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/February: Found match for regex: :::::{{m|en|wholly}} and {{m|en|holy}} aren't homophones in some accents. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:05, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473368 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/February: Found match for regex: ::::::: No, {{m|en|wholly}} has a new phoneme in those accents: see {{w|Wholly-holy split}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:45, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473368 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/February: Found match for regex: :: One of Daniel's desiderata is a word with homophones. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:46, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473368 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/February: Found match for regex: :I feel like this is more a function of the ambiguity of the verb "to be"—that it can be either habitual or episodic—than anything idiomatic about the phrase "in school". A similar ambiguity is found in "He's working", which can mean either "He's at work right now" or "He has a job". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:06, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473368 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/February: Found match for regex: ::I can hear the English audio file, but it is rather noisy and considerably quieter than the French. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:29, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473368 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/February: Found match for regex: ::It's certainly part of my passive vocabulary, but since I pretty much have nothing to do with slaughterhouses, neither abattoir nor slaughterhouse is really part of my active vocabulary. I have no sense at all of one being significantly less common than the other, since they're both very rare in my speech. One fourth of practically nothing is practically nothing. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:35, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473368 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/February: Found match for regex: :I can only imagine saying it that way if I had already said it normally twice and the person I was talking to still didn't understand me. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:13, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473368 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/February: Found match for regex: :: In the military, aren't they usually careful about not referring to handheld firearms as "guns", reserving that term for big things like cannons? Compared to cannons and the like, miniguns are pretty small. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:18, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473368 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/February: Found match for regex: :: Way out of my area of knowledge here, but from context I suspect it means one of the first or last days of the period, when the flow is at its lightest. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:52, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473368 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/February: Found match for regex: :The page he's talking about is עברי. {{w|Eber}} also says the name may have been given "in reference to those who crossed the Euphrates river with Abram from Paddan Aram to the land of Canaan." —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:38, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473368 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/February: Found match for regex: ::: I've always interpreted it the same way as Eiríkr. Certainly the only possible plural for me is "language isolates", never *"languages isolate" (parallel to "attorneys general"). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:41, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473368 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/February: Found match for regex: ::::: Yes, though not in the sense of "language isolate". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:31, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473368 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/February: Found match for regex: :::: {{ping|Chuck Entz}}: "More perfect" in the U.S. constitution means "more nearly perfect". Thomas Jefferson was not claiming the union was already perfect; he was saying it was not perfect, but that the Constitution would bring it a bit closer to perfection. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:30, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473368 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/February: Found match for regex: ::Neither the opinion that "opaque" is alleged to be an absolute nor the opinion that it sounds awkward changes the fact that it is amply attested: , , , , , . That fact is sufficient in itself for us to include it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:26, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473369 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/March: Found match for regex: :::::: The headline in the CNN article linked to above is "Donald Trump's pants are on fire", which suggests that one derived term from {{m|en|liar liar pants on fire}} is {{m|en|one's pants are on fire||to tell lies}}. Looking through Boogle Gooks, I think {{m|en|pants on fire}} stands without "liar liar" before it often enough that it deserves either an entry of its own or at least a redirect to the full version. It very rarely stands alone in any grammatical relationship to a fuller sentence, so I'd just call it a phrase. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:40, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473369 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/March: Found match for regex: :Sorry, dictionaries are not the place for fanciful etymologies driven solely by wishful thinking. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:38, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473369 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/March: Found match for regex: :There seem to be many hypotheses. CNRTL takes it back to *reexvadare; the Larousse Dictionnaire étymologique takes it back to either {{l|la|rē-}} + {{l|la|aestuō}} or {{l|la|rē-}} + {{l|la|ex-}} + {{l|la|vagus}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:42, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473369 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/March: Found match for regex: :I'd call them all determiners. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:13, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473369 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/March: Found match for regex: ::: The fact that they behave like determiners: they modify nouns (heckuva deal) and adjective + noun phrases (heckuva good deal), but they don't occur in the predicative or comparative/superlative. They can occur everywhere uncontroversial determiners like every occur, and can't occur anywhere uncontroversial determiners don't occur. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:35, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473369 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/March: Found match for regex: :::::: Hmm, good point. Maybe the determiner is actually a helluva, though on the other hand I've also heard "one helluva". Maybe they are just contractions. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:46, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473369 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/March: Found match for regex: :::::::Is there any natural human language that doesn't have determiners? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:54, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473369 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/March: Found match for regex: ::::::::: Linguistic theory, including the definition of determiner has changed a lot in the 67 years since Bloomfield's death. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:54, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473369 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/March: Found match for regex: :The IPA is right; it should be stressed on the first syllable, not the second. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:25, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473369 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/March: Found match for regex: ::The audio file is wrong (it had /ˈθiːsəs/ instead of /ˈθiːsiːz/), so I've removed it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:05, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473369 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/March: Found match for regex: :I didn't try to get the file deleted at Commons because I know Commons deletion discussions well enough to know people there will say that being a mispronunciation isn't a good enough reason to delete a file. They'll say, "if it's wrong, just don't use it". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:24, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473369 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/March: Found match for regex: :: @Aɴɢʀ: Any diff or link? --Dan Polansky (talk) 11:23, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473369 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/March: Found match for regex: ::: To what? My personal experience at Commons? No, of course not. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:30, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473369 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/March: Found match for regex: :::: @Aɴɢʀ: Your experience at Commons is experience with something online, isn't it? Do some keyword searches come to mind that would help verify that deletion from Commons is hard and see whether this is because of policies or admins? And is renaming also hard, to, say, "...-nonstandard.oga"? --Dan Polansky (talk) 11:41, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473369 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/March: Found match for regex: ::::: Renaming wouldn't be hard. Deletion from Commons wouldn't be hard because of policies or admins, but because of the general attitude there of keeping anything that's freely licensed and isn't obscene. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:44, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473369 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/March: Found match for regex: :::::: @Aɴɢʀ: Thank you. Is renaming problematic files on Commons a practical way of solving this problem, by your assessment? Or does it at least appear promising? --Dan Polansky (talk) 12:03, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473369 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/March: Found match for regex: ::::::: Yes, I think it's promising and practical and probably the way that will cause the least drama. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:28, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473369 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/March: Found match for regex: :It's probably /ˈɡɪbli/, but I've never heard the word pronounced, and trying to find a video online of someone pronouncing it is almost impossible due to interference from Studio Ghibli and the Maserati Ghibli. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:05, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473369 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/March: Found match for regex: :No, why should there be something wrong? ghibli says its plural is ghiblis; ghiblis says it's the plural of ghibli. Looks right to me. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:31, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473369 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/March: Found match for regex: :::: Anyway, it's not just this entry. Look up pretty much any countable English noun and there will be a link to the entry for the plural form. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:17, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473369 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/March: Found match for regex: **I don't know any Indonesian, but I assume that {{m|id|menjalankan}} is the causative of {{m|id|jalan}}, and I can imagine that the causative of a verb meaning "to go on, go forward; to walk; to pass" could also cover such actions as compelling someone (by violence or threat) to go somewhere, and maybe even something as simple as successfully asking someone to go somewhere. (If I ask my mother to go to the market for me, and she does, maybe I have menjalankaned her to the market.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:13, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473369 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/March: Found match for regex: **All that said, however, at {{m|id|jalan}} itself the gloss of {{m|id|menjalankan}} under Derived terms is "to drive, to operate; to start, to put into operation; to carry out, to perform". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:15, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473369 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/March: Found match for regex: :Probably pretty close to how modern North Americans pronounce it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:06, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473369 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/March: Found match for regex: :::: I agree that it sounds odd in the plural; nevertheless, searching b.g.c reveals that while the plural is rare, it isn't unattestable: , , . —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:16, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473369 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/March: Found match for regex: ::Possibly, though we do have an entry for refractory rhyme. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:49, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473369 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/March: Found match for regex: :::: It looks like the module is incomplete; {{tl|grc-conj|aor-hmi}} isn't adding stress marks the way the other components of {{tl|grc-conj}} do. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:08, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473369 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/March: Found match for regex: :Fixed. The may be present phonetically sometimes, but it's not phonemic. The syllabification looks OK. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:31, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473370 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/April: Found match for regex: ::Fixed. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:09, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473370 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/April: Found match for regex: :There are probably many reasons, of which imitating AAVE is only one. Other possible reasons would be to avoid sounding too "posh" or "fancy" in front of people who would use it themselves unselfconsciously, for humorous effect, and so on. And it wasn't that long ago that it wasn't considered uneducated in the U.S.: when I read Little Women, I was struck how the main characters (educated white women from Massachusetts in the 1860s and '70s) invariably said "he don't" and "she don't", although the narrative itself never did. (The text currently at Wikisource was taken from an edition where it was standardized to "(s)he doesn't", but the original edition uses the nonstandard form in direct quotation.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:28, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473370 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/April: Found match for regex: ::{{tl|lb|en|historical}}, perhaps, or is it too soon for that? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:13, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473370 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/April: Found match for regex: :You're right; the declension table itself at {{m|non|því}} showed what's right. I've fixed the entry now. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:09, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473370 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/April: Found match for regex: :It can't be a participle (unless it's a typo for *deretrāns), but it could be a noun or regular adjective. Definitely not a verb, though, not in that form. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:45, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473370 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/April: Found match for regex: {{ping|Alexius Isclanus|Etimo|Gloria sah|GianWiki|IvanScrooge98|Johanna-Hypatia|Tn4196}} and anyone else with good Italian: are these edits good: {{diff|37996000}} and {{diff|37996004}}? The first one seems to be replacing sourced info with unsourced, and the second seems to be replacing more specific info with more general info. But maybe the info we had before was wrong, and the replacements are correct. Can someone take a look? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:01, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473370 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/April: Found match for regex: :::Mille grazie for your help! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:28, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473370 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/April: Found match for regex: :Is it necessary to gloss it at all at this entry? Couldn't the entry just say something along the lines of "Hiragana reading of {{l|ja|茗荷}}", leaving all lexical info to the main entry? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:57, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473370 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/April: Found match for regex: :That description is wrong. Other class 3 verbs where the first consonant of the cluster was an obstruent include {{m|gem-pro|*bregdaną}}, {{m|gem-pro|*brestaną}}, {{m|gem-pro|*flehtaną}}, {{m|gem-pro|*hrespaną}}, {{m|gem-pro|*wreskwaną}}, and {{m|gem-pro|*þreskaną}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:23, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473370 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/April: Found match for regex: :::I think so, yes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:39, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473370 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/April: Found match for regex: The only pronunciation we have listed for {{m|en|says}} is /sɛz/ (to rhyme with fez), which is the traditional pronunciation and, I believe, the only one used in the U.S. But increasingly I've been hearing /seɪz/ (to rhyme with gaze) from speakers from England. Do any English people here have a feeling for how common it is? Is it nonstandard/proscribed? More common among younger speakers? Regionally restricted? Anything like that? Is it encountered in other countries besides the UK, or indeed outside England? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:03, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473370 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/April: Found match for regex: ::::::: I've added it and labeled it "nonstandard" without marking any region. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:45, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473370 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/April: Found match for regex: :: Yes, the change of a sonorant to an obstruent (Wiyot, Bantu) or a fricative to a stop or affricate is fortition. The change of a voiced obstruent to a voiceless one is also fortition and can also be called "hardening", which is why Germans call final devoicing {{m|de|Auslautverhärtung|Auslaut'''verhärtung'''}}. The Belarusian sense comes from a sense of {{m|en|hard||unpalatalized, velarized}} that is unique (or nearly unique) to Slavic linguistics. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:38, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473370 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/April: Found match for regex: :::: See {{w|Sonority hierarchy}}. If "soft" means "more sonorous" and "hard" means "less sonorous", then fricatives are softer than affricates, affricates are softer than stops, and voiced obstruents are softer than voiceless ones. The only one that isn't related to sonority is palatalized vs. nonpalatalized. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:33, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473370 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/April: Found match for regex: :::::: "Hard" and "soft" are really laymen's terms anyway. They have no meaning in phonetics and phonology at all. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:21, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473370 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/April: Found match for regex: ::: I think Appendix: namespace can be used for this. We used to have Appendix:List of unattested Irish words, so why not Appendix:List of unattested Navajo words? It would be for words we believe to exist but for which we cannot find even a single mention in a dictionary or grammar book, let alone a use in a permanently archived source. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:45, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473371 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/May: Found match for regex: ::::::: Is it common in Canadian English? I don't think it would be understood in the U.S. either; at least, I require context to understand the sentence quoted above. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:12, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473371 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/May: Found match for regex: :Don't they pronounce it , same as virtually all other Spanish speakers? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:57, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473371 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/May: Found match for regex: ::There's no rule saying we have to use only precomposed characters. We can use U+0337 COMBINING SHORT SOLIDUS OVERLAY to create u̷ or U+0338 COMBINING LONG SOLIDUS OVERLAY to create u̸. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:50, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473371 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/May: Found match for regex: :::But the sounds do not exhibit complementary distribution, so they aren't separate phonemes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:58, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473371 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/May: Found match for regex: ::Aɴɢʀ, have You ever been a GA speaker living in an RP land? Perhaps You're an RP speaker in an RP land with RP dictionaries and your lack of broad experience may be producing tunnel vision. One friend, a Northern English immigrant in Australia broke down in tears because every single staff member they approached in Target to help them find a battery /ˈbæ.tə.ɹi/ heard their /ˈbæʔ.tʰɹi/ as 'bat tree' /ˈbæʔt.tɹi/, even though they were a Target employee. One GA immigrant relative was offended in Australia by hearing something they'd completed being called 'sorted' /ˈsɔː.tɪd/, an unfamiliar slang term they heard as sordid /ˈsɔɹɾɨd/. Then trying to incorporate the new term, they said sorted /ˈsɔːr.ɾɪd/ but it was heard as sordid /ˈsɔː.dɪd/. Beyond the complementary distribution, the ability to change the meaning by substituting one word-medial t sound for the other marks separate phonemes. Warmest Regards, :)—_thecurran Speak your mind ^{my past} 05:37, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473371 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/May: Found match for regex: :::I've never been accused of being an RP speaker before! No, I'm American and a speaker of GenAm. I also have a Ph.D. in linguistics with a specialization in phonology, and I know that GA (like RP) has no phoneme /ʔ/, but /t/ has an allophone . Batman can be pronounced with a glottal stop, or with an unreleased , or even with an unreleased (likewise, atmosphere can be pronounced with , , or ), but the fact that debuccalization is not obligatory and an alveolar stop is always possible (and not only in careful speech but even in casual speech!) establishes pretty clearly that these words still have /t/ in their underlying representation. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:36, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473371 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/May: Found match for regex: ::Aɴɢʀ, I really stuck my foot down my throat this time; I'm pulling my head in and apologizing. Am I also wrong about /ʔ/ being involved in the majority GA pronunciation of 'Batman'? Do You have any thoughts on the aforementioned short info-graphic? Warmest Regards, :)—_thecurran Speak your mind ^{my past} 00:44, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473371 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/May: Found match for regex: :::I said myself that Batman can be pronounced with a glottal stop. I'm not denying that for a moment. All I'm denying is that the glottal stop is phonemic. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:03, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473371 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/May: Found match for regex: :::Shows how bad the Internet is at conveying emotions. My feelings weren't hurt at all, I just wanted you to understand that you are right that words like Batman and atmosphere are (often) pronounced with a glottal stop, but that doesn't mean the glottal stop is phonemic. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:44, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473371 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/May: Found match for regex: ::I think Hinkelstein is the usual word for menhir in the German translations of the Asterix comics, in case someone wants to look for attestation. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:57, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473371 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/May: Found match for regex: :It isn't in Lewis and Short or Oxford, so it seems not to be Classical Latin at all. Maybe someone with access to a Medieval Latin dictionary could look it up. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:40, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473371 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/May: Found match for regex: :::Unfortunately the entry you linked to above doesn't provide any information about what the third and fourth principal parts would be. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:51, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473371 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/May: Found match for regex: ::{{done}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:01, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473371 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/May: Found match for regex: :::: Do any varieties of English allow /ʃj-/? Certainly RP doesn't, and I thought East Anglian was famous for reducing /juː/ to /uː/ everywhere, in even more contexts than American English. For example, I thought the stereotypical East Anglian pronunciation of {{m|en|beautiful}} was /ˈbuːtɪfəl/ (cf. w:Phonological history of English consonant clusters#Yod-dropping). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:54, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473371 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/May: Found match for regex: :We could probably stand to separate them out by accent. I don't think Americans would usually say /ɪndaɪˈɹɛkt/, nor Brits /ɪndəˈɹɛkt/. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:56, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473371 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/May: Found match for regex: :::: Well, they agree with me that Brits are unlikely to say /ɪndəˈɹɛkt/ (with /ə/, as opposed to /ɪndɪˈɹɛkt/ with /ɪ/). I stand by my statement that Americans would not usually say /ɪndaɪˈɹɛkt/, but perhaps it's not totally unheard of. Merriam-Webster and American Heritage do both list /ɪndaɪˈɹɛkt/, but if I ever heard an American say it, I'd probably think he had been living in Britain for a while. (Or was actually Canadian and not American after all.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:16, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473371 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/May: Found match for regex: ::::::: There's no difference between /ʌɪ/ and /aɪ/; they're just two different ways to transcribe the same sound. The convention at Wiktionary is to use the latter, while the convention in Oxford dictionaries is to use the former. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:08, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473371 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/May: Found match for regex: ::I think this is a case where we can get away with a hard redirect to for crying out loud. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:43, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473371 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/May: Found match for regex: ::::We don't use hard redirects a lot, but in cases where it's unlikely that the page would ever be used for another language (as is the case here), we do use them sometimes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:49, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473371 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/May: Found match for regex: :: There's definitely a verb {{m|en|contour}} in reference to makeup ("In Asia they don't contour their cheeks", "I could tell that he contoured his cheeks and wore mascara too", "Although most women think that contouring the nose is strictly to make it look smaller or narrower or longer, ..."), and I found several other uses on b.g.c where the verb seems to mean something like "trace the contour of, follow the contour of". Unfortunately I'm not sure how exactly to define the makeup sense, so I don't feel able to add it myself. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:16, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473371 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/May: Found match for regex: :::: For the makeup sense, yes; but it's also used as a verb in non-makeup senses, and there it seems to mean "trace the contour of, follow the contour of". In the makeup sense, I think (but I'm not positive) I've heard "to contour" used in contrast to "to highlight", where "to contour" means "to apply darker makeup to make something less prominent" while "to highlight" means "to apply lighter makeup to make something more prominent". For example, I saw a video with two drag queens where one recommended to the other one that she should "contour your Adam's apple", where the idea is not to improve the contour of the Adam's apple but to make it less prominent. Though you could say the idea is to improve the overall contour of the throat. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:27, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473372 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/June: Found match for regex: :Sure, especially if you can figure how to specify when it's appropriate to use wie this way, since normally "What is X?" in German uses {{m|de|was}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:19, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473372 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/June: Found match for regex: ::: Maybe. It also occurs to me that you can say "Wie ist X" whenever it's synonymous with "Wie lautet X": "Wie lautet dein Name?"/"Wie ist dein Name?" (alongside the more usual "Wie heißt du") and "Wie lautet deine Nummer?"/"Wie ist deine Nummer?". There are probably counterexamples, though. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:49, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473372 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/June: Found match for regex: ::::: "How are you called?" sounds like foreigners' English to me, but I may be mistaken. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:27, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473372 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/June: Found match for regex: :Merriam-Webster's Geographical Dictionary gives /mɛn/ for the French river and province. I wouldn't be surprised if /meɪn/ is also attestable, though, not only because of the influence of the U.S. state but also because of the way English speakers tend to handle French /ɛː/ (compare {{m|en|Seine}}, which fluctuates between /sɛn/ and /seɪn/). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:08, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473372 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/June: Found match for regex: :: From its syntax and semantics in English I'd either call it a phrase or a postposition. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:09, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473372 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/June: Found match for regex: :I'd say {{m|en|clack}}. "Typewriter clacking" gets a bunch of hits on b.g.c. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:15, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473372 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/June: Found match for regex: :No, it's a preposition. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:51, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473372 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/June: Found match for regex: :I don't think so. Islamic terrorism is still just Islamic + terrorism, even if some politicians avoid using it so as not to antagonize people they think may still be useful to them in the future. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:13, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473372 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/June: Found match for regex: :The hi part could just be a loanword, and then the whole expression is French. Reminds me of German-speaking Switzerland, where you hear people say merci schön. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:55, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473372 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/June: Found match for regex: :I don't know about attesting it, but the definition he's going for but is too ignorant of English vocabulary to write is something like "Not identifying with any particular race". It's parallel to the equally new term {{m|en|agender||not identifying with any particular gender}}; both of them are probably formed by analogy with {{m|en|asexual}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:59, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473372 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/June: Found match for regex: :At Wiktionary, we create entries for words that have real-world usage by multiple authors, independently of each other, over the space of more than a year, in durably archived sources (which usually means published books and periodicals, though there are some exceptions). We don't have entries for words that our editors and their friends made up one night and that no one else uses. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:21, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473372 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/June: Found match for regex: :::: File:pl-miasto.ogg sounds like to me. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:14, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473372 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/June: Found match for regex: :::::::: It's international because it's the alphabet of the the International Phonetic Association. This blog post by {{w|John C. Wells}} provides important insight into the obligatory vagueness of IPA symbols. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:14, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473372 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/June: Found match for regex: :: Maybe I do have that difficulty. I'm most accustomed to palatalized consonants in Irish, where (depending on dialect) phonemic /bʲoː/ can surface as phonetic . —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:43, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473372 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/June: Found match for regex: :The link to webster1913.com provided on the page shows Prod"i*tor, which I take to indicate stress on the first syllable and the /d/ belonging to the previous syllable. Most dictionaries only show a consonant between two vowels as belonging to the syllable of the preceding vowel if that vowel is short (lax), so I would interpret Prod"i*tor as representing RP /ˈpɹɒdɪtə/ and GA /ˈpɹɑdɪtɚ/. If RP /ˈpɹəʊdɪtə/ ~ GA /ˈpɹoʊdɪtɚ/ had been intended, they probably would have written Pro"di*tor instead. Since it's an obsolete word, though, it will be very different to find anyone who intuitively knows how to pronounce it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:07, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473372 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/June: Found match for regex: :::::: If the pronunciation of an obsolete word can be reasonably deduced I see no reason not to add it. There's any number of reasons why a text including obsolete words would be read aloud. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:32, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473372 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/June: Found match for regex: ::::::::: Sure there is. The editors of Webster's 1913 may very well have known how actors and poets pronounced the word when they were reading old texts aloud. And being reasonably deducible is no grounds for omitting a pronunciation section, or we wouldn't have a pronunciation section for {{m|en|pit}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:48, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473372 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/June: Found match for regex: :: Longman's Pronunciation Dictionary lists /ˈtɔːtɔɪs/ and /ˈtɔːtɔɪz/ as British non-RP pronunciations. The pronunciation we currently list, however, does not rhyme with Ms., even if we're only talking about the second syllable. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:44, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473372 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/June: Found match for regex: *I can only find them capitalized as the names of specific neighborhoods in specific cities. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:14, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473372 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/June: Found match for regex: :It represents /i/ with a high pitch accent. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:31, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473372 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/June: Found match for regex: :Whether the two tone symbols combine or not depends on what font you use, I think. At any rate, on my computer they're combined in your comment above. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:33, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473372 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/June: Found match for regex: Is it really so nonstandard to use {{m|en|candelabra}} as a singular noun? I'm not sure I've ever even heard {{m|en|candelabrum}} before today; certainly in my own speech {{m|en|candelabra}} is the normal word. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:07, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473372 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/June: Found match for regex: :::: I'm having trouble finding any unambiguous use of "preinfarction" as a noun in bgc. "Preinfaction syndrome" may actually be the English term for {{m|es|preinfarto}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:07, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473372 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/June: Found match for regex: ::::I doubt it was even popularized by Empire. I've seen Empire more times than I can count, and I don't even remember anyone saying it. It's certainly not one of the "quotable quotes" from the movie, like "Do, or do not. There is no try" or "'I love you.' 'I know'" or "And I thought they smelled bad on the outside" or "Laugh it up, fuzzball". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:39, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473372 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/June: Found match for regex: :: To be honest I don't think we need either picture there, not because of explicitness or otherwise, but simply because sexuality is an abstract noun, not something that a picture can be taken of. Pictures of people in sexual-romantic relationships may make sense for an encyclopedia article on sexuality, but not a dictionary entry. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:57, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473372 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/June: Found match for regex: :::::: I've gone ahead and removed the images. I'll leave improving the definitions to other people. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:15, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473372 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/June: Found match for regex: :Which language? The English looks fine. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:08, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473372 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/June: Found match for regex: ::: To me, the problem is not that it's an idiom, but that it's too colloquial for the encyclopedic tone for which Wikipedia strives. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:09, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473373 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/July: Found match for regex: :: In American McDonald'ses it's pronounced "fi-LAY o' fish" and that doesn't feel pretentious to us at all. But my experience of American English includes only the word {{m|en|filet}}; I don't think {{m|en|fillet}} was ever a part of my active vocabulary, and not a very significant part of my passive vocabulary, either. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:33, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473373 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/July: Found match for regex: :::: Well, that's another pondian difference then. In US English you'd be fileting a fish and pronouncing it to rhyme with "praying". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:42, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473373 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/July: Found match for regex: ::(edit conflict) Separated out by national variety, the two-r version is still much more common in en-GB, but the one-r version has become more common in en-US since 2001. (In my own writing I wouldn't use either form, but would just use {{m|en|transfer}} as a noun.) "Referal", on the other hand, is virtually nonexistent in both national varieties. Interestingly, Chrome's spellchecker, when set to en-US, marks "transferral" as a spelling error but approves "transferal". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:29, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473373 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/July: Found match for regex: ::::::::::: Even the page Donnanz linked to gives the option of pronouncing the a as in father, it just doesn't have a corresponding sound file. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:15, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473373 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/July: Found match for regex: :: As I remember, on All Creatures Great and Small the farmers often addressed the vets as "vet'n'ry", so maybe veterinary by itself can be used colloquially as a noun in some varieties of British English. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:00, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473373 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/July: Found match for regex: :::::: Yes. In American English, vet is short for both veteran and veterinarian. You have to use context (or the unclipped term) to distinguish them. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:57, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473373 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/July: Found match for regex: **I've made it an {{tl|alternative spelling of|þurh|lang=ang}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:20, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473373 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/July: Found match for regex: :: I think "ginger" as a noun referring to a redhead (as in "He's a ginger") was virtually unknown in American English until it was popularized by South Park. I can't say whether it was used that way in British English before that, but I suspect it was. (South Park also introduced Americans to the word {{m|en|minge}}, which was previously unknown in the States.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:20, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473373 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/July: Found match for regex: :Webster's Third New International and {{w|Kenyon and Knott}} both say taffety is pronounced with a final /i/. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:13, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473373 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/July: Found match for regex: ::I think either of those is a good solution. But we do also have to resign ourselves to the fact that not every non-English word is going to be able to be listed in the translation section of some English word. Wiktionary is very good at being an English dictionary, and it's very good at being an X-to-English dictionary for any other language X, but its design simply won't let it be a good English-to-X dictionary. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:40, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473374 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/August: Found match for regex: ::::: Besides poetic style, headlinese is another context where you might find substantivized adjectives without a preceding determiner, though there too the dative (e.g. Mann hilft Jugendlicher) is more likely than the genitive (Mann rettet Mutter deutscher Jugendlicher???) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:56, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473374 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/August: Found match for regex: :::What about casual speech? Is there a difference between русский and русски in casual or rapid speech? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:32, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473374 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/August: Found match for regex: :Please provide links, otherwise it's difficult to follow what you're talking about. I assume you're referring to the etymology sections of Hittite and of de:Hethiter (since en-wikt's own entry Hethiter doesn't have an etymology section). Anyway, you're right, the Biblical Hebrew form is {{l|he|חִתִּי}} (with a tav), not {{l|he|חִטִּים}} (with a tet). I've fixed our entry. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:11, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473374 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/August: Found match for regex: **I'd go so far as to say the street address includes the city, state/province (if necessary), ZIP code/postal code (if necessary), and so forth. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:07, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473374 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/August: Found match for regex: :: Hmm, I wonder. If we replace "unless" with "if ... not", we get "He will do his homework if there are not cartoons on TV". Although that statement would commonly be interpreted as meaning "if and only if there are not cartoons on TV", according to strict logic, it doesn't mean that. Strictly speaking, the sentence makes no prediction at all about what will happen if there are cartoons on TV. I don't know whether "unless" necessarily has to mean "if and only if ... not", or whether it simply means "if ... not" and thus also makes no prediction as to what will happen if there are cartoons on TV. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:03, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473374 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/August: Found match for regex: :I agree. The sense "pregnant" is already at {{m|la|gravidus}}; {{m|la|gravida}} and {{m|la|gravidā}} should just be nonlemma forms of {{m|la|gravidus}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:27, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473374 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/August: Found match for regex: ::Perhaps the OP was thrown off by the presence of {{m|fr|un}} in the recording. If so, he isn't the first and won't be the last to speak up about it. It can be disconcerting, especially for people with little or no French, to see accueil and hear un accueil. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:01, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473374 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/August: Found match for regex: :::As for oui sounding like "weh", isn't {{m|fr|ouais}} considered a different word, just as {{m|en|yeah}} is a different word from {{m|en|yes}}? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:06, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473374 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/August: Found match for regex: *: I'd also call it a {{m|en|votive candle}}, though to judge from the pics at Google Images, votive candles are somewhat taller than tealights. In everyday use, though, I don't think I'd bother with that distinction. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:06, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473374 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/August: Found match for regex: :I don't know, but it wouldn't surprise me. {{cog|de|Jungfrau}} is still grammatically feminine when applied to a male. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:01, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473374 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/August: Found match for regex: :: I know it from junior high and high school (in elementary school we didn't go from class to class much). There was a bell (and in my day it was a bell sound) to indicate the end of a class period, a second bell to warn you that you needed to be in class very soon, and the third bell—the tardy bell—which meant you were tardy if you weren't in the classroom by the time it rang. I don't think it's SOP since the bell itself isn't tardy. If the term were "tardiness bell" it would be SOP, but I'd say "tardy bell" is idiomatic. Not slang, though. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:18, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473374 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/August: Found match for regex: :: In the U.S., I never heard it at the private school in New York State I attended through age 8. I heard it for the first time at the pubilc school in Texas I started attending at age 9. I think I had to ask my parents or the teacher what the word "tardy" meant, because I had never heard it before. I still associate it almost exclusively with school. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:57, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473374 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/August: Found match for regex: ::: I'm a circumfix because I like to give hugs. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:04, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473375 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/September: Found match for regex: :: Any info on the etymology? Is it a joke "opposite" of virgin wool? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:16, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473375 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/September: Found match for regex: * German uses {{m|de|wievielter}} for this. The usage example there uses "what number". It's a significant gap in the English lexicon; when I try to explain it to English speakers who know no German, I say it means "how many-eth". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473375 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/September: Found match for regex: :I don't know if there is such a source, but it's good to keep in mind that place names are not always borrowed from the locals' own pronunciation. Calcutta might (for all I know) be filtered through a variety of other languages, such as Hindi or Portuguese. (Consider {{m|en|Japan}}, which obviously doesn't come straight from Nihon or Nippon but rather through some variety of Chinese like {{cog|nan|Ji̍t-pún}}, then Malay, then Portuguese and/or Dutch.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:00, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473375 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/September: Found match for regex: :What do others think? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:48, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473375 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/September: Found match for regex: ::: In this case, it's a prepositional phrase complement, rather than a direct object, that's in parentheses. I think it's clear enough to any user what they mean. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:00, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473375 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/September: Found match for regex: :: Yeah, either eye-dialect or written euphemism (like "d*mn" would be). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:40, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473375 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/September: Found match for regex: :It's probably the initials of the journalist who wrote the article. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:08, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473375 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/September: Found match for regex: ** Well, there's {{m|en|bacaw}} and its fuller former {{m|en|buck buck bacaw}}, but in practice they're both probably used more to accuse someone of cowardice than to denote the actual cry of a hen. (As for the feminine of "cock-a-doodle-doo", surely it's "cunt-a-doodle-doo".) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:38, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473375 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/September: Found match for regex: :To judge from Juniperites subulata and Juniperites acutifolia in the 1835 quote, it's feminine, which is odd since {{m|la|-itēs}} is normally masculine. But since neither Wikispecies nor Wikipedia has ever heard of Juniperites, and since our quotations all come from the 19th century, shouldn't we change the definition to something like "(historical) A name formerly applied to certain extinct fossil plants resembling the juniper, when they were believed to be a taxonomic genus"? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:50, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473375 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/September: Found match for regex: ::: British Scots vs. American Scots? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:40, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473375 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/September: Found match for regex: :: Yes. Apparently when monotonic orthography was introduced for Modern Greek, some typographers set the tonos as a vertical line rather than as a conventional acute accent. That's very confusing for polytonic writing (as in Ancient Greek) though, where the acute has to contrast with the grave. Ideally Ancient Greek should never be printed in a font that uses a vertical tonos rather than a slanted one. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:23, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473375 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/September: Found match for regex: :::: The trouble is, it doesn't have a different name and position in Unicode. A word like {{m|el|τόνος}} is Unicode-spelled exactly the same in monotonic/Modern and polytonic/Ancient. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:32, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473375 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/September: Found match for regex: :However, the MediaWiki software apparently merges them. When I type ] and ], they point to the exact same article (not even a hard redirect from one to the other): βουλή and βουλή. So while a typesetter might be able to make the difference in a printed document, we here at Wikimedia projects can't. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:37, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473375 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/September: Found match for regex: :::: I for one do not want βουλή#Ancient Greek and βουλή#Greek on separate pages, and if I've understood Wikitiki89 and Prosfilaes correctly, it isn't even technically possible for us to put them on separate pages. (Personally, I'd prefer to have ἅγιος & άγιος as well as βουλή & βουλῇ on the same page too, but there doesn't seem to be much popular support for that.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:30, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473375 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/September: Found match for regex: :::::: Another drawback to doing that only for Ancient Greek and not for Modern Greek is that Modern Greek was spelled polytonically until 1982 (and in some cases still is), which means we could wind up with three pages where we currently have two: αγιος for Ancient Greek, ἅγιος for (obsolete/archaic/dated) Modern Greek, and άγιος for post-1982 Modern Greek. So far I don't think we have any entries in polytonic Modern Greek, but in principle there's no reason we couldn't, is there? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:51, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473375 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/September: Found match for regex: :::: {{reply to|CodeCat}} We can tell that this is the phoneme /t/ and not /d/ because the surface pronunciation is not invariably : it's free variation between and . —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:11, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473375 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/September: Found match for regex: *Flapping is always optional in American English, and doesn't occur 100% of the time in environments where it's expected. Even if they're unaware of the spelling, Americans will generally be aware that otter has a /t/ and odder has a /d/, despite usually making them homophones. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:28, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473375 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/September: Found match for regex: :It was probably just a way of getting the entry into CAT:ga:Military. Sense 2 can probably be removed. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:46, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473375 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/September: Found match for regex: :Good question. I can't find any uses of the word "manlard" in connection with the eggplant anywhere on the Net except this entry of ours, its mirrors, and people quoting it. Looking through the history, the word "eggplant" was replaced by the word "manlard" in {{diff|35384071|text=an edit}} which Chuck Entz hid as "graffiti/vandalism" but neglected to actually revert. (Those links are probably visible only to admins.) I'll revert it now. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:09, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473375 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/September: Found match for regex: :::: I'd avoid the long mark and write /ˈkɹaɪsˈseɪk/. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:49, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473375 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/September: Found match for regex: :::::: Because that's the way you say it. Both syllables feel equally strongly stressed to me. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:54, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473375 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/September: Found match for regex: :I don't think so. We don't usually have separate entries for reflexive verbs, and senses 4 and 5 of fancy#Verb already seem to cover this. Maybe add a reflexive quote or usex to one of them. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:09, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473375 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/September: Found match for regex: : The Longman Pronunciation Dictionary by {{w|John C. Wells}} usually does a good job of listing widespread pronunciations even if they're nonstandard, but it makes no mention of a version stressed on the second syllable, only versions stressed on the first and last syllables. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:59, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473376 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/October: Found match for regex: We're missing at least one, and maybe several, biological senses of {{m|en|factor}}. It seems to be used to mean a protein responsible for the coagulation of blood, but I don't know enough about biology to write a cogent definition myself, nor do I know whether it also has other biological meanings. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:08, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473376 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/October: Found match for regex: : Wouldn't the language have to be called 仫佬語? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:20, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473376 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/October: Found match for regex: :: The line is "Maybe I pulled the panic cord". Perhaps she was thinking of the ripcord on a parachute, or the emergency brake cord on a train. I'm unaware of anything regularly called a "panic cord". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:45, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473376 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/October: Found match for regex: : https://en.wiktionary.orghttps://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Category:en:People&from=G. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:58, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473376 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/October: Found match for regex: * This is just trade + barb sense 2: 'a hurtful or disparaging remark'. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:18, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473376 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/October: Found match for regex: : I think by {{w|Osthoff's law}} it has to be short. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:35, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473376 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/October: Found match for regex: :: I figured the answer would come from a PIE analysis. Thanks, Aɴɢʀ. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 16:18, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473376 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::: From a PIE POV, in both etymologies the -αρ- comes from a syllabic r̥ in the zero grades kr̥p-/kʷr̥p-, and syllabic r̥ always gives short -ᾰρ-. My first answer was purely synchronic: because of Osthoff's law, long ᾱ can't appear before ρ in the same syllable, so the vowel in καρπός must be short. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:29, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473376 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/October: Found match for regex: :::: @Aɴɢʀ: Understood. I'm just not familiar with any of these laws. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 17:20, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473376 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/October: Found match for regex: :I've never heard of that. For me, the stressed pronunciations of {{m|en|of}} and {{m|en|from}} rhyme perfectly with {{m|en|love}} and {{m|en|rum}}, while in British English (to the best of my knowledge) they rhyme with {{m|en|sov}} and {{m|en|Tom}}. I notice that {{m|en|sov}} and the British pronunciation of stressed {{m|en|of}} are the only words in Rhymes:English/ɒv. What vowel do you have in the stressed pronunciation of {{m|en|was}}? That's another one that tends to have the LOT vowel in British English and the STRUT vowel in American English. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:15, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473376 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/October: Found match for regex: :I'd say it's just "healthy" as short for "That's healthy for your relationship"; but we do seem to be missing a more metaphorical sense of healthy as "beneficial". I wouldn't call it slang, though. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:05, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473376 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/October: Found match for regex: :Not quite sure why you pinged me; Old French is outside my area of expertise. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:14, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473376 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::: Pinging {{ping|Whaleyland}} as the creator of the entry in case he can shed some light on it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:49, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473376 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/October: Found match for regex: :: Why do we have other's at all? I thought we had a convention against having entries for words with the 's clitic. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:05, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473376 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::: Among musicians, it's considered bad form (it sounds amateurish) to call an instrumental piece a "song" rather than a "piece"; nevertheless Mendelssohn wrote {{w|Songs Without Words}} for piano alone. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:36, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473376 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::::: I think for pop music, people tend to use {{m|en|instrumental}} as a noun. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:26, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473376 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::::::: OK. I really should have written "Among classical musicians" above. I don't hang out with pop musicians. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:33, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473376 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/October: Found match for regex: :: The above definition is right. The template {{tl|eye dialect of}} is widely misused in Wiktionary. I clean it up wherever I notice it, but there's still a lot of work to do. If a spelling denotes a nonstandard pronunciation, {{tl|nonstandard form of}} should be used instead. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:27, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473376 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::: I certainly wouldn't want all instances of {{tl|eye dialect of}} replaced; sometimes it is used correctly (e.g. {{m|en|anybuddy}}). Nor are pronunciation spellings always nonstandard; sometimes (e.g. {{m|en|plow}}) they become standard, sometimes (e.g. {{m|en|lite}}) they take on a semantic life of their own, and sometimes (e.g. {{m|en|thru}}, {{m|en|tho}}) they remain informal but are not really proscribed. I wouldn't call any of the last four examples eye dialect, though, because they aren't used to suggest a lack of education or sophistication on the part of the person whose mouth they are put in, the way true eye dialect like {{m|en|sez}} is. The things that should be marked {{tl|nonstandard form of}} are the times where a nonstandard spelling reflects a nonstandard pronunciation, like {{m|en|anyfink}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:14, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473376 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/October: Found match for regex: :Since {{m|en|beg pardon}} is not standardly pronounced /bɛɡ ˈpɑɹdɪŋ/, no. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:16, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473376 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::: In which case, beg parding can be considered a hypercorrection. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:11, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473376 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::: Doesn't this word occur in the New Testament? If so, there should definitenly be an Ancient Greek entry. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:05, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473376 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::I removed the tag. It was listed and discussed at Wiktionary:Tea room/2009/June#purgatoric, but the tag wasn't removed when the discussion was archived. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:05, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473376 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::: Also, since the issue discussed there was never resolved, I've also started Wiktionary:Requests for verification#purgatoric. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:08, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473376 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::: It's true that y'all fills a necessary gap, but that doesn't preclude the possibility that it started out as a calque of a creole (e.g. Gullah) or West African construction. Nevertheless, w:Gullah language#Origins says that Gullah for y'all is {{m|gul|oonuh}} and is a loanword of African origin. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:00, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473376 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::::: Sure, but "you all" parallel to "we all" and "they all" has different connotations from "y'all", which is a simple plural without the emphasis on globality that "we all" and "they all" have. If you do want to emphasize globality that way with "y'all", it's possible to say "y'all all" in the South (or simply "you all" without contraction). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:20, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473377 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/November: Found match for regex: :In my accent, none of these words are homophones. Deceased is /dɪˈsist/, diseased is /dɪˈzizd/, and desist is /dɪˈsɪst/. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:28, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473377 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/November: Found match for regex: :::Strictly speaking, an infix is an affix that appears inside a root, i.e. there are parts of the root on both sides. An example famous in phonology circles is {{cog|tl|-um-}}, which (under certain circumstances) appears inside a root: {{m|tl|gradwet||graduate}} → {{m|tl|grumadwet|gr-'''um'''-adwet}}. If it comes after the root, it's a suffix, even when it always has to be followed by another morpheme before the end of the word. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:14, 3 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473377 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/November: Found match for regex: :::: I agree. I can imagine a meaning of "too many word orders"; I can't imagine a meaning of "too much word order". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:01, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473377 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/November: Found match for regex: {{ping|CodeCat}} and other Dutch speakers: is {{diff|41477328|text=this edit}} by an anon kosher? (The spelling of guarantee has been corrected; I'm asking about the rather drastic change in meaning the edit caused.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:31, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473377 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/November: Found match for regex: :: OK, I restored the older definition and kept the new one as sense 2. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:34, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473377 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/November: Found match for regex: :: The difference between Lockerbie and Paddington is that in the quotations, Lockerbie is being used generically to refer to terrorist bomb attacks on airplanes in general, while Paddington is being used to refer only to one specific attack. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:18, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473377 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/November: Found match for regex: :Not confused with, it's just used to emphasize cuteness and littleness and delicacy and vulnerability and all those things straight guys apparently find attractive in girls. The British slang term {{m|en|bird}} with the same meaning does the same thing. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:10, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473377 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/November: Found match for regex: :They're both right, but they mean different things. "Ei albwm/albymau" means "his album/albums", while "Ei halbwm/halbymau" means "her album/albums". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:30, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473377 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/November: Found match for regex: :What this entry is, is U+0B1C ORIYA LETTER JA ଜ plus U+0B3C ORIYA SIGN NUKTA ଼. I don't know Oriya either, but it's plausible that that's how /z/ would be represented, since in Devanagari (for example), /z/ is represented by ज़, which is also the "j" letter with a dot under it. The difference is just that Devanagari ज़ is a precomposed character and Oriya ଜ଼ is built out of its component parts. But again, I don't know if this character actually exists in Oriya, merely that it's plausible that it could exist on the basis of its Devanagari analogue. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:40, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473377 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/November: Found match for regex: :Sure, if it's citeable from CFI-compliant sources. I've also heard it as hold my drink. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:02, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473377 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/November: Found match for regex: :: It was the last quote in particular where I heard "Hold my drink". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:02, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473377 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/November: Found match for regex: ::::: No, but it does require {{m|en|fishfood}} to be significantly less common than {{m|en|fish food}}, which it is. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:15, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473377 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/November: Found match for regex: :: I've added both {{m|en|fishfeed}} and {{m|en|fishfood}} as I've found them both on bgc. As far as I'm concerned, that COALMINEs in both {{m|en|fish feed}} and {{m|en|fish food}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:52, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473377 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/November: Found match for regex: :: And I replaced the replacement with {{tl|alternative case form of}}, which seems most appropriate to me. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:55, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473377 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/November: Found match for regex: :::::::: It would be in extraordinarily bad taste to call an esoterical get-together where people camp and share their thoughts and ideas about death a "death camp", and anyone who did so would probably get all sorts of irate phone calls and flames on the Internet, but it wouldn't be ungrammatical. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:04, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473377 Wiktionary:Tea room/2016/November: Found match for regex: :: Not really; you don't speak into other people's mouths. That said, I'm not familiar with this usage at all. If I had been the editor of the publication linked to above, I would have written "face-to-face communication" rather than "mouth-to-mouth" in the headline. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:03, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473378 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/December: Found match for regex: :Something like {{diff|41879625|text=this}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:49, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473379 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/January: Found match for regex: :It's right the way it is. Although the feminine ablative singular of {{m|la|quī}} is {{m|la|quā}}, there's no difference between the masculine and feminine forms of {{m|la|quis}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:09, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473379 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/January: Found match for regex: ::::Your ping didn't work for some reason. And yes, quis doesn't distinguish masculine and feminine. Which makes sense if you think about it: if I ask "Who did you talk to?" I don't know if it's a man or a woman. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:45, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473379 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/January: Found match for regex: :::: It's been happening to me today too. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:40, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473379 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/January: Found match for regex: :I've been trying, but I cannot get {{tl|unsupportedpage}} to actually display C|N>K as the title of the page. Any ideas? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:36, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473379 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/January: Found match for regex: :::In that case, it's unfortunate that its documentation says, "The effect is to change the displayed header on the page". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:52, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473380 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/February: Found match for regex: {{tl|calque}} doesn't seem able to deduce an etymology-only language's primary language; see móilín for an example. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:17, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473380 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/February: Found match for regex: :::Exactly. If I write {{tl|der|fr|VL.|*foobarius}}, it's interpreted as exactly the same as {{tl|etyl|fr|VL.}} {{tl|m|la|*foobarius}}, so {{tl|der}} knows that the etymology-only language "VL." is to be matched with "la". {{tl|inh}} knows that too. But {{tl|calque}} doesn't. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:31, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473380 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/February: Found match for regex: ::::::: {{ping|Kc kennylau}}: Thanks for luacizing the template! But móilín is still getting a module error, just a different one now. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:59, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473380 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/February: Found match for regex: :For me, they've gone black, but they still work if you click on them. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:08, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473380 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/February: Found match for regex: :::::: I think {{tl|i}} is more common than {{tl|q}} as a shortcut for {{tl|qualifier}}, but yes, there are bots that convert both shortcuts to the long form, G-d knows why. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:08, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473380 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/February: Found match for regex: :: That doesn't seem to me to be a severe enough mistake to warrant a "harmful change" warning. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:03, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473380 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/February: Found match for regex: :::: If you create a page ], you can transclude it on another page as if it were a template by writing {{tl|:плыть/Russian/Related terms}}. (Be sure to remember the leading colon.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:36, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473380 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/February: Found match for regex: :Where did you receive these congratulations? Your user talk page has never been edited. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:54, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473380 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/February: Found match for regex: :I'm not quite sure what you're looking for, but I added {{tl|en-categoryTOC}} in case that's what you wanted. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:31, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473380 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/February: Found match for regex: :: The proposal only involves the hyphen-minus and the tilde, both of which are ASCII characters and easily available on most keyboards. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:56, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473380 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/February: Found match for regex: There seems to have been a recent change to something with the result that when Gothic words are enclosed by {{tl|l}}, the automatically generated transliteration is now automatically also linked. In other words {{tl|l|got|𐍈𐌰𐍃}} now results in {{l|got|𐍈𐌰𐍃}} with the "ƕas" as a blue link, instead of as unlinked black text, as it used to be. This is a good thing, since we have entries for all attested Gothic words in their romanized forms, so why not link to them. However, the link is also there even when the Gothic word's own link is overridden by being put in position 3: thus {{tl|l|got||𐍈𐌰𐍃}} results in {{l|got||𐍈𐌰𐍃}} with the "ƕas" as a blue link, even though "𐍈𐌰𐍃" itself does not have a link. Could this be changed, so that the romanization is linked only if the native script version is also linked? The reason is that I use {{tl|l}} when providing quotations, putting the Gothic text in position 3 since we don't want a link to a whole sentence, but then the transliteration of the entire quotation is rendered as a (red) link: see for example the quotations under the definition at 𐌰𐍆𐌼𐌰𐍂𐌶𐌾𐌰𐌽. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:21, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473380 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/February: Found match for regex: :: {{tl|ux}} is for usage examples, not quotations, isn't it? And anyway, 𐌰𐍆𐌼𐌰𐍂𐌶𐌾𐌰𐌽 isn't the only one: I've added quotations to a whole slew of Gothic words using {{tl|l|got||...}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:36, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473380 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/February: Found match for regex: :::: At least in Latin-alphabet languages, they're formatted differently. Usage examples are italicized, quotations aren't. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:55, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473380 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/February: Found match for regex: :::Even if I stop using {{tl|l}} for quotations (and I've been using it for quotations in all languages other than English for quite some time now), I still feel that if a term is put in pos.3 of {{tl|l}} in order to override the link, then the link to the romanization ought to be overridden as well. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:22, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473381 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/March: Found match for regex: :Not just that one. All those ancient proto-language indices use really bad linking methods and are in desperate need of overhauling or deletion. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:48, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473381 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/March: Found match for regex: :WT:List of languages and WT:List of languages/special list all languages accepted by those two templates (as well as by {{tl|l}}, {{tl|inh}}, and {{tl|der}}). The ones under WT:List of languages/special#Etymology-only languages can be used by {{tl|etyl}}, {{tl|inh}}, and {{tl|der}} but not by {{tl|m}} and {{tl|l}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:51, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473381 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/March: Found match for regex: ::::: No, the etymology-only languages can't be used by {{tl|m}} and {{tl|l}}, as I said above. If you write {{tl|m|xno|blah}} (xno being an etymology-only language), you get a module error. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:25, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473381 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/March: Found match for regex: :That saves you 8 keystrokes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:48, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473381 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/March: Found match for regex: :Category:Burmese redlinks appears to be empty, but ] has it listed at the bottom. Categories aren't much use if they don't actually show you the words that belong to them. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:43, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473381 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/March: Found match for regex: :It isn't empty anymore, but ] still isn't in it. Weird. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:56, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473381 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/March: Found match for regex: ::: It wasn't just that; some categories were showing pages that didn't have any relevant redlinks in them at all. They just seemed very unreliable and I'm not sorry they've been deleted. What we need a bot (or rather, lots of bots) to do is to actually keep the Index: namespace up to date with blue, red, and orange links for all languages (or at least all that there are people interested in editing). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:20, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473381 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/March: Found match for regex: :I'm disinclined to unblock it. It's only semiprotected, meaning once you're autoconfirmed you'll be able to edit it. As I understand it, if you make several good edits over the course of the next three days or so, you'll be autoconfirmed automatically. (That's redundant, but oh well.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:24, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473381 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/March: Found match for regex: *I agree; these background colors are unacceptable. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:57, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473381 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/March: Found match for regex: ::The point is clear enough to me: the idea was to color-code the tables so that identical forms have the same background color (e.g. alba has the same background color in the nominative singular feminine, nominative plural neuter, and accusative plural neuter). A nice idea, but it doesn't work in practice: it's just distracting and not helpful at all. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:17, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473381 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/March: Found match for regex: ::::Speaking for myself, I don't want differently colored cells in inflection tables at all. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:26, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473381 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/March: Found match for regex: :The only solution I can think of probably won't be very popular: to strip all diacritics from both Modern and Ancient Greek. Then both Modern {{l|el|ιερέας}} and Ancient {{l|grc|ἱερέᾱς}} would be at ιερεας (with hard redirects from the forms with diacritics) and would show their diacritics only in their headword lines as well as when mentioned in {{tl|l}}, {{tl|m}}, {{tl|t}}, etc. But I suspect this proposal will meet with general disapproval, which is why I've never actually proposed it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:04, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473381 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/March: Found match for regex: ::: That could work, though Wiktionary doesn't have a history of making disambiguation pages. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:23, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473381 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/March: Found match for regex: ::I've been thinking more about this, and actually we do have disambiguation pages here, but in Appendix: namespace, namely the "Variations of..." pages. What do other people think of creating pages like Appendix:Variations of "ιερεας", which could then link to both ιερέας and ἱερέας; and in particular also having ] as a hard redirect to Appendix:Variations of "ιερεας"? That would allow us to find all Greek words regardless of diacritics (since the search box would find the redirect ]) without creating the unattested form ] in main namespace. In cases like βάπτισμα where there is only one form with diacritics, the hard redirect ] could go straight to βάπτισμα rather than to a disambiguating appendix. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:24, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473382 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/April: Found match for regex: ::: I really wish writing system designers wouldn't use punctuation marks as letters. The ideal solution to this problem is for Unicode to create a separate code point for a MODIFIER LETTER SLASH and for us to use that instead, but that's probably too much to hope for, and even if it happened, we'd still have to do something to accommodate Iraqw in the meantime. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:55, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473382 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/April: Found match for regex: {{ping|Yair rand|CodeCat}} and anyone else with the technical know-how: is it possible to edit {{tl|findetym}} or the modules it invokes so that it will categorize into "inherited from" categories rather than (or in addition to) "derived from" categories? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:02, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473382 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/April: Found match for regex: :Did {{diff|38341634|text=this}} do the trick? If not, I'm out of ideas. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:53, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473383 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/May: Found match for regex: :You might have to make a null edit to the page with the romanization on it to refresh the category. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:34, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473383 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/May: Found match for regex: :::You don't have to refresh all the pages in the category, just the ones that should be disappearing from the category, i.e. the ones you've created Gothic-script entries for. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:42, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473383 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/May: Found match for regex: ::::: FWIW, the category now has 7487 entries when I look. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:55, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473383 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/May: Found match for regex: :Done, except I made the display link to the Wikipedia article instead of our rather uninformative entry. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:03, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473383 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/May: Found match for regex: ::: I was just notified that edits of mine to various obscure Wikipedias were reverted—three years ago. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:44, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473383 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/May: Found match for regex: ::: Doing {{diff|38553373|text=this}} solves the problem, but ideally that shouldn't be necessary. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:20, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473383 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/May: Found match for regex: :::::: It's not a misconception; all pronunciations do have to be in IPA. But they don't have to be only in IPA. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:02, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473383 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/May: Found match for regex: :::::::: I'm not sure if it's actually written down anyplace, but it seems to be common consensus that pronunciation sections should contain at least the IPA, and may contain other systems (e.g. enPR for English) as well. Wiktionary:Pronunciation#Ad hoc transcription sort of implies this, and Wiktionary:Entry layout#Pronunciation says "Use an established system of pronunciation transcription, such as IPA." That said, however, it looks like Tropylium above isn't talking about Pronunciation sections, he's talking about entry names. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:04, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473383 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/May: Found match for regex: :Because Module:languages/data3/g automatically strips all macrons and circumflexes from links tagged as being gml. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:01, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473383 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/May: Found match for regex: :::{{done}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:42, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473383 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/May: Found match for regex: :The "original problem" is simply that Norman used to be known as Jèrriais and Guernèsiais, so Norman translation lines are often still alphabetized under G or J, depending on which variety was originally listed. I have no idea if there's any way to fix this other than manually. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:08, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473383 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/May: Found match for regex: Something's going on with the box of clickable characters governed by MediaWiki:Edittools. In Burmese and Devanagari, clicking any of the combining characters causes the character to appear twice. (For example, if I click on ा in Devanagari, what appears is ाा.) This doesn't seem to be happening for combining characters in the other scripts, though I haven't checked everything. Also, for Khmer, clicking any of the combining characters causes all of them to appear in the edit box. Any thoughts how to fix this? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:01, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473383 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/May: Found match for regex: ::: I think "updated since my last visit" has some sort of highlighting on most other wikis. Makes it easier to see where to start if you want to see all changes since the last time you looked at the page. I like it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:04, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473383 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/May: Found match for regex: : The only thing I can think of is that certain languages (Frankish, Proto-Norse, Gothic) are attested in one script and reconstructed in a different one. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:52, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473384 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/June: Found match for regex: I've also noticed a problem I was unaware of when I mentioned the above: the combining diacritics for Greek don't work anymore either: they're all bunched together instead of being separate, and clicking on them doesn't do anything. The combining diacritics for Cyrillic still work, though. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:04, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473384 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/June: Found match for regex: :: Thanks for your help! I think I fixed it for Burmese too (I was missing a or two). The Greek and Khmer seem to be different issues. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:25, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473384 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/June: Found match for regex: :::: Thanks for your help! It's weird that all of them used to work fine and then stopped even though the source text hadn't been edited. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:07, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473384 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/June: Found match for regex: Did I do something wrong here that is causing graciozzo to appear in Category:Ladino terms needing attention and Category:attention lacking explanation? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:01, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473384 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/June: Found match for regex: :I guess no one's made one yet. It's a wiki, {{tl|sofixit}}. But I do find our country categories rather confusing. We have categories for most countries in Africa, but they aren't in Category:Countries of Africa; rather, they're in Category:Africa. Likewise for the other continents. It seems counterintuitive to me. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:37, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473384 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/June: Found match for regex: :If {{tl|etyl|fr|-}} is followed by a French term, you can replace it with {{tl|cog|fr|(term)}}, e.g. {{tl|etyl|fr|-}} {{tl|m|fr|chien}} can be replaced by {{tl|cog|fr|chien}}. I'm not sure why {{tl|etyl|fr|-}} would ever not be followed by a French term. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:36, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473384 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/June: Found match for regex: ::: In that case, you would want to put it into the "terms derived from French" category, so you wouldn't use "{{tl|etyl|fr|-}}" but "{{tl|etyl|fr|en}}" (or whatever). And if you really didn't want to categorize, you could dispense with the tag altogether and just write "A French borrowing". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:20, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473384 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/June: Found match for regex: :::::::: Sure, but it's straightforward to change those to "of {{tl|der|en|de}} origin}}". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:19, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473384 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/June: Found match for regex: ***** How are people supposed to tell the difference between topical categories and set categories? This is the first I've heard of such a distinction. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:14, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473385 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/July: Found match for regex: :: Also, if it were to become widely used, the parameter would have to be more language-specific. At the moment there are only two lists, both in reconstructed Vulgar Latin, but what if someday we wanted one cognate list for the descendants of {{cog|la|dolus}} and another for the descendants of {{cog|sga|dolus}}? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:29, 2 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473385 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/July: Found match for regex: :There could be a Translingual verb section. There could also be a different English verb; for example, if flied pointed to fly#Verb rather than fly#English, it would be confusing because it would be pointing to a verb that doesn't have a form "flied". If it points to fly#English, on the other hand, the reader knows that the form is there somewhere, even if it takes a little looking for. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:40, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473385 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/July: Found match for regex: :It's 8:31 UTC now, and my timestamp is showing that, so maybe it's been fixed. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:31, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473385 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/July: Found match for regex: ::: The timestamp of your initial message is plain text now, so it's not going to change. But if the time registered in the history matches the real time, then the bug is fixed. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:39, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473385 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/July: Found match for regex: ::: I wouldn't say that йо́ркский refers to anything at all in the form {{m|ru|нью-йо́ркский}}. As our etymology section indicates, that form is Нью-Йорк + -ский, not нью + йоркский. The only definition of {{m|ru|йо́ркский}} should be "pertaining to York (e.g. England or Ontario)"; it shouldn't also say {{tl|only in|нью-йо́ркский}}. Likewise I wouldn't expect an English entry Yorker that's defined as {{tl|only in|New Yorker}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:58, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473385 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/July: Found match for regex: :::::::::: The source above doesn't say which dialect of Spanish it's referring to. It seems to be treating Spanish monolithically, which is careless. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:16, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473385 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/July: Found match for regex: ::: This phonemic contrast seems to be based on spelling pronunciations, since {{m|es|hierba}} and {{m|es|yerba}} are etymologically identical, both coming from {{cog|la|herba}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:47, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473385 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/July: Found match for regex: What is causing CAT:Pages using invalid self-closed HTML tags to show up on a bunch of pages? I'm finding it on several Irish entries (e.g. abhaill, abhainn, achar), but I can't find any HTML tags on those entries. Is it being triggered by a template? There's no template listed in the category, so if so, I don't know how to find the template causing the trouble, nor what exactly the trouble is. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:22, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473385 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/July: Found match for regex: :::: Yeah, I'm going through them all now and removing it. For the life of me I can't remember why I ever put it in in the first place. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:57, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473385 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/July: Found match for regex: :I've fixed all of the Irish declension templates. There are still other pages in the category, but I feel like I've cleaned up my own mess. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:02, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473385 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/July: Found match for regex: Is <references /> an invalid self-closed HTML tag? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:28, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473385 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/July: Found match for regex: :Answering my own question: no, but <noinclude /> is. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:42, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473385 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/July: Found match for regex: :::: I wouldn't say {{m|el|Μάγχη}} is a calque at all. It's a sort of a transliteration of {{m|fr|Manche}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:16, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473385 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/July: Found match for regex: Would it be possible to split CAT:etyl cleanup according to the language section where {{tl|etyl}} is being used? In other words, could all instances of {{tl|etyl|...|en}} categorize into CAT:etyl cleanup/en, and so forth? I feel more confident deciding whether to replace {{tl|etyl}}+{{tl|m}} with {{tl|der}} or with {{tl|inh}} in some languages than in others. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:32, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473385 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/July: Found match for regex: :: All Celtic languages (including non-modern ones) as well as Burmese and Lower Sorbian. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:43, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473385 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/July: Found match for regex: :::: Thanks! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:01, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473385 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/July: Found match for regex: Before we had the Reconstruction namespace and reconstructions were in the Appendix namespace, there were often hard redirects from alternative forms to main forms. For example, Appendix:Proto-Indo-European/nepot- redirected to Appendix:Proto-Indo-European/népōts. But when we shifted to the new namespace, only the main entries were shifted, while redirects were left in the Appendix namespace, but had their targets changed to the Reconstruction namespace, so that Appendix:Proto-Indo-European/nepot- redirected to Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/népōts. The problem is that links like {{tl|l|ine-pro|*nepot-}} now point to Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/nepot-, which (up until a few minutes ago, when I fixed it) was a redlink. So we had bluelink redirects in Appendix namespace with nothing linking to them, and links pointing to nonexistent pages in Reconstruction namespace. Can someone with a bot please go through all redirects of the form ] and move them, without leaving a redirect, to ]? Thanks! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:17, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473385 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/July: Found match for regex: :: Yeah, but those aren't so urgent because there aren't pages pointing to red links because of them. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:35, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473386 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/August: Found match for regex: :Fixed. It was the parameters: the word was divided bull|iens instead of bulli|ens, which made the template think the word was a compound of {{m|la|iēns||going}} (compare {{m|la|abiēns}}, whose genitive really is {{m|la|abeuntis}}). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:34, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473386 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/August: Found match for regex: ::A Latin entry, actually, but I do like the idea of an English portmanteau "bullien" for a bullying alien. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:43, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473387 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/September: Found match for regex: :: (I know most of the above aren't actually English words, it's just to illustrate my suggestion.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:56, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473387 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/September: Found match for regex: ** Words that are unique to only one of the Rwanda-Rundi dialects should be tagged with the {{tl|lb}} template. Right now, {{tl|lb|rw|Rwanda}} would put terms into "Category:Rwandan Rwanda-Rundi", which sounds ridiculous. Is there some way to edit Module:labels/data/regional to categorize into "Category:Rwanda" instead (and also have {{tl|lb|rw|Rundi}} categorize into "Category:Rundi"), while still correctly categorizing CAT:Rwandan French and CAT:Rwandan English? But wait! Come to think of it, do we even want CAT:Rwanda to be for terms in the Rwanda variety of Rwanda-Rundi? Because Rwanda is also a country, and other categories named for countries are top-level topic categories, e.g. CAT:Thailand. So maybe we should keep CAT:Rwanda for the country and find some other name for "Rwandan Rwanda-Rundi". Suggestions? CAT:Kinyarwanda for the dialect? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:09, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473387 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/September: Found match for regex: **** Renaming them to what? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 23:20, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473387 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/September: Found match for regex: :What needs to be edited is Module:Template:R:The Bokmål and Nynorsk dictionaries, though I'm not sure how. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:18, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473387 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/September: Found match for regex: ::The wrong phi (it was the mathematical phi symbol U+03D5 instead of the Greek small letter phi U+03C6) was being used at congé. I've fixed it now. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:36, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473388 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::::::::::::: I don't think new users are baffled at all by unnamed positional parameters, provided (1) the first positional parameter is reliably the language code, and (2) the template has an informative documentation subpage. Unfortunately, there are currently some 50,000 Templates and modules needing documentation, and that, I submit, is what makes using templates confusing to newcomers. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:00, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473388 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/October: Found match for regex: :::: Also, treating them as prefixes allows categories like CAT:Ancient Greek words prefixed with μετα-; we don't have any infrastructure for a category like "Ancient Greek words compounded with μετά". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:55, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473388 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/October: Found match for regex: :{{ping|ObsequiousNewt}}: any ideas? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:28, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473388 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::In the quotation at {{l|grc|Θεός|tr=-}}, ὁ is currently being transliterated as oh instead of ho; yet when I link {{l|grc|ὁ}} by itself, its transliteration is correct. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:48, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473388 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/October: Found match for regex: I recently edited {{tl|el-nF-η-ες-1}} to use {{tl|l-self}} rather than bare links. Unfortunately, it's causing things to break in inflection tables whenever the generated form is identical to the page name (i.e. exactly the circumstances under which it's supposed to present boldface and no link rather than roman face and a link). See the declension table at αρχή#Declension, for example. Is there something at {{tl|l-self}} or one of the modules it uses that needs to be fixed? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:27, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473388 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/October: Found match for regex: {{ping|ObsequiousNewt}} or anyone else who feels up to the task: {{tl|grc-conj}} or Module:grc-conj is having a problem with the passive of the liquid/nasal futures. {{tl|grc-conj|fut-ln|X|Y}} is causing the future passive of all verbs to appear as ήσομαι instead of as -ήσομαι suffixed to Y. See {{l|grc|πίνω}}, for example, where the template says {{tl|grc-conj|fut-ln|πῐ|ποθ|form=mp}} but the table is showing the future passive as ήσομαι rather than ποθήσομαι. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:07, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473388 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/October: Found match for regex: :Why limit this to English nouns? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:32, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473388 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/October: Found match for regex: :We talked about this a couple months back; most people preferred having humans rather than bots decide whether to replace {{tl|etyl}} + {{tl|m}} with {{tl|der}} or with {{tl|inh}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:17, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473388 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::: You can use {{tl|der}} if you don't want to decide between borrowed and inherited. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:56, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473388 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/October: Found match for regex: :Actually {{m|en|H2O}} is a redirect to {{m|en|H₂O}} with the Unicode "subscript two" character. However, AFAICT there is no "Latin subscript small letter g" character, nor is there any way to add formatting to page names, so I think Tg is your only option. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:22, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473388 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/October: Found match for regex: :::{{reply to|SemperBlotto}} Is it English only, or is it rather translingual? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:35, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473388 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/October: Found match for regex: :::::: French Wikipedia uses T_v (and calls T_g "anglais") and German Wikipedia uses T_G, so it's probably best to call it English. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:48, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473388 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/October: Found match for regex: :: That seems like an issue for a different discussion. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:35, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473389 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/November: Found match for regex: but since nothing ever needs to be enclosed within the "references" tag, the first option is simpler. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:53, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473389 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/November: Found match for regex: :Philanthropy would have to be added at Module:category tree/topic cat/data to one or more of the existing topics at Category:List of topics. Where would it be appropriate? To judge from the categories that Wikipedia's w:Category:Philanthropy belongs to, I'd say CAT:Ethics, CAT:Economics, and CAT:Political science as a first guess. What do you think? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:20, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473389 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/November: Found match for regex: :It's in use, but has an invalid label. I'm willing to create a topic Philanthropy for the tree that isn't a tree, but only if doing so doesn't result in Drama. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:18, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473389 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2016/November: Found match for regex: :{{reply to|Equinox}} Category:Entry maintenance subcategories by language, perhaps? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:02, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473390 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/December: Found match for regex: ::::::: Not under that name, obviously. It's at w:arz:نافارا. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:38, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473390 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/December: Found match for regex: :How would we implement this split practically? The code for Monguor is mjg. Would we keep that code for one variety (presumably the one with the larger published corpus, if that make sense in this case) and devise a new Wiktionary-internal code (presumably xgn-something) for the other? Or should we deprecate mjg and devise two new codes, e.g. xgn-hmo and xgn-mma? Could we use mgj as the basis for the new codes, and call them something like mgj-huz and mgj-min? These questions aren't necessarily for Crom daba, but more for users with experience in creating new codes, like CodeCat and -sche. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:38, 4 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473390 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/December: Found match for regex: :::: But it's not an inconsistency, because those aren't participles. As long as CAT:English participles is a subcategory of CAT:English verb forms (and it is), the individual participles don't need to be in the "verb forms" category directly. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:54, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473390 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/December: Found match for regex: :Has there been any discussion of this issue at all? Is it something that needs to be voted on? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:04, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473390 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/December: Found match for regex: :Japanese is a well documented language, which means any entry has to be citeable from at least three uses (not mere mentions) from independent, permanently archived sources over more than a year. If that's true of ヸタミン and テレヸジョン and any other forms with ヸ, they can be added. If not, they can't. I would therefore avoid using automation to add them, because it takes a human brain to determine which forms meet WT:CFI and which don't. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:45, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473390 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/December: Found match for regex: :BTW, isn't it more common to use ヴィ to represent /vi/ rather than ヸ? Are ヴィタミン and テレヴィジョン more widely used than ヸタミン and テレヸジョン? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:49, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473390 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/December: Found match for regex: ::::They needn't be found in online permanently archived sources. Print sources like books, magazines, and newspapers are acceptable too. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:00, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473391 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/January: Found match for regex: # {{support}} to make consensus clearer, but this does not mean I oppose the other option. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:52, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473391 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/January: Found match for regex: #: Yes, for example {{l|itc-pro|*-kʷe}} and {{l|ine-pro|*-kʷe}}, or {{l|grk-pro|*pénkʷe}} and {{l|ine-pro|*pénkʷe}}. Even more when redirects are taken into consideration ({{l|itc-pro|*kapros}} and {{l|ine-pro|*kapros}} → {{l|ine-pro|*kápros}}), and even more when plausible future redirects are taken into consideration ({{l|cel-pro|*oynos}} and plausible {{l|ine-pro|*oynos}} → {{l|ine-pro|*óynos}}). I would be very surprised if no proto-language other than PIE had a form spelled {{l|ine-pro|*ne}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:19, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473391 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/January: Found match for regex: * Either one is fine with me. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:34, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473391 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/January: Found match for regex: *: Statement of support added above. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:52, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473391 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/January: Found match for regex: :I've reformatted the example sentences because if you have running text in italics and then there's something that would normally be italicized, the thing to do is put it back in roman. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:22, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473391 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/January: Found match for regex: What do other people think of the idea of adding a parameter to {{tl|m}} and {{tl|l}} that would display the language name? At the moment, in etymology sections for example, if we want to write "compare {{cog|de|Mutter}}" we write compare <code><nowiki>{{etyl|de|-}} {{m|de|Mutter}}</nowiki>. Wouldn't it be nice to write compare <code><nowiki>{{m|de|Mutter|name=1}}</nowiki> instead? Not only is it fewer keystrokes, it ensures that the language named and the language tagged are the same, so there won't be any mistakes like compare <code><nowiki>{{etyl|fr|-}} {{m|de|Mutter}}</nowiki>, which do happen from time to time. For {{tl|l}}, since it's more often used in lists, the language name could be preceded by a colon, as is the case in Descendants lists. For example muoter#Descendants could just list * <code><nowiki>{{l|de|Mutter|name=1}}</nowiki> instead of * German: <code><nowiki>{{l|de|Mutter}}</nowiki>. This would have the same two advantages: fewer keystrokes, elimination of the chance of a mismatch. Any thoughts/ideas for improvement? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:49, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473391 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/January: Found match for regex: ** I was unaware of {{tl|cog}}; however, {{tl|cog}} still isn't right for things like Descendants lists. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:48, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473391 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/January: Found match for regex: **** As in * <code><nowiki>{{t|de|Mutter|f|name=1}}</nowiki> instead of * German: <code><nowiki>{{t|de|Mutter|f}}</nowiki>? I'm down with that. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:28, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473391 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/January: Found match for regex: :This joke never stops getting old. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:20, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473391 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/January: Found match for regex: :: I think we're talking about things like AFAICT, the existence of which should (in Purplebackpack's view) or should not (in Renard Migrant's view) automatically permit the existence of as far as I can tell. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:57, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473391 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/January: Found match for regex: :::: In some cases, a little research will reveal which language the scientific word was first coined in. For example, {{m|en|homosexual}} was first coined in German, though most languages' words look as if they come from a New Latin {{m|la|homosexuālis}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:02, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473391 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/January: Found match for regex: ::::: For dictionary-writing purposes it's almost never necessary to use . The IPA vowel diacritics are great when you're discussing the fine details of phonetic realization, such as in a discussion of allophones in various contexts or when comparing the vowel systems of two distinct languages or dialects. But in a dictionary, what's important is the phonemes and maybe their most common, widespread allophones, and for that the IPA recommends using the typographically simplest symbol in the neighborhood. Although the cardinal vowel ɑ is defined as maximally back and maximally low, that doesn't mean that only a maximally back and maximally low vowel is correctly transcribed with ɑ. If a language has only one unrounded back low vowel, then ɑ is the correct symbol for it, even if (to judge from the vowel chart at {{w|Hindustani phonology}}) that vowel is closer to being central than being maximally back. Using ä for a language's only vowel in the low back unrounded range, or worse yet, for a language's only low vowel, is an example of {{w|false precision}} that we should avoid. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:04, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473391 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/January: Found match for regex: * I would definitely want to keep the spelled-out English words in the paragraph immediately above. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:07, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473391 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/January: Found match for regex: :: It's second person (singular and plural) imperative in function, but third person plural present subjunctive in form. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:28, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473391 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/January: Found match for regex: What do others think? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:56, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473391 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/January: Found match for regex: *There is already Medieval Greek as an etymology-only language. There's no difference between Medieval Greek and Byzantine Greek, is there? Shouldn't the two be merged into a single term? And Module:languages/data3/g even calls Medieval Greek another name for Byzantine Greek. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:55, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473391 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/January: Found match for regex: *** I've deleted it. Everything is at CAT:Byzantine Greek now. Help cleaning CAT:Pages with module errors caused by my deletion of gkm from Module:languages/data3/g is welcome! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:49, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473391 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/January: Found match for regex: * {{done}}. Last time I refreshed CAT:Pages with module errors there weren't any more caused by this change, but maybe some more will pop up over the next few days. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:53, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473391 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/January: Found match for regex: *** {{diff|36925198|text=It was}}, but it still creates a module error when an entry says "{{tl|etyl|gkm|en}} {{tl|m|gkm|φόοβαρ}}" instead of "{{tl|der|en|gkm|φόοβαρ}}". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:53, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473391 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/January: Found match for regex: *{{tl|term/t}} isn't doing anything these days; why not temporarily resurrect it for current purposes? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:57, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473391 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/January: Found match for regex: *Support definition lines saying "Burmese-script form of...", "Sinhala-script form of...", etc., vel sim. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:52, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473391 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/January: Found match for regex: :I put it into use at {{l|pi|ဗျဂ္ဃ}} and {{l|pi|ब्यग्घ}} for illustration purposes. Do we like this and want to do things this way? (I do!) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:29, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473391 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/January: Found match for regex: :::The luacized template is {{tl|grc-IPA}}. As far as I know, {{tl|grc-ipa-rows}} is almost deprecated (though there seem to be some cases where {{tl|grc-IPA}} doesn't work, so {{tl|grc-ipa-rows}} is required instead. I'd rather have a bot go through and replace all instances of {{tl|grc-ipa-rows}} with {{tl|grc-IPA}} (changing the parameters as required) instead of having two competing luacized templates. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:35, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473391 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/January: Found match for regex: ::::::: The Mediawiki lc: magic word unfortunately doesn't recognize capital letters with iota subscript as having lower-case equivalents, so it doesn't do anything to them. So any workaround will have to employ some other method. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:27, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473391 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/January: Found match for regex: ::::::::: I don't know if it is used in this context at all yet; I'm just saying if someone were to try using it to force the template to reinterpret capital letters as lowercase ones, it wouldn't work on iota-subscripted capital letters. Of course, there probably aren't very many words beginning with an iota-subscripted capital letter; we can always write {{tl|grc-IPA|w=ᾅδης}} manually. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:49, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473391 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/January: Found match for regex: ::::::::: I like the format of User:Daniel Carrero/auraria, though it should be flexible enough to allow cases where the headword forms are identical as well, e.g. the present tense vs. past tense of {{m|en|read}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:19, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473392 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/February: Found match for regex: ** Hyphenation is not a good way to determine the number of syllables. Just today I added the {{tl|hyphenation}} template to two disyllabic words that are hyphenated as if they were monosyllables: {{m|en|abreast}} and {{m|en|ahead}}, which are never broken across a line break, because one of the rules of hyphenation in English is to never leave a single letter by itself. Also, dictionaries differ as to where acceptable hyphenation points in English are: for {{m|en|eukaryote}}, Merriam-Webster's and Oxford agree with us that -kary- should not be broken up even though it's two syllables, but American Heritage does break it up as eu·kar·y·ote. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:07, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473392 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/February: Found match for regex: ::{{ping|Gloria sah}}: ISO 639-3 has deprecated eml and now treats Emilian egl and Romagnol rgn as two separate languages. Therefore, please always use egl for Emilian words and rgn for Romagnol words, and use the headers ==Emilian== and ==Romagnol==. If a word happens to be spelled the same in both languages, you can create two entries. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:56, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473392 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/February: Found match for regex: ::::::: Oh right, there's a unified Emilian-Romagnol Wikipedia rather than two separate ones. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:09, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473392 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/February: Found match for regex: :: I have no objection to having all OCS words moved from є to е, but I'm not going to do it myself. It's way too big a task for someone who doesn't know how to run a bot. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:05, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473392 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/February: Found match for regex: :::If Alfabet is more than marginal in contemporary German, we can call it a {{tl|misspelling of}}. I too am opposed to collecting every random spelling ever written down, when it comes to living languages with enormous corpora, like modern German. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:03, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473392 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/February: Found match for regex: :::::::: I agree too. Yiddish didn't inherit anything from Hebrew, but it borrowed a lot from it. I've removed Hebrew as ancestor of Yiddish from the module. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:25, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473392 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/February: Found match for regex: ::I believe the correct German spelling is {{m|de|Fahrrad|Megafahrrad}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:28, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473392 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/February: Found match for regex: :::He said "I'm going to create a few more votes... then I won't create any votes from February 29...", so he did no more than he said he would. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:50, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473392 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/February: Found match for regex: :On an unrelated note, could people please stop calling Daniel Carrero "Dan"? It's very confusing. For me and probably most regular Wiktionarians, Dan is someone else entirely. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:03, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473392 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/February: Found match for regex: :::: What about the dynamics abbreviations, like pp, p, mp, mf, f, and ff? They usually aren't used in running text and do feel very translingual to me. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:15, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473392 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/February: Found match for regex: :::::: I think categorizing pp as translingual is as helpful as categorizing kg as translingual: it means the same thing in all languages where it's used. It makes more sense than creating two dozen language entries for pp that are all defined as "pianissimo; very softly" or something. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:12, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473392 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/February: Found match for regex: :::: Those feel less translingual to me because B, for example, is called H in German, and in French, these seven notes are called la, si, do, ré, mi, fa, and sol respectively. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:19, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473392 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/February: Found match for regex: ::Not everything in the .gov domain is necessarily public domain. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:06, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473392 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/February: Found match for regex: ::Unless they aren't cognates. The example that always occurs to me is a verb meaning "to be silent". Most European languages have a simple verb for this ({{cog|fr|taire|se taire}}, {{cog|de|schweigen}}, etc.), but English doesn't, meaning there's no place (other than silent itself, which is suboptimal) where we can equate those terms. It's kind of annoying, but on the other hand, I suppose it isn't really English Wiktionary's job to facilitate translation between French and German. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:43, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473392 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/February: Found match for regex: :: The preterite forms aren't even that rare up here in the northern half of Germany, I think. I hear them in speech frequently enough, even for content verbs (not just auxiliaries and modals). I certainly have no impression that the 2nd person singular preterite is rarer than the other persons. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:40, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473392 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/February: Found match for regex: :::: The periphrastic perfect: du bist gegangen instead of du gingst; du hast angerufen instead of du riefst an. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:14, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473392 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/February: Found match for regex: ::And for even fuller disclosure, I don't get anything at all from his doing this other than the satisfaction of seeing the number of items in Category:term cleanup go down. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:13, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473392 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/February: Found match for regex: :: Certainly the claim "all languages come from Arabic" is utter nonsense. I've often heard the same claim made about Sanskrit, but that's utter nonsense too. However, it probably is true that it's easier to learn a difficult language if you've already learned some easier languages first. Not because the easier languages directly make the harder language easier, but rather because you're already familiar with what learning a foreign language entails, and what sort of things you have to learn when you're learning a language. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:49, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473392 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/February: Found match for regex: :::::: Also, the Tocharian alphabet isn't in Unicode yet, so we don't really have any choice but to write it in romanization. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:55, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473392 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/February: Found match for regex: :::::::: That is the status quo already. The only time we have only Latin-alphabet entries is when the native script isn't in Unicode, as is the case with Tocharian, and the only time when Latin-alphabet entries are the main entries and the other scripts are secondary is when there isn't any single predominant native script, as is the case with Pali. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:49, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473392 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/February: Found match for regex: ::::::::::I'm not sure that Unicode block is suitable for Tocharian, though. Certainly not with the glyphs shown in the corresponding PDF file. Perhaps it would be possible for someone to make a font accommodating the Tocharian glyphs, but I think it's more likely that Tocharian will one day have a Unicode block of its very own. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:20, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473392 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/February: Found match for regex: ::::::::::Actually, I take that back: that Unicode block is definitely unsuitable for Tocharian, because it doesn't have any space for the Tocharian letter and vowel sign conventionally transliterated ä. I'm also not quite sure how the consonant transcribed kᵤ works in the native script, so I don't know whether the Brahmi block can accommodate it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:25, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473392 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/February: Found match for regex: ::::::::::::I assume so; I've never seen it. Is it used only in Sanskrit loanwords that have ध? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:44, 29 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473392 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/February: Found match for regex: *I definitely oppose doing this to all templates. I use a number of templates where the first two or three parameters are made up of the parts of the word, e.g. {{tl|dsb-decl-noun-19|wukni|k}} at {{m|dsb|wuknik}}, or {{tl|ga-mut-cons|b|róg}} at {{m|ga|bróg}}, or {{tl|affix|my|ဝမ်း|ဆွဲ}} at {{m|my|ဝမ်းဆွဲ|tr=-}}. Having to name those parameters, even if only done botwise after the fact, would cost a great deal of intuitiveness and ease of reading the edit box and would have no discernible benefits at all, as far as I can tell. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:25, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473392 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/February: Found match for regex: *** The "k" in the first one and the "b" in the second one don't stand for anything; they're literally the last letter of the word and the first letter of the word, respectively. In the Burmese example, it's just the two parts of a compound word; I could just as easily have used {{tl|affix|en|dog|house}} for {{m|en|doghouse}} as an example. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:05, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473392 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/February: Found match for regex: ***** "house" isn't a suffix, though, it's just the second root. It's not just a matter of being more work to type, it's a matter of being able to read the source code easily. I don't want to be confronted with {{tl|dsb-decl-noun-19|firstpartoftheword=wukni|lastletter=k}} or {{tl|ga-mut-cons|firstletter=b|restoftheword=róg}} when I open the edit box, even if I don't have to type it myself, nor do I want my watchlist to be cluttered by bots making totally unnecessary changes. Someone who doesn't use these templates anyway isn't helped by having explicit parameter names, and someone who wants to use these templates for the first time can look at the template documentation page to see how to write them. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:56, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473392 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/February: Found match for regex: :::: I'm certainly not opposed to improving the intuitiveness of certain templates ({{tl|de-conj-weak}} and {{tl|de-conj-strong}} come to mind as having far too many positional parameters with unintuitive arguments), I'm just opposed to this proposal being applied to all templates. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:43, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473393 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/March: Found match for regex: :Another nuance is that a lot of pages in the Index: namespace have simple wiki links to the Appendix: namespace rather than links provided by {{tl|l}} or {{tl|m}}. For example, Index:Proto-Indo-European/d has ] and ] instead of <code><nowiki>{{l|gem-pro|*talō|1}}</nowiki> and <code><nowiki>{{m|gem-pro|*talō}}</nowiki>. That means all those links will be broken whenever a reconstruction is moved to Reconstruction: space without leaving a redirect. I'm gradually going through these appendices and fixing the links to reconstructions, but there's a hell of a lot of them, and fixing them is time-consuming because it can't be done by simple search and replace. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:11, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473393 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/March: Found match for regex: ::: Well, that works if you're content with pages that say ], but I'm not. If I'm going to go to the trouble of tidying up these pages, I'm going to do it right and use <code><nowiki>{{l|gem-pro|*talō}}</nowiki>. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:50, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473393 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/March: Found match for regex: *: There are no more Latin reconstructions in Appendix namespace. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:34, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473393 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/March: Found match for regex: ::::::: That's not how I've been using it. If a modern English word has been inherited from Middle English and the Middle English word was borrowed from Old French, then the modern English word belongs in both Category:English terms inherited from Middle English and Category:English borrowed terms. There's no reason to treat the two as mutually exclusive. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:52, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473393 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/March: Found match for regex: :::::::::::: It's only confusing if we start categorizing terms by the language they were borrowed from. {{tl|bor|en|fro}} puts things into Category:English borrowed terms and Category:English terms derived from Old French, but we don't allow categories like Category:English terms borrowed from Old French, so it doesn't matter whether it's borrowed directly or indirectly. (I see that Category:English terms borrowed from Old French actually suddenly exists now, even though there's been no consensus to create categories like that, so that's a shame. At any rate, my argument still holds according to the state of affairs up to 48 hours ago.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:25, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473393 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/March: Found match for regex: :::::::::::::: Is there a consensus for using the practice established by the documentation? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:25, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473393 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/March: Found match for regex: :::: But if we do that, emperor is in Category:English terms inherited from Middle English, but it isn't in Category:English borrowed terms even though it is a borrowed term. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:26, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473393 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/March: Found match for regex: :::::: A word never stops being a borrowed term. It hasn't suddenly become a native term, so it remains a borrowed term for the rest of eternity. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:32, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473393 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/March: Found match for regex: :::::::: In theory yes, but in practice we'd never put {{tl|bor}} on a word without knowing for sure that it had been borrowed from some specific named language or proto-language. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:40, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473393 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/March: Found match for regex: :: The distinction may not be clear for English, but in other languages it is. In Welsh, "colloquial" means "not literary". There are any number of Welsh verb forms, for example, that are colloquial in the sense of not literary but are not necessarily informal. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:15, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473393 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/March: Found match for regex: ::: @Aɴɢʀ: By "not literary", do you mean "not appearing in writing but only in speech"? --Dan Polansky (talk) 08:22, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473393 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/March: Found match for regex: :::: {{ping|Dan Polansky}} Not necessarily. Magazines, newspapers, and popular fiction are often written in colloquial Welsh; unpublished writing like letters virtually always are. Modern-day introductory textbooks usually only teach the colloquial register, leaving the literary register for more advanced learners. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:15, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473393 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/March: Found match for regex: :Common practice in lexicography is to be terse, because dictionaries were traditionally made of paper and would be too expensive if they went into detail. Since we're not paper, we do have the luxury of being verbose. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:08, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473393 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/March: Found match for regex: ::I'm reluctant to make absolute rules about this sort of thing. I feel like such decisions should be made on a case-by-case basis, as the details of each non-lemma in each language will be different. And we do include etymologies for non-lemmas in the case of suppletive forms and other irregular forms, e.g. {{m|sga|do·fúaid}} and {{m|sga|estir}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:20, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473393 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/March: Found match for regex: :::: {{ping|CodeCat}}, if I do that, then {{m|sga|do·fúaid}} isn't in Category:Old Irish words prefixed with dí- and Category:Old Irish words prefixed with fo- anymore. I suppose I could put the lemma {{m|sga|ithid}} in those categories, but people would probably be confused by that. Likewise, if we were to create a Category:Old Irish terms derived from the PIE root *h₁ed-, it would be misleading to put the lemma {{m|sga|ithid}} in it, though {{m|sga|do·fúaid}} and {{m|sga|estir}} would belong in it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:55, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473393 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/March: Found match for regex: :::::::: What's so interesting about {{m|de|See}}? Just that it's a false friend? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:27, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473393 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/March: Found match for regex: :::::::::: That's true. When I first started learning German, my mnemonic for the genders was that See is like a spider: the female is larger than the male. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:52, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473393 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/March: Found match for regex: :::: I think paraḫzi would have to be spelled pa-ra-aḫ-zi. AFAIK an apparent C.V syllable break shows that the vowel is purely orthographic. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:19, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473393 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/March: Found match for regex: *:: I agree with Wikitiki. Liliana doesn't exactly have a clean record here either, but at the moment she's done nothing here at en-wikt (that I know of) to warrant a block or ban. Sanctions imposed at other projects are none of our concern, unless it's decided that her actions warrant a global block, in which case it's out of our hands. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:55, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473393 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/March: Found match for regex: ::::: I found the diff too, but I'm not going to link to it because I don't see the relevance to this project. As long as she doesn't say anything like that here, there's no reason to ban her from here. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:43, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473393 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/March: Found match for regex: ::: If it comes to that, {{tl|R:my:MED}} was created with the prefix, and I don't it moved to {{tl|R:MED}}, which could also "happen in yet another undiscussed volume change". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:10, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473393 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/March: Found match for regex: :::::: I always correct misuses of the term "eye dialect" where I encounter them in entries, but I don't go hunting for them. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:30, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473393 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/March: Found match for regex: :::::::: I'm not convinced sais isn't eye dialect. The entry claims that sais is pronounced to rhyme with gaze, but is it really? If I was reading one of the quoted passages out loud, I would pronounce it in the same way as says, namely to rhyme with fez. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:55, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473393 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/March: Found match for regex: ::: I usually just use {{tl|nonstandard spelling of}}, but more nuanced options are also available. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:53, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473394 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/April: Found match for regex: :Is it different from Sauraseni Prakrit psu? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:22, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473394 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/April: Found match for regex: :::: Why would the work be less useful or not be preserved if he uses the inc-ohi code now instead of waiting for a new code? If and when the new code is created, the forms can be moved. We had a lot of entries in Norman varieties using our own local codes before the code nrf was created, and once it was, we moved them to the new code. Nothing was lost. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:44, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473394 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/April: Found match for regex: :I don't know much about it, but I agree using the asterisk to mark places where syntactic gemination may occur is kind of silly. If its triggers are not predictable in all cases, then maybe it would be better to mark certain words as triggering it, the way certain Irish words (e.g. {{m|ga|go}}, {{m|ga|i}}, {{m|ga|bhur}}, etc.) are marked as triggering certain initial mutations. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:56, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473394 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/April: Found match for regex: :I'd give it a week, but I agree it looks unlikely that the asterisks will be kept. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:44, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473394 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/April: Found match for regex: :Now that a discussion has been held, I have no objection. I was never in favor of the asterisk, I was only opposed to a large-scale change in our representation of Italian pronunciation without discussion first. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:25, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473394 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/April: Found match for regex: *If it isn't a problem, it doesn't need a solution. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:45, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473394 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/April: Found match for regex: *** No, I think common sense doesn't need to be regulated. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:44, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473394 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/April: Found match for regex: : I'm unaware of any Celtic word for "gold" besides loanwords from {{m|la|aurum}}. Maybe in Gaulish or Celtiberian, but I don't think there's anything in Insular Celtic. The gap isn't especially surprising, though; there are all sorts of semantic gaps in proto-languages where we might not expect them. For example, there's no reconstructable PIE word for "rain", despite the fact that PIE speakers must have been aware of and had a word for it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:30, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473394 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/April: Found match for regex: ::: {{ping|-sche}} Probably Old Irish {{m|sga|áu}} (attested in the meaning 'ear' from {{m|ine-pro|*h₂ṓws}}) and Middle Welsh {{m|wlm|eu}}/Modern Welsh {{m|cy|au}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:33, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473394 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/April: Found match for regex: :No, they oughtn't. They ought to be linked in etymology sections of real words. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:16, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473394 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/April: Found match for regex: :: I agree, but I also agree that the reference material for de:Haus is excessive and I don't want our entries to look like that either. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:19, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473394 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/April: Found match for regex: :::: If we had many entries with that amount of reference material, someone would doubtless propose a new References tab next to the Citations tab. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:42, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473394 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/April: Found match for regex: :::::: I didn't say it was likely we would do it, merely that it was likely someone would propose it. It would probably also be really difficult to get <ref> tags to generate text in a different namespace on a different tab. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:43, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473394 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/April: Found match for regex: :That user has only two edits to English Wiktionary, both of which have been deleted. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:55, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473394 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/April: Found match for regex: :::: I'm not sure that would work. Substing {{tl|lb|en|chemistry}}, for example, yields <code><nowiki>{{#invoke:labels/templates|show}}</nowiki>. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:51, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473394 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/April: Found match for regex: :I'm fine with merging the codes as long as we have regional labels for them allowing the categories Category:Dutch Low German and Category:German Low German to be retained as regional varieties of Low German. We could even have separate categories for all of the subdialects of Dutch Low German that have their own ISO codes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:49, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473394 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/April: Found match for regex: :::: Old Saxon (osx). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:36, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473394 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/April: Found match for regex: ::::::: I'm definitely opposed to making this merger dependent on some unrelated merger. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:08, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473394 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/April: Found match for regex: ::::::::::: I don't know about Dutch Low German, but I suspect German Low German will become extinct before it has a chance to either converge with or diverge from Dutch Low German. Trying to find a fluent native speaker of German Low German below the age of 50 is like trying to find a hay-colored needle in a hay stack. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:19, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473394 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/April: Found match for regex: :: I agree in principle, but it will be difficult to get people to comply, perhaps especially for Latin and Ancient Greek. This may be due in part to how these languages are taught. When I was in school and competing in certamen at {{w|Junior Classical League}} conventions, your answer would be considered wrong if you said something like "dīcō – to say". We were constantly reminded to answer along the lines of either "dīcō – I say" or "dīcere – to say". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:16, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473394 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/April: Found match for regex: ::You have to write edit summaries separately anyway; you can still use bare links in them. What I like about {{tl|l}} even for English is that it will always take me to the English section, even when I've previously been looking at another language. In tabbed languages, at least, the software remembers what language you've been looking at, and will take you to the same language (if present) when you click on a bare link. So if I'm looking at aisling#Irish and then click on the bare link ], I will be taken to dream#Irish instead of dream#English. But if the gloss had {{tl|l|en|dream}} instead, I will be taken to the right place. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:43, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473394 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/April: Found match for regex: :::::: But if you have added the derived term amazingly to an entry, you haven't actually written the words "added derived term amazingly" to the entry (I hope), so in the example you gave above, your edit summary isn't copied and pasted from your edit. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:02, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473394 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/April: Found match for regex: I agree with Renard Migrant, Aɴɢʀ, and Daniel Carrero. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 16:05, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473395 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/May: Found match for regex: :In linguistics, reduplication is considered a kind of affix, but its meanings are language-specific, not translingual. In Indonesian, for example, reduplication is used to form plurals. In some languages, it's used to indicate a diminutive; in others, a wide variety or a large number. In older Indo-European languages (and Proto-Indo-European itself) reduplication of the initial consonant or consonant cluster of a verb root is used to form the present stem of some verbs as well as the perfect stem of most verbs that have a perfect stem. I like the idea of having an entry for the reduplication morpheme, but I doubt it should have a Translingual section. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:11, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473395 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/May: Found match for regex: *: These are the sort of thing we're looking for at Wiktionary:Foreign Word of the Day/Focus weeks#False friends. It's been a while since we had a focus week for false friends. The last one I remember is the week starting with Wiktionary:Foreign Word of the Day/2014/February#11. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:17, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473395 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/May: Found match for regex: ::I'm happy to help out as time permits, but I definitely don't want to be the primary responsible for FWOTD. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:25, 20 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473395 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/May: Found match for regex: :::: Maybe not the form of any older dialect, but it is the Koine form (it's in both LXX and NT). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:11, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473395 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/May: Found match for regex: :I see nothing wrong with having an entry for aes Cyprium. It's not SOP, as "Cyprian brass" does not obviously mean "copper". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:14, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473396 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/June: Found match for regex: :Why is it necessary to double-check that a user really wants to do what he just said to do? I can understand having that sort of failsafe in place for something potentially damaging, but not for something as innocuous as sending thanks. Can't we just eliminate the message altogether and allow clicking on "thank" to immediately do what it says it does? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:23, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473396 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/June: Found match for regex: :I don't know about L & S, but we already have a template {{tl|R:LSJ}} that makes links to Liddell and Scott. The problem is the large number of Ancient Greek entries that don't use it, but instead have merely a link to Wikipedia's article on the Liddell and Scott dictionary. What I'd like a bot to do is go through and change all instances of *] to *<code><nowiki>{{R:LSJ}}</nowiki>, adding any necessary arguments as well. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:28, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473396 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/June: Found match for regex: :I don't mind including words in constructed languages already approved for mainspace (e.g. Esperanto), but I'd be opposed to including words in protolanguages. There's a reason protolanguages aren't in mainspace, and that reason should apply to FWOTD as well. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 23:07, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473396 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/June: Found match for regex: The fact that Elfdalian now has an official ISO-639 code reminds me that we have several pages, at least in the Reconstruction: namespace, on which the language names {{w|Westrobothnian}}, {{w|Jamtish}}, and Scanian are used. These languages have neither ISO-639 codes nor Wiktionary-specific ad-hoc codes. What do we want to do with them? Should we make ad-hoc codes (e.g. gmq-vas, gmq-jmk, and gmq-scy) for them? Shall we consider them Regional Swedish dialects? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:13, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473396 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/June: Found match for regex: ::: gmq-bot is fine with me. I only suggested gmq-vas because Linguist List's ad hoc code is swe-vas. Are these three lects as different from Standard Swedish as Elfdalian and Gutnish are? If so, then I'm for giving them their own codes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:29, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473396 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/June: Found match for regex: :::::: It looks like no one objected to giving all these languages their own codes; the discussion stalled over the truly trivial issue of whether or not to prefix the codes with gmq-. I don't care if we leave the prefix off, but I thought it would confuse the HTML if we did. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:51, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473396 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/June: Found match for regex: ::::::: I've created gmq-bot, gmq-jmk, and gmq-scy, so entries can now be made for those languages, and links to them in the Reconstruction namespace can now use {{tl|l}} instead of bare links. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:35, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473396 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/June: Found match for regex: ::::::: P.S. I'm not touching Category:Scanian Swedish, because I'm not capable of saying what's Scanian language and what's Scanian dialect of Standard Swedish. I leave that for someone who knows these languages. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:58, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473396 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/June: Found match for regex: :We can use Google Scholar to locate permanently archived journal articles, so I'd say yes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:28, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473396 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/June: Found match for regex: ::I don't really care which order the cases are in as long as nominative is first, but the advantage to sticking with tradition is that it's what readers will expect. I would be thrown off by an adjective declension table that put the gender columns in the order masculine-neuter-feminine, because over the years I have come to always expect masculine-feminine-neuter, and not just for German but for all languages with those three genders. I have no doubt we would get a lot more complaints about a declension table that put neuter between masculine and feminine than we get about the current order. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:10, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473396 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/June: Found match for regex: Do we have any established customs regarding what do with quotations that aren't written in a phonetic transcription rather than the usual orthography of the language in question? I have a book of Burmese proverbs that writes all the Burmese in transcription, not in Burmese orthography; likewise Die araner mundart has lots of usage examples for Irish written in phonetic transcription rather than conventional orthography. So far, I've just been putting these things in conventional orthography, but that goes against our usual custom of transcribing quotations exactly as they're written in the source. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:35, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473396 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/June: Found match for regex: :: I do do that when possible for Irish, but when I'm working through Die araner mundart to make sure we have entries for all the words it lists, it's easier to give the same examples. Also, it's a good source for unalloyed dialectal Irish rather than standard "school" Irish. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:12, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473396 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/June: Found match for regex: *: The difference there is much smaller than what I'm talking about. At {{m|ga|aithrí}}, for example, I just added the usex "Mara ndéanfaidh muid aithrí inár bpeacaí, tá muid ar fad caillte", but what the source actually says is "mar ə ńīnə myȷ æŕī ə n-r̥ bȧkī, tā myȷ əŕ fad kāĺcə". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:12, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473396 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/June: Found match for regex: :::: It's a quotation of a usage example. The book I'm using is a reference work about this dialect; volume II is the dictionary, which provides usage examples taken from the author's fieldwork among native speakers. They're sentences that he heard spoken while he was living among Irish speakers, so this book is the only form in which these sentences have been published. And rather than writing them in conventional orthography, he writes them in his own ad-hoc phonetic transcription. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:23, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473396 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/June: Found match for regex: :::: That would make it clear, wouldn't it? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:30, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473396 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/June: Found match for regex: :::::: Yeah, I was thinking about doing that. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:47, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473396 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/June: Found match for regex: ::::::: Obviously each dictionary is different, but that's sort of typical for paper dictionaries. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:40, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473396 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/June: Found match for regex: * I consider this sort of thing a case of {{w|false precision}} that should be removed. It's a bit like measuring the distance between two cities down to the nearest nanometer. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:25, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473396 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/June: Found match for regex: *:::: Showing both aspiration of the and devoicing of the is redundant. Flapping is common, but optional, in AmEng, so is not the only possibility. The unstressed vowel is not as far back as . And above all, all this information is predictable, so it doesn't need to be shown. There's a reason why paper dictionaries only give phonemic transcription, not phonetic, and saving space isn't it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:58, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473396 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/June: Found match for regex: *:::::::: Giving the phonemic transcription only is not giving false information, but giving the phonetic transcription falsely implies that all other phonetic renderings are wrong, which is harmful. Pronouncing this word without aspiration/devoicing is unusual (except in certain accents like Indian English) but not incorrect. Pronouncing this word without flapping the /d/ is unusual in North America but not incorrect. Pronouncing this word with rather than is normal and not incorrect. Pronouncing this word with a nonvelarized is unusual in North America but not incorrect. That's why this is false precision: it implies that any deviation is wrong, and it isn't. It's like saying the distance from New York to Boston is 13,495,680 inches: it implies that it's more than 13,495,679 inches but less than 13,495,681 inches, which is absurd. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:08, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473396 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/June: Found match for regex: :::: We really need some clear contrast made between "set" categories and "topic" categories. Other than the fact that "set" categories tend to have plural names and "topic" categories singular names, I don't know how we're supposed to predict which category is of which type. Category:en:Horses, for example, has a plural name and says "English terms for horses", but in fact its content includes lots of terms that relate to horses in some way but are not terms for horses (behind the bit, equine, gait, etc.). Some of them could be moved to Category:en:Equestrianism, but not all of them. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:50, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473396 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/June: Found match for regex: ::::::::: I don't know if new names are really necessary; it might be sufficient to have more explicit text in the categories themselves. The text currently in CAT:en:Currency and CAT:en:Currencies is pretty good, but maybe they could even say "This is a topic category..." and "This is a set category...". Take CAT:en:Body, which says "English terms for and related to the body and its parts." It seems to be both, as it's both terms for and related to. It should probably be a topic category, with a separate CAT:en:Body parts as the set category. Then, to add to the confusion, there's CAT:en:Anatomy, which I guess is supposed to be just for anatomical technical terms (such as one might learn in anatomy class at university) and not for everyday words, but in practice it's full of every day words for parts of the body. Maybe we should have a third kind of category, the "technical-term category" and label them as such. I was recently at a loss where to put some language's word for "feather". Not in CAT:Birds, because a feather isn't a kind of bird, and not in CAT:Ornithology because it isn't a technical term. CAT:Body is OK I guess, though it seems odd since the average reader probably expects that to refer to the human body. I notice that {{m|en|feather}} isn't in any category specific to its primary birdy meaning. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:31, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473396 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/June: Found match for regex: :: I don't look at the descriptions all that much either, but I do look at them when I'm uncertain whether a particular words belongs in a particular category. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:56, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473396 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/June: Found match for regex: :No, I don't think we are. We treat Vulgar Latin as an etymology-only variant of Latin anyway, it's not as if we treat it as a separate language. And in etymologies it is important to recognize that some reconstructed words that must have existed as early as the 1st century simply aren't attested, or are attested only in nonliterary contexts (e.g. graffiti in Pompeii), or that some words must have had colloquial senses that aren't attested in literature (e.g. {{m|la|focus||fire}} as opposed to 'fireplace, hearth'). Of course in real life the distinction between Vulgar Latin and Classical Latin wasn't binary, it was a continuum from basilect to acrolect, but for dictionary-writing purposes it's still more helpful to retain the labels than to ditch them. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:45, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473397 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/July: Found match for regex: ::: {{small|Are you calling {{w|Cecil Rhodes}} a sissy? —] (]) 15:27, 15 July 2016 (UTC)}}
Page 4473397 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/July: Found match for regex: ::::::: What are the differences between Vedic and Classical pronunciation that you're showing? I thought Classical Sanskrit had a stress accent that was placed in accordance with a rule similar to that for Latin (except that it can go back further than the antepenultimate), so I was expecting /ˈtɕən̪d̪ɽə/ for चन्द्र. Shouldn't कार्त्स्न्य have /ɑː/ (with long mark) in both Vedic and Classical? What about words whose Vedic scansion reveals one more syllable than is written (e.g. /kɑːɽt̪sniə/ for कार्त्स्न्य or /ukt̪uɑː/ for उक्त्वा – I don't know if those particular words belong to the class I'm talking about, but they illustrate the principle)? Does the system have a way of accommodating them? And don't some scholars believe intervocalic laryngeals were still around in Vedic, so that ā for example might sometimes be /əʔə/ or /ɑːʔə/ or /əʔɑː/ or /ɑːʔɑː/? Your sandbox doesn't seem to have any examples of word-final visarga; how would the module transcribe चन्द्रः? I'd expect /tɕən̪d̪ɽə́h/ in Vedic and /ˈtɕən̪d̪ɽəhə/ in Classical. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:14, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473397 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/July: Found match for regex: :::::::::: {{ping|JohnC5}} I don't have answers to the questions I asked. I thought that stress receded to the rightmost long vowel (excluding the final syllable) and fell on the first syllable if all syllables (excluding the final syllable) had short vowels, so that svataṃtraḥ and aupadraṣṭrya would be stressed on the first syllable, but I'm not positive that's right. Wikipedia doesn't say anything at all about post-Vedic accent, and all I have to go on is my memory of the Sanskrit class I took as an undergraduate more than 25 years ago. So please don't interpret my comments above as "This is how things are, you should accommodate them" but rather "Here's something that might bear looking into, but I'm not sure of the details at all". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:55, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473397 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/July: Found match for regex: :::::::::::: {{reply to|JohnC5}} I notice you're using /x/ for the visarga; is it really that and not /h/? As for laryngeals and alternate syllabification, we probably don't want them to be generated automatically from the spelling, but maybe the {{tl|sa-IPA}} template could take a parameter like altved=pāat or altved=uktuā that would allow pronunciations not reflected by the spelling to be listed as alternative Vedic pronunciations. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:13, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473397 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/July: Found match for regex: :::::::::::::: {{reply to|JohnC5}} I think all we know for sure is that a word could be spelled उक्त्वा and scan as three syllables in the Veda; whether it was realized as /ˈuk.t̪u.ʋɑː/, /ˈuk.t̪u.ɑː/, or /ˈuk.t̪u.ʔɑː/ is probably not really knowable at this point. Likewise all that's known for sure is that some instances of ā scan as two syllables, and comparative evidence shows that these must have been *aHa or *aHā or *āHa or *āHā in PII, but how exactly they were realized in Vedic is again probably not really knowable at this point. I don't know whether vowel hiatus ever occurs when it wasn't due to a laryngeal. I almost regret bringing these issues up now, since I know so little about the details that would help in resolving them. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:38, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473397 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/July: Found match for regex: :I have no objection. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:05, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473398 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/August: Found match for regex: ::For the L3 header, I'd just call it a verb. We don't seem to have entries for parallel things in English like -ceive, but I did make an entry for Old Irish {{m|sga|·icc}} and call it a verb. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:36, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473398 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/August: Found match for regex: : I think we should remove the hyperlinks, because what we are actually quoting is the durably archived version of the article, i.e. the version printed on paper (that will eventually end up on microfilm in libraries), and that version doesn't have hyperlinks. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:04, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473398 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/August: Found match for regex: :: I'd like Thai to follow the pattern we've already established for Burmese: one automatically generated transliteration system used everywhere outside of Thai entries (translation sections, etymology sections, etc.), and Thai entries with additional transliteration systems (both spelling-based and sound-based). Ideally the automatically generated one should be {{w|ISO 11940-2}} or at least based on it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:05, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473398 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/August: Found match for regex: ::: There should be no double standard. Either both Wyang and CodeCat have their sysop powers restored upon resolution of this problem, or they both have to reapply and be voted on. I do not understand, however, why CodeCat's edits are no longer autopatrolled. That should be fixed as soon as possible. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:55, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473398 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/August: Found match for regex: : I really don't want us to start enshrining common sense as policy or to start having highly regulated drama-fests like Wikipedia does. Editors shouldn't revert-war and wheel-war because it's disruptive; we shouldn't need an explicit policy stating what everyone already knows. As for returning a page to the "original state", who decides what the "original state" is? If today I revert something another editor did back in 2013, and 15 minutes later he reverts my revert, what's the "original state"? I like how unregulated and uncomplicated Wiktionary is compared to Wikipedia, and I want to keep it that way. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:15, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473398 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/August: Found match for regex: :: Maybe it would be better to give the templates a parameter so users can manually make them opt in to categorizing, e.g. |PIErootcat=1 or something like that. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:58, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473398 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/August: Found match for regex: ::To this day at Wikipedia there are people who consider Wiktionary to be Wikipedia's trashcan. I still see "Transwiki to Wiktionary" at deletion discussions all the time there, even for terms we already have an entry for, and even when our entry is superior to the Wikipedia article up for deletion. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:09, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473398 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/August: Found match for regex: But according to w:Breton_language#Alphabet, at least the following are actually used: â, ê, î, ô, û, ù, ü, ñ. Shouldn't we therefore be keeping all 8 of those, instead of only ñ? Breton Wikipedia uses at least ê and ù in its articles. (Here's a sentence from br:Backgammon: Dre m'eo berr amzer c'hoari pep den, hag a-benn digreskiñ lodenn ar chañs, e vez c'hoariet a-grogadoù alies, ha trec'h e vez disklêriet an den en deus dastumet ar muiañ a boentoù dreist 3 e-lec'h gortoz ma vije bet lamet an holl jedoueroù diouzh un tu.) So it looks like these diacritics are used in normal writing, not just in pedagogical texts and reference works. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:15, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473398 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/August: Found match for regex: :In fact, I just noticed that we do use "ù" at least in article titles, e.g. anvioù, which is the plural of {{m|br|anv}}. But "anvioù" in the headline of {{m|br|anv}} points to "anviou" instead, so the link is broken. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:19, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473398 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/August: Found match for regex: ::{{ping|JohnC5}} is the one who made the change to the module, about a month ago, so I'm pinging him too. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:21, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473398 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/August: Found match for regex: :::: OK, I've unstripped the diacritics. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:44, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473398 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/August: Found match for regex: # {{support}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:14, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473398 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/August: Found match for regex: # {{support}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:12, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473398 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/August: Found match for regex: # {{oppose}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:13, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473399 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/September: Found match for regex: *I'm all in favor of this. If there's any risk of {{tl|also}} taking more than about 8 or 9 arguments, then an "Appendix:Variations of..." should be created anyway. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:26, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473399 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/September: Found match for regex: {{ping|CodeCat|Victar|UtherPendrogn|Nayrb Rellimer|Florian Blaschke}}, and anyone else who cares: Right now we have only two Proto-Celtic verbs, {{m|cel-pro|*ber-}} (which uses the stem as the lemma) and {{m|cel-pro|*brusū}} (which uses the 1st person singular present as the lemma). Does anyone object to my settling on the 3rd person singular present as the lemma form for Proto-Celtic verbs? That's what we're already using for verb lemmas for Proto-Celtic's ancestor (Proto-Indo-European) as well as for its best attested early descendant (Old Irish). This would entail moving {{m|cel-pro|*ber-}} to {{m|cel-pro|*bereti}} and {{m|cel-pro|*brusū}} to {{m|cel-pro|*bruseti}}. Is that OK with everyone? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:29, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473399 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/September: Found match for regex: :: The imperative for the modern Goidelic languages, the verbal noun for the modern Brythonic languages. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:40, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473399 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/September: Found match for regex: :::: I've been using the verbal noun for Middle Welsh, too, but I've been thinking it might be good to use the 1st person singular present (which is what the Geiriadur Prifysgol Cymru does for literary Welsh) and have the verbal noun be separate (as the verbal noun is separate for the Goidelic languages). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:00, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473399 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/September: Found match for regex: *OK, I've gone ahead and moved all the verb pages (there were only four) to the third-person singular present indicative form. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:46, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473399 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/September: Found match for regex: :: I definitely would not use MacBain's dictionary for anything. It's hopelessly out of date now, and wasn't all that up to date even when it was published. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:54, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473399 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/September: Found match for regex: :::: I got some Google Hits for the Gaulish name and variants of it, e.g. this, but it seems to be a place name rather than a personal name. I can find no trace of an Irish form "Cathfollomon". {{w|Cadwallon}} reconstructs Proto-Brythonic *Katuwellaunos, which in our notation would be {{m|cel-bry-pro|*Kaduwellọn}}, from Proto-Celtic {{m|cel-pro|*Katuwelnāmnos}}. The Brythonic {{w|Catuvellauni}} have the same name. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:28, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473399 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/September: Found match for regex: :: This is true. On my German keyboard, it's easy to type â ê î ô û but not ŵ ŷ, so if I'm searching for a Welsh word with a circumflexed vowel, I'll search for the diacriticked form of the first five but the undiacriticked form of the last two. All that said, however, I'd prefer to keep the full list on each page, because you just never know where you're going to end up. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:43, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473399 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/September: Found match for regex: :I bet it hasn't been discussed before. We can certainly create a language code for Middle Danish if no one objects; I'd suggest gmq-mda. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:13, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473399 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/September: Found match for regex: :: You can see some samples at w:History of Danish#Medieval Danish. Maybe someone who knows Danish can tell us if that is as different from modern Danish as Chaucer is from modern English. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:37, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473399 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/September: Found match for regex: :::: I guess the next question is, how late are the words we're already calling Old Danish attested? If our Old Danish words are words/spellings attested up through the 15th century, then the reason we don't have Middle Danish is that what we're calling Old Danish developed directly into (early) Modern Danish. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:57, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473399 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/September: Found match for regex: :::: For English, I would follow the Maximal Onset Principle for stressed syllables first, and also make sure any stressed syllable with a lax vowel has at least one coda consonant. Once the stressed syllables are maximized, the unstressed ones will take care of themselves. In other words, {{m|en|happy}} should be syllabified /ˈhæp.i/, not /ˈhæ.pi/. That said, however, I do want to reiterate something I've said many times before: syllabification in English is far from obvious, and syllable boundaries are very often perceived to be located within consonants. Evidence suggests that the /p/ of happy is not exclusively in either syllable; rather it's simultaneously the coda of the first syllable and the onset of the second. But there's no convenient way to show that in IPA. For this reason, I personally am often very reluctant to mark syllable boundaries except in cases of vowel hiatus, where it's a convenient way of showing that a sequence of two vowels isn't a diphthong (e.g. Joey vs. Joy). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:33, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473399 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/September: Found match for regex: :::: I don't have very strong feelings about putting the syllable boundary marker and the stress marker next to each other. Putting them both isn't wrong, but it certainly isn't necessary. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:19, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473399 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/September: Found match for regex: ::::::: Definitely not that. That implies there are two possible syllabifications, and worse yet, that there's a way of distinguishing them. As for how to mark it, I think if we must mark it, then /ˈhæp.i/ is the least bad option. If we do invent a house notation, I'd rather use something that takes up less space, like /ˈhæpˇi/; we could define ˇ as meaning "the previous consonant is ambisyllabic". But if I'm honest, I'd really rather just stick to /ˈhæpi/, which is unambiugous, easy to read, and makes no theoretical claims as to syllabification. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:22, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473399 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/September: Found match for regex: ::Should the accounts of deceased users be permanently blocked in order to prevent hacking? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:05, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473399 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/September: Found match for regex: ::* As I understand it, the proposal still allows the use of   in the edit box, just not an actual nonbreaking space itself. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:05, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473399 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/September: Found match for regex: :Or maybe the first person singular, since that's the usual lemma for Middle Welsh in academic material (notwithstanding the fact that we at Wiktionary use the verbal noun instead, a situation which I've been meaning to rectify but haven't gotten around to yet). I don't know what form is usually given as the lemma for the various stages of Breton and Cornish. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:35, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473399 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/September: Found match for regex: :If it's something that applies to all or most verbs across the board, then it shouldn't be in a usage note as the usage note would have to appear on every single verb entry. Maybe there could be a footnote within the inflection table itself saying something like "Increasingly used as the preterite" or whatever. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:41, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473399 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/September: Found match for regex: ::: I think that's fine, especially for a historical language. For a modern language we might not want to list all obsolete forms in inflection tables. (Though TBH I do have a tendency to put obsolete inflected forms in Irish declension tables, so maybe I'm being hypocritical.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:12, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473399 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/September: Found match for regex: ::: I'm friends with an Athabaskanist who told me all the Athabaskanists she knows are pretty much convinced by Dene-Yeniseian. But it's definitely the exception rather than the rule for new suggestions of high-level groupings to be accepted by the wider linguistics community. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:13, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473399 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/September: Found match for regex: *** I dunno, I've been using CAT:etyl cleanup as a way of finding terms for which a decision needs to be made whether they're inheritances or not. I've been working on the assumption that if an entry uses {{tl|der}} it means someone has deliberately made the decision not to use {{tl|inh}}, but that if an entry uses {{tl|etyl}} it probably means no one stopped to think about the difference. But if your bot empties the Etyl cleanup categories automatically, then I'll have no way of knowing which entries have already been thought about and which haven't. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:18, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473399 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/September: Found match for regex: ***** But the derivation categories include everything using {{tl|der}}, regardless of whether a human editor deliberately used {{tl|der}} instead of {{tl|inh}} or a bot automatically used {{tl|der}} without considering {{tl|inh}}. The derivation categories will be far too big for me (or anyone else, probably) to feel any motivation to work through them. As a result, inheritances will stay in the derivation categories indefinitely, thus rendering completely useless the distinction we only fairly recently decided to make between inherited and noninherited terms. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:22, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473400 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/October: Found match for regex: : I didn't realize this was an issue. I thought our longstanding practice was to put ===Pronunciation=== after ===Etymology===, unless there are multiple etymologies and all have the same pronunciation, in which case ===Pronunciation=== comes before ===Etymology 1===. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:04, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473400 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/October: Found match for regex: :::The current setup is <code><nowiki>{{calque|fr|etyl lang=en|etyl term=light year}}</nowiki>. I'd say the new setup should be <code><nowiki>{{calque|fr|en|light year}}</nowiki>, but that won't work right away because the older setup, <code><nowiki>{{calque|année|lumière|etyl lang=en|etyl term=light year|lang=fr}}</nowiki> is still accommodated. Perhaps we need a new template with the new setup during the period of transition; {{tl|cal}} is currently a redirect to {{tl|calque}} but it's used on only a handful of pages. Maybe we could separate {{tl|cal}} for now, make it follow the new setup, correct the 13 pages it's used on, and then gradually migrate uses of {{tl|calque}} with the old setup to {{tl|cal}} with the new. Then, once no pages are using the old setup anymore, we can move {{tl|cal}} back to {{tl|calque}} (deleting the old template and leaving a redirect) in order to achieve our status quo of having a short-name template redirect to a long-name template. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:08, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473400 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/October: Found match for regex: :: I agree that the bot should only add missing pronunciations, not attempt to change existing ones. As to your questions: (1) I'd tag it "General American"; "US" is ambiguous and should be avoided (not all US accents are GenAm). (2) Yes, have the bot follow our conventions for representing GenAm. (3) I've long been opposed to indicating syllable boundaries in English, but I think I'm in the minority here. (4) Maximize the onsets of stressed syllables when indicating stress placement. (5) I agree; /ʌ/ in primarily and secondarily stressed syllables and /ə/ elsewhere. (6) I support /ɝ/ in primarily and secondarily stressed syllables, /ɚ/ in unstressed syllables, and /əɹ/ in unstressed syllables before a vowel. All three variants are illustrated in murderer: /ˈmɝdəɹɚ/. (7) I'd follow Kenyon and Knott here: /l̩/ after all consonants; /n̩/ after alveolar consonants, otherwise /ən/; /əm/ everywhere. Thus /ˈkækl̩/, /ˈbʌtn̩/, /ˈtʃɪkən/, /ˈɹɪðəm/. (8) I'd let the bot just follow CMUPD here; individual entries can be cleaned up later as necssary. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:16, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473400 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/October: Found match for regex: :::: Yes, of course they are. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:28, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473400 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/October: Found match for regex: :::::: What's extremely rare outside of Wiktionary is using /ɹ/ rather than /r/ for the English r-phoneme. Probably most reference works that render American English in IPA use /ɜr/ for the {{smallcaps|nurse}} vowel and /ər/ for the lett{{smallcaps|er}} vowel, but /ɝ ɚ/ do have some usage as well (e.g. Kenyon & Knott, PEAS). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:22, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473400 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/October: Found match for regex: :::::::: Yes; anything that can be a word-initial onset cluster can be a stressed syllable onset cluster. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:56, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473400 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::(1) K&K don't use /l̩/ or /n̩/ after /ɹ/. I'd forgotten about that until I saw /ˈtʃæɹl̩/ on your test page. But they write /ˈbæɹəl/ and /ˈbæɹən/ with shwas, and that feels right to my intuitions as well. They use /n̩/ after /t d s z/ but /ən/ after /ʃ ʒ tʃ dʒ θ ð l n ɹ/, and I largely agree (though I'm not adverse to Ethan /ˈiθn̩/ and heathen /ˈhiðn̩/ either). (2) I'm inclined to write /fɝi/ for furry since /ɝ/ is always stressed and doesn't lose its r-coloring before a vowel. That's different from ephemeral /iˈfɛməɹəl/ where I feel like the first shwa really isn't r-colored. (3) I have no opinion on the use of tie bars on affricates. I don't usually use them myself for English, but I usually do for other languages; I can't justify why. I certainly don't object to them. (4) I generally prefer /hw/, not least because it makes it easier to combine merging and contrasting accents by writing /(h)w/. (5) I'd use /ɚ/ after a vowel. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:23, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473400 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::Indeed, in that discussion it seems that a large portion of people expressed the opinion that having cognates in a separate paragraph should be an option, especially when the Etymology section is big, but not a requirement. If I had contributed to the discussion, that's probably what I would have said, too. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:48, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473400 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/October: Found match for regex: :::: On the talk page, I suggested using {{tl|nonstandard spelling of}}, but no one's responded to that suggestion yet. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:42, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473400 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::: Some British publishers do use the -ize spellings, notably the Oxford University Press, which is why British spelling using the -ize variants is known as Oxford spelling. It shouldn't be labeled simply as "US" (the way center or color should be) but should be labeled {{tl|lb|en|US|Oxford}} or the like. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:49, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473400 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/October: Found match for regex: :::::: I think so. I'd say the actual definition should be at only entry, and the other entry should be marked as an alternative spelling, with the appropriate context labels. The problem is which entry to make the primary one. In the past, some have suggested using Google Books Ngrams to see which is more common across English as a whole (i.e. without specifying en-US or en-GB); in this case, that would be canonize. But I don't know whether there's a consensus to use that method. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:48, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473400 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::::::::-ize spellings can be labeled {{tl|lb|en|US|Oxford}} and -ise spellings can be labeled {{tl|lb|en|non-Oxford}}. The form called the alternative spelling can use a from= parameter instead of {{tl|lb}}, like {{diff|41155095|text=this}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:23, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473400 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/October: Found match for regex: :::::::::::: I wasn't aware of {{tl|term-label}}. That is a good idea. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:51, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473400 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::: We could create Module:en:Dialects and create abbreviations for {{tl|alter}} to recognize, the way Module:hy:Dialects and Module:grc:Dialects do for those languages. Otherwise, I'd just use {{tl|q|] ]}}; that way the parentheses aren't italicized but the contents are. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:02, 15 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473400 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::::: {{reply to|Erutuon}} That's fine, but wouldn't it be better to have {{tl|alter}} call on the same dialect list that {{tl|lb}} and {{tl|alternative form of|from=}} already call on, i.e. Module:labels/data/regional? It seems redundant to have two lists. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:27, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473400 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::::::: {{reply to|Erutuon}} Couldn't {{tl|alter}} be rewritten to use Module:labels/data/regional instead of, or in addition to, Module:XXX:Dialects? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:16, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473400 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/October: Found match for regex: :::: I've been under the impression for years that our usual practice is to use typewriter apostrophes in entry titles and curly apostrophes in headword line displays, not just for French but for all languages that use apostrophes. I understand the rationale behind using typewriter apostrophes in entry titles, but curly apostrophes look prettier, so I prefer using them for display whenever possible. What should definitely always be the case, though, is for there to be a hard redirect from the curly version to the typewriter version, e.g. d’où → d'où, because French Wiktionary always uses curly apostrophes, and the only way to make sure our entries link correctly to theirs is for en:d'où to link to fr:d'où, which hard-redirects to fr:d’où, which links to en:d’où, which hard-redirects back to en:d'où. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:19, 21 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473400 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/October: Found match for regex: ::: How is that supposed to work when Old X is the ancestor of multiple modern languages? Old Irish is the ancestor of Irish, Scottish Gaelic, and Manx. Old English is the ancestor of English and Scots. Old Norse is the ancestor of some 10 languages, not one of which is called "Norse". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:51, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473400 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/October: Found match for regex: :::: I support renaming pro Old Occitan. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:51, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473400 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/October: Found match for regex: :The way you don't like is the way the Irish editors have agreed to list country names in Irish, which almost always have the definite article. For example, the entry name for the Irish word for "France" is {{l|ga|Frainc}}, but the headword line says An Fhrainc. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:03, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473400 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/October: Found match for regex: :::: I also prefer keeping the parens, except perhaps in the headword line. "γένεσις • génesis f" doesn't look that bad to me, but in running text the parens really need to be there. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:54, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473401 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/November: Found match for regex: {{ping|Dimboukas|Eipnvn|Omnipaedista|Svlioras|Xoristzatziki|Rossyxan}} and anyone else who knows Modern Greek: Is/was Katharevousa ever written in monotonic orthography? I notice most of the entries in CAT:Katharevousa are monotonic and wonder whether they're actually attestable as such. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:35, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473401 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/November: Found match for regex: :: In durably archived sources? I have no interest in sending any of them to RFV, but in theory, if someone did, would they be likely to pass? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:45, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473401 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/November: Found match for regex: :::That's fine with me, although the fact that we have a lot of templates for online dictionaries beginning with "R:" and categorized as "reference templates" suggests that we do consider online dictionaries to be references. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:20, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473401 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/November: Found match for regex: :Now I'm at a loss for where to put {{tl|R:ga:Dinneen}}. It's a reference to a paper dictionary, so there's no link, so it can't really go under External links. But it's also just a dictionary entry that isn't proving anything in the etymology or definition other than the existence of the word and, in some cases, the word's pre-reform spelling, so strictly it shouldn't go under References either. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 23:49, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473401 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/November: Found match for regex: :: {{reply to|Daniel Carrero}} I like "External sources". The only online version of Dinneen's dictionary I know of is , which is difficult to use, full of scannos, and incomplete. There are scans of the must shorter first edition at . The first edition is public domain in both the EU and the US; the second edition is public domain in the EU for sure but might not be in the US, depending on what Ireland's copyright laws were in 1996. {{reply to|Erutuon}} I'd say References sections can be used for footnotes, but that's not all they can be used for. They can be used to link to pages where you can find information corroborating any claims we make that might not be immediately intuitive. If LSJ and Cunliffe have been used as the source of definitions, I'd still put them in External links, because since this is a wiki, the definitions may get changed at some point in the future, and then they won't be taken directly from those sources anymore. And ideally (but admittedly totally unrealistically), we should be writing our own definitions "from the bottom up", i.e. on the basis of citations, rather than taking them from other dictionaries. For example, we should be saying that {{m|grc|μῆνις}} means "wrath" not because LSJ tells us that's what it means, but because we observe that that's what it means in "Μῆνιν ἄειδε, θεά, Πηληιάδεω Ἀχιλῆος οὐλομένην". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:32, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473401 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/November: Found match for regex: :: In German, verbs that take dative objects, e.g. {{m|de|helfen}}, are traditionally called intransitive; only verbs that take accusative objects are called transitive. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:19, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473401 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/November: Found match for regex: :::::: That's true. German has some verbs that take two accusative objects; my favorite example is das geht dich_ACC einen Scheißdreck_ACC an "that's none of your damn business". A more prosaic example is Sie nannte ihn_ACC einen Lügner_ACC "she called hima liar". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:38, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473401 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/November: Found match for regex: :Neither one. Even without parentheses, ᵝ is not a valid IPA character. According to Wikipedia, the sound formerly spelled ŵ is a "closely lip-rounded with the tongue in the close-i position" that has completely merged with /w/ in most dialects. It seems to be commonly transcribed with /β/ in the literature, so I'd prefer the module to generate "/m.maˈɽá.wi/, /m.maˈɽá.βi/" as two separate forms, rather than trying to merge them. Alternatively, if people feel that /β/ doesn't adequately represent the sound in question, a "closely lip-rounded with the tongue in the close-i position" could probably be transcribed /w̹ʲ/. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:37, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473401 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/November: Found match for regex: :Wiktionary:Blocking policy makes no provision for blocking someone just because they ask us to. If you want to stop editing, just stop editing. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:06, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473401 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/November: Found match for regex: ::It's been proposed numerous times before, but I still like the idea of having separate pages for each language's token of a word. Thus, instead of sea#English, sea#Irish, sea#Old Irish, sea#Old Swedish, and sea#Spanish, we'd have en/sea, ga/sea, sga/sea, gmq-osw/sea, and es/sea. That would totally eliminate the problem of how to sort languages on a page as well as making pages like a navigable again. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:06, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4473401 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2016/November: Found match for regex: :::::: I like the idea of sea becoming a disambig page; in fact, it could be a disambig page for all the diacriticky variations too, thus taking over the function of the "Variations of..." appendices and obviating the need for {{tl|also}}. See User:Angr/disambig for one possible scenario. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:34, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 4578765 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2016-01/Literal translations in translation tables: Found match for regex: # {{support}} I guess, especially when the foreign-language term is a red link, meaning there's no entry for a literal translation to appear in. If it's a blue link, I'd sort of play it by ear, preferring to include shortish literal translations while avoiding longish ones. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:12, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4579077 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2016-01/Translations of taxonomic names: Found match for regex: # {{abstain}} I'd like there at the very least to be restrictions on translations entered for taxonomic names, such as: (1) Do not add a term that is identical to the existing Translingual term, so don't add "German: {{tl|t|de|Mammalia}}" to the translation table Mammalia. (2) Do not add a term that is the same as (or simply the plural of) the language's vernacular equivalent of the taxonomic name, so don't add "German: {{tl|t|de|Säugetiere}}" to the translation table at Mammalia, as that is simply the plural of the German word that should be entered in the translation table at mammal. (3) You may add transliterations of the taxonomic name into other scripts (provided these transliterations are actually attestable in the language in question), so it is acceptable to add "Russian: {{tl|t|ru|го́мо са́пиенс}}" to the translation table at Homo sapiens. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:38, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4579077 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2016-01/Translations of taxonomic names: Found match for regex: #:: No, it doesn't have any (distinct) inflected forms in German. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:12, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 4580555 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2016-02/Notes about pronunciations: Found match for regex: # {{abstain}} per -sche. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:12, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4700200 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2016-02/Attestation vs. the slippery slope 2: Found match for regex: # {{abstain}} I agree with Droigheann: reducing it to what Dan proposed seems like a good idea. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:23, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
Page 4889105 Wiktionary:Votes/2016-04/New logo: Found match for regex: # {{oppose}}. Problematic for a variety of reasons, and I'm sure I'm not the only one getting tired of newbies coming to complain about the phonetic transcription. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:56, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4889105 Wiktionary:Votes/2016-04/New logo: Found match for regex: # {{support}} Better than what we've got now, and more likely to win than the tiles. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:21, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4889105 Wiktionary:Votes/2016-04/New logo: Found match for regex: #: ~~{{abstain}} Meh. Better than the current logo, but not as good as the tiles. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:56, 26 April 2016 (UTC)~~ Changing to support. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:21, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
Page 4889105 Wiktionary:Votes/2016-04/New logo: Found match for regex: #:::{{ping|Metaknowledge}}: If it looks like it could make a difference, maybe I'll change my vote later on. At the moment, though, it doesn't look like any of the logos has community support. If that happens, I guess we're stuck with the status quo, though I wish it meant we would have no logo at all. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:43, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4889105 Wiktionary:Votes/2016-04/New logo: Found match for regex: # {{support}}. I've already altered my preferences to display this when I'm logged in. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:56, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4889105 Wiktionary:Votes/2016-04/New logo: Found match for regex: ::: I'm opposed to the fact that the status quo prevails. I think that if none of the candidates gets at least 2:1 support, we should have no logo at all. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:28, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4889105 Wiktionary:Votes/2016-04/New logo: Found match for regex: :::::It would be less ridiculous than the current logo. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:06, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 4928504 Wiktionary:Votes/2016-06/label → lb: Found match for regex: # {{abstain}} A matter of no importance. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:21, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4967831 Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2016-06/User:Smuconlaw for admin: Found match for regex: * Nomination seconded: —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:42, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4967831 Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2016-06/User:Smuconlaw for admin: Found match for regex: # {{support}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:29, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 4967831 Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2016-06/User:Smuconlaw for admin: Found match for regex: #::: I agree it would be a good idea to change your user page, especially now that the student project is over anyway. I see no reason to change your user name, though. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:42, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4967831 Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2016-06/User:Smuconlaw for admin: Found match for regex: :::::: {{done}}, though I think a non-admin in good standing would have been as good as an admin for this purpose. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:42, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4977014 Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2016-06/Tohru for deadmin: Found match for regex: # {{support}} without prejudice per Equinox. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:58, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4982500 Wiktionary:Votes/2016-07/Using template l to link to English entries: Found match for regex: #: ~~{{support}} unless something better like the {{tl|def}} template proposed on the talk page can be implemented. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:42, 25 July 2016 (UTC)~~
Page 4982500 Wiktionary:Votes/2016-07/Using template l to link to English entries: Found match for regex: # {{oppose}}, I would prefer using {{tl|def}} instead. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:59, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4994314 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2016-07/Pronunciation 2: Found match for regex: # {{support}}, although the "Ideally, every entry should have a pronunciation section, with the phonetic transcription and an audio file" needs to be finessed. There are some languages that shouldn't have a pronunciation section (e.g. sign languages, which have a Production section instead, and many ancient languages whose pronunciation is unknown). Languages with no native speakers shouldn't have audio files. But for modern spoken languages, yes, the pronunciation section is an essential part of the entry, and an entry would be incomplete without one. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:17, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 4996111 Wiktionary:Votes/2016-07/Adding PIE root box: Found match for regex: # {{oppose}} the use of automatic and semi-automatic edits to add boxes; oppose the use of boxes at all for this, but support enabling {{tl|der}} and {{tl|inh}} to populate the categories. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:08, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
Page 5018194 Wiktionary:Votes/2016-07/Using template l to link to entries: Found match for regex: # {{support}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:30, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 5018194 Wiktionary:Votes/2016-07/Using template l to link to entries: Found match for regex: # {{support}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:30, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 5020648 Wiktionary:Votes/2016-07/borrowing, borrowed, loan, loanword → bor: Found match for regex: #: bor is for direct borrowings from one language to the language of the entry. inh for terms inherited from an earlier stage of the language. der is for everything else, or if you aren't sure. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:15, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 5020648 Wiktionary:Votes/2016-07/borrowing, borrowed, loan, loanword → bor: Found match for regex: # {{oppose}}. I'm all for using {{tl|bor}}, but I'm opposed to having bots fix redirects that ain't broke. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:23, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 5020648 Wiktionary:Votes/2016-07/borrowing, borrowed, loan, loanword → bor: Found match for regex: #: @Aɴɢʀ: What is the disadvantage of using bots? Will not bots make the conversion to {{tl|bor}} faster, on the assumption that people often copy what they seen in existing entries, and the fewer non-bors there are in the wiki markup, the fewer models there are to pick non-bor from? --Dan Polansky (talk) 11:20, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 5020648 Wiktionary:Votes/2016-07/borrowing, borrowed, loan, loanword → bor: Found match for regex: #:: It's a waste of the bot operator's time and an annoyance to anyone watchlisting the pages to have bots doing nothing to pages but changing the names of templates. At the very least, I don't want to see bots making edits doing only this; if a bot does it incidentally while making some other, genuinely important edit, that's less of a waste of time and less annoying to others. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:50, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 5020648 Wiktionary:Votes/2016-07/borrowing, borrowed, loan, loanword → bor: Found match for regex: #::: @Aɴɢʀ: Frankly, the bot operator's time should be the operator's concern, and if the operator wishes to do something, no one should hinder them only on account of that being waste of operator's time. As for watchlisted pages, that's a valid point although one that I am surprised to see made. --Dan Polansky (talk)
Page 5022000 Wiktionary:Votes/2016-07/Placing English definitions in def template or similar: Found match for regex: # {{support}} since plain links often don't work correctly. Inconvenience for editors is not as important as misleading links for readers. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:54, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 5022000 Wiktionary:Votes/2016-07/Placing English definitions in def template or similar: Found match for regex: #:: I mean they often take the reader to the top of the page, which in some cases is very far away from the English section. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:32, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 5098872 Wiktionary:Votes/2016-08/Making usex the primary name in the wiki markup: Found match for regex: # {{abstain}} As long as the syntax is the same—i.e., as long as {{tl|usex|aa|Text|Translation}} works just like {{tl|ux|aa|Text|Translation}} works—then I don't really care which one is the primary name and which one is the redirect. I just don't want to use the old, clumsy {{tl|usex|Text|t=Translation|lang=aa}} syntax anymore. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:54, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 5100857 Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2016-08/User:Dan Polansky for admin: Found match for regex: # {{support}} I often disagree with Dan, and often find him to be unreasonably scared of change, but I see no reason whatever not to trust him with the tools. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:20, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 5100857 Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2016-08/User:Dan Polansky for admin: Found match for regex: # {{support}}, precisely per Aɴɢʀ. At the end of the day this discussion is about whether to give a very active editor a mop with which to do more work. bd2412 T 19:31, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 5101214 Wiktionary:Votes/bt-2016-08/User:OctraBot for bot status: Found match for regex: # {{support}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:34, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 5199488 Wiktionary:Votes/2016-10/Removing label proscribed from entries: Found match for regex: # {{oppose}} It is a descriptive fact that some forms are proscribed in the standard written form of some language. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:24, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 5267643 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2016-11/Abbreviations: Found match for regex: # {{support}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:52, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 5284651 Wiktionary:Votes/2016-12/Division of Church Slavonic languages: Found match for regex: # {{oppose}} for now; it needs more discussion first. Certainly RCS is different from OCS, but I don't know whether it's different enough to warrant being a separate language as opposed to a regional/temporal dialect; in other words, that tagging Russianisms with {{tl|lb|cu|Russia}} or the like isn't sufficient. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:35, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 5298249 Wiktionary:Votes/2016-12/Boldface in image captions: Found match for regex: # {{oppose}} both options. The status quo, with each editor deciding for himself how to format the captions he writes, and no one wasting time on mass edits switching from one format to the other, is preferable. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 00:08, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5298249 Wiktionary:Votes/2016-12/Boldface in image captions: Found match for regex: #: Aɴɢʀ: I understand this to mean that avoidable lack of unity AKA consistency in formatting is preferable, right? --Dan Polansky (talk) 19:06, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5298249 Wiktionary:Votes/2016-12/Boldface in image captions: Found match for regex: #:: Consistency has its place, which is why we have templates, but in this case I feel that any attempt at consistency would be unnecessarily disruptive and would not bring any benefit except consistency for consistency's sake. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:20, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5298249 Wiktionary:Votes/2016-12/Boldface in image captions: Found match for regex: #:::: It would disrupt my work to have my watchlist filled with edits doing nothing constructive, but merely adding or removing boldface from captions. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:15, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311503 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/January: Found match for regex: :The problem of course, is that the page pilegrim doesn't have a Middle English entry yet. That happens all the time. There's no way to prevent links to pages that lack the corresponding language section, but if you go to your Preferences, under the Gadgets tab, you can select the box for "OrangeLinks: colour links orange if the target language is missing on an existing page". Then links to pages lacking the corresponding language section will appear in orange rather than blue, thus warning you ahead of time that there is, for example, no Middle English section at pilegrim. The link is still there, but the color keeps you from getting your hopes up. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:38, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311503 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/January: Found match for regex: :::{{reply to|Backinstadiums}} It isn't Arabic script that's the problem. The orange-link function only looks to see if the language section is there, not if the exact form you're interested in is there. As for using green rather than orange, I imagine there's some way to change that on your own CSS page, but I couldn't begin to tell you how. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:06, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311503 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/January: Found match for regex: ::: I'm not opposed to removing accents from PBS and PIE page names as long they can remain in headword lines. We can treat them the same as macrons in Latin, complete with diacritic stripping in linking templates. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:08, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311504 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/February: Found match for regex: ::Yes, and Wiktionary:Quotations#How to format quotations calls for putting the year first. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:37, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311504 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/February: Found match for regex: *** I've moved Reconstruction:Hunnic/adám to an acceptable name and tidied it up in accordance with the one cited source. I have neither the time nor the inclination to do the same for all the remaining Hunnic entries, but this one at least has a scholarly background. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:05, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311504 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/February: Found match for regex: ** I've upped the block to to indefinite on that information. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:25, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311504 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/February: Found match for regex: :::I agree with Equinox, Ungoliant, and Stephen that {{tl|also}} is for word that differ only in capitalization (mike/Mike), diacritics (sake/saké), punctuation (wont/won't), spacing (everyday/every day), and the like. I'm undecided on visually similar characters from different scripts, though (e.g. to/το; hug/հաց). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:39, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311504 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/February: Found match for regex: ::: {{reply to|Erutuon}} Module:my-pron, for example, also generates a phonetic respelling and romanizations in addition to IPA. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:26, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311504 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/February: Found match for regex: :I recall a discussion in which it was decided that templates that automatically produce pronunciation info should be named "xx-IPA"; I don't think there was ever a discussion about what the corresponding modules should be called. Since ordinary editors very rarely have to type the names of modules (as they frequently do the names of templates), succinctness is less important for module names than for template names. I agree that "xx-pron" should be avoided as templates named "xx-pron" are usually headword-line templates for pronouns, and it would be confusing for "pron" to stand for something else in modules. Other than that, I don't really mind what the module is called as long as the template is called "xx-IPA" as expected, since the module name only has to be written once, namely in the template that invokes the module. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:24, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311504 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/February: Found match for regex: : I think putting synonyms and antonyms under their respective senses is a good idea, especially for words with lots of meanings, like head. Keeping them in separate Synonyms and Antonyms sections makes them harder to find, makes it harder to find which sense they belong to, and makes it easier for them to be assigned to senses that are not actually listed. Separate sections are fine for words that have only one or two meanings, but for words like head with a very large number of senses and subsenses and subsubsenses, I think the new arrangement is an improvement. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:57, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311504 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/February: Found match for regex: :::: I'm not fond of subsensing either, but that's an entirely separate issue that has nothing whatever to do with the placement of synonyms. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:27, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311504 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/February: Found match for regex: {{outdent|14}} When it comes to pronunciation info, clearly our usual criteria of use in a permanently archived source by multiple independent authors spanning the course of more than a year cannot apply. When I add pronunciation info for English, German, and Burmese, I always rely on information from other dictionaries; when I add it for Irish, I rely on published phonetic descriptions of specific dialects combined with my own knowledge of the phonology of the language. For Welsh and Lower Sorbian, I rely on the spelling-to-pronunciation rules described in dictionaries as well as as phonological descriptions of the language. And for English and German, still I often come into conflict with other users who have different opinions on how best to transcribe these languages, even if we don't actually disagree on how a given word is pronounced. In general, phonemic transcriptions are more important here than narrow phonetic ones, but there's no reason not to include both. Is there any objection to {{IPA|lang=nl|/kroːˈaː.(t)si.jə/|}}? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:40, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311505 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/March: Found match for regex: :(key) links to Appendix:English pronunciation; it only takes you to Wikipedia's article on a language's phonology if the pronunciation appendix doesn't exist. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:47, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311505 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/March: Found match for regex: ::: I think in general, quotations should be at the main entry, but there can be exceptions, such as when a given nonlemma form is rare, dialectal or obsolete. For example, the quote at sense 1 of {{m|en|childer}} really does belong there, not at {{m|en|child}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:33, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311505 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/March: Found match for regex: ::Awesomemeeos was already blocked for an hour last week to "cool off". He may need a longer cooling-off period this time, e.g. a day. He's said before he {{diff|42408790|text=has "mental issues"}} and his {{diff|42460022|text="mind was messed up"}}. Perhaps he needs some time off to sort his thoughts. {{reply to|Jan.Kamenicek}} Atitarev's objections are not to Awesomemeeos's edits (which are unobjectionable) but to his edit summaries, which seem to contain veiled threats. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:45, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311505 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/March: Found match for regex: :CAT:Persian non-lemma forms and CAT:Persian verb forms do exist and aren't empty, so there are some such entries. If there aren't more, it's just because no one has bothered adding them yet. The inflection tables would have to be edited to make the terms linkable. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:50, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311505 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/March: Found match for regex: :I generally just link back to the main entry, mostly because I'm too lazy to list the alternative plurals. This is particularly relevant in languages like Welsh, where many nouns have as many as three or four different attested plural forms. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:03, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311506 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/April: Found match for regex: :I appreciate the problem, but I don't have any ideas on solving it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:23, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311506 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/April: Found match for regex: :::: Strictly, I'd say intervocalic *ɸ, *θ, *x, and xʷ all become *f in Sabellic, while in Latino-Faliscan they become *b, *d, *g, and *gʷ. But the result is the same. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:37, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311506 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/April: Found match for regex: :If you're reading Spanish with missing diacritics, your next step is to throw it away and get some Spanish that's spelled correctly. Failing that, I suppose you could go through all the pages listed under "See also:" at the top of the page nandu until you find one with a Spanish entry. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:36, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311506 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/April: Found match for regex: :Since both ఉత్పలమాల and ఉత్తరము are nouns, I would give its POS as noun. I would list ఉ under Synonyms at each of the full entries, just as ave. is listed as a synonym of avenue and St. is listed as a synonym of Saint. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:44, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311506 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/April: Found match for regex: :: We're a dictionary; we're interested in the lexicographic properties of words, including names. It's not our job to avoid offending people. My own first name is a relatively rare alternative spelling of a fairly common first name, and if I look my first name up in a dictionary, that's exactly the information I expect to see. It doesn't offend me at all. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:51, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311506 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/April: Found match for regex: :::::: Both ladies and gentleman and men and women obey Behagel's law of increasing terms: the shorter term (the one with fewer syllables) comes before the longer term. This is why we say salt and pepper, not *pepper and salt, and why English speakers say bow and arrow but German speakers say Pfeil und Bogen (lit. "arrow and bow"). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:44, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311506 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/April: Found match for regex: Without any discussion whatever, G23r0f0i has taken it upon {{gender:G23r0f0i|himself|herself|themself}} to remove ===Statistics=== sections and {{tl|rank}} templates from English entries. I don't have any particular interest in rankings either way, but I do think widespread removal of a feature we've had for a long time needs to be discussed before it goes any further. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:37, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311506 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/April: Found match for regex: :I'm in favor as long as (1) User:Wyang is also re-sysopped, and (2) the two of them agree not to wheel-war with each other anymore. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:17, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311506 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/April: Found match for regex: :: {{reply to|I'm so meta even this acronym}} Clipping is the linguistic technical term, though. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:36, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311506 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/April: Found match for regex: :::: The term refers both to the process (as a mass noun) and to the form so created (as a count noun). See the first sentence of the second paragraph of the Wikipedia article, for example. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:41, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311506 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/April: Found match for regex: :As long as it's only replacing r with ɹ in English-language sections it's okay. Our convention is to use /ɹ/ for English; see Appendix:English pronunciation. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:39, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311506 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/April: Found match for regex: ::: {{reply to|Donnanz}} Primarily because of Wiktionary:Votes/2008-01/IPA for English r. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:49, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311506 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/April: Found match for regex: :::::: Strictly speaking, /r/ stands for a trill, like the Italian r or the Spanish rr, while /ɹ/ stands for the usual English r. However, most English-language dictionaries and phonology reference works use /r/, because it's easier on both typesetters and readers and because the two sounds do not contrast in English. (Some varieties of English, particularly some varieties of Scottish English, do use the trill.) If we were a monolingual English dictionary, I'd be in favor of /r/, but because we're a multilingual dictionary I think it's preferable for us to use /ɹ/ for English and /r/ for languages that actually have a trill. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:09, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311506 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/April: Found match for regex: ::::::: {{reply to|Donnanz}} You can listen to that difference in pronunciation in these recordings for {{IPAchar|}} and {{IPAchar|}}. I agree with Erutuon and Aɴɢʀ here. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 11:40, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311506 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/April: Found match for regex: ::::::: "From {{m|ru|вода́||water}}) and the root of {{m|ru|води́ть||to lead}}", for example. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:30, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311506 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/April: Found match for regex: :As a linguist, I don't doubt the existence of null morphemes for a moment, but as a lexicographer, I do doubt the usefulness of showing them in etymology sections of a dictionary. I don't think our readers will benefit from being told that the plural deer is formed from the singular as deer + ∅ or that the past participle run is formed from the infinitive as run + ∅. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:33, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311506 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/April: Found match for regex: ::: Fair enough. I don't think our readers will benefit from being told that the verb dog is formed from the noun as dog + ∅ or that the noun break is formed from the verb as break + ∅. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:00, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311506 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/April: Found match for regex: ::: The 2nd millennium BC is of course a very wide range. The Rig Veda and Hittite inscriptions are also from that millennium. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:36, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311506 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/April: Found match for regex: :: Written-out initialisms? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 05:53, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311507 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/May: Found match for regex: ::: Personally, I miss having "Stupidity" as a block reason. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:16, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311507 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/May: Found match for regex: :: Considering the previous vote is over 5 years old, I think that would be silly. Consensus can change in 5 years; it makes more sense to start a new vote than to cast a meaningless support in a long-stale vote. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:33, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311507 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/May: Found match for regex: :Certainly for the grammatical categories, we do have things in both parent and child categories, although Proper nouns are not considered a child of Nouns. But dog is in both CAT:English nouns and CAT:English lemmas, and Germany is in both CAT:English proper nouns and CAT:English lemmas. For the topical categories, you're probably right that we should avoid duplication and only put things in the most specific category available, thus Toulouse should be in CAT:en:Cities in France but not in CAT:en:Cities or CAT:en:France. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:03, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311507 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/May: Found match for regex: : How about breaking it down into all of its parts: {{af|en|un-|shake|-able|-ity}}? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:19, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311507 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/May: Found match for regex: ::: {{reply to|Benwing2}} Or even ] + -ity], but I don't see that as a reason not to include all the morphemes in the etymology. On the other hand {{af|en|un-|shake|-able|-ity}} would put it into CAT:English words suffixed with -able, which seems undesirable. So maybe just {{af|en|un-|shake|-ability}}? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:52, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311507 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/May: Found match for regex: :The hand gesture is optional, though. I'm sure I've used expressions like "yay big" even when talking on the phone. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:56, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311508 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/June: Found match for regex: ::Right, but our L2 headers, i.e. language names, are in English. We have ==French==, ==German==, and ==Spanish==, not ==Français==, ==Deutsch==, and ==Español==. For that reason, I'm in favor of ignoring things like apostrophes and diacritics when it comes to alphabetizing languages. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:39, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311508 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/June: Found match for regex: :I'd say we should capitalize them all. We shouldn't have Latin entries for {{m|la|romānus}} and {{m|la|graecus}} unless they also have non-demonym meanings. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:48, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311508 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/June: Found match for regex: ::::{{reply to|Atitarev}} My motivation is that that's the way I'm used to seeing it done in modern editions of Latin texts. I've always seen the first sentence of {{w|De Bello Gallico}} written "{{lang|la|Gallia est omnis divisa in partes tres, quarum unam incolunt '''B'''elgae, aliam '''A'''quitani, tertiam qui ipsorum lingua '''C'''eltae, nostra '''G'''alli appellantur.}}" As for Sanskrit, I don't recall ever endorsing capitalized terms at all; we write Sanskrit in Devanagari anyway. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:51, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311508 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/June: Found match for regex: ::{{reply to|Erutuon}} du Cange (published in France) gives entries in all caps, but capitalizes Anglicos in the example sentence. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:55, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311508 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/June: Found match for regex: :::{{reply to|Atitarev}} As Vriullop and I commented above, demonyms are capitalized in Latin also in works published in France and Spain. It's not just conforming to English- and German-speakers' expectations. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:22, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311508 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/June: Found match for regex: ::Yes; in theory at least, CAT:Anatomy is for technical terms and CAT:Body is for everyday words pertaining to the body, though in practice the distinction is hardly observed. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:50, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311508 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/June: Found match for regex: :::: It's not redundant at all. Not all tools are machines (e.g. cutlery), and although probably all machines are tools in the broadest sense, not all machines are necessarily thought of as tools (like clocks and vending machines). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:25, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311508 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/June: Found match for regex: :::::: {{reply to|DCDuring}} Our definition of {{m|en|tool}} defines it as mechanical, which I would say is wrong. Wikipedia's entry defines it as "any physical item that can be used to achieve a goal, especially if the item is not consumed in the process". That would include a Paleolithic hunter-gatherer's use of a stone as a tool, and would include ships and locomotives as well. Our definition would definitely exclude the stone, and might exclude the ship and locomotive as well. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:17, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311509 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/July: Found match for regex: ::::: {{reply to|TheDaveRoss}} There are a number of reasons why I (and others) often (not always) use {{tl|l}} rather than bare links in definitions, most of which are already mentioned elsewhere in this thread: (1) if the English word is spelled the same as the foreign word being glossed (e.g. {{noncog|fr|correct}}, then a bare link won't provide a link at all, but will merely write the word in bold; (2) sometimes Translingual, not English, is the top entry on the page; (3) in Tabbed Browsing, following a link without an explicit language marking takes you to the same language you were just looking at if it's there, rather than the top entry (e.g. if you're at {{noncog|fr|corriger}} and click on a bare link to ], you will be taken to correct#French, not correct#English. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:57, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311509 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/July: Found match for regex: :I tend to decide this on a case-by-case basis. In this case, we're dealing with an obsolete spelling of an extremely common word, so I would add citations to {{m|it|huomo}}, because what's being attested is the specific spelling with an h, not the existence of the word {{m|it|uomo}} itself. But for rare words that are attested in multiple spellings, I'd put the citations all together in a single entry, so the reader can see that the word definitely exists but is spelled in a variety of ways. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:27, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311509 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/July: Found match for regex: ::: I agree it would be better for plain-linked ] to take you to hotel#English, not whatever language you were last reading, nor hotel#Translingual, nor the top of the page (which will take a non-logged-in user to the table of contents only). Doing this would obviate the need for the unpopular {{tl|def}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:11, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311509 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/July: Found match for regex: :::: Yes, the standard convention is xx-IPA. A few years back I moved all templates with deviating names to xx-IPA as long as they were luacized templates that automatically generated pronunciation information. Most redirects are there because of the page moves. There's nothing particularly wrong with having redirects from xx-ipa names, but there's no particular reason for them either. Just use xx-IPA. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:17, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311509 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/July: Found match for regex: :Sounds reasonable to me. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:53, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311509 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/July: Found match for regex: :It's definitely unexpected for HRHC- to make the second laryngeal syllable rather than the R, but maybe someone's discovered a new sound law by which (word-initial?) HRHC- surfaces as post-laryngeal RəC- > RaC- in Germanic rather than the normally expected R̥̄C- > uRC-. Are there any PGmc words that do start with uRC- < HRHC-? All the uRC- words I can find in CAT:Proto-Germanic lemmas ({{m|gem-pro|*umbi}}, {{m|gem-pro|*und}}, {{m|gem-pro|*under}}, {{m|gem-pro|*unhtaz}}, {{m|gem-pro|*unseraz}}, {{m|gem-pro|*urbą}}) seem to come from *(H)R̥C-, not *(H)RHC-. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:49, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311509 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/July: Found match for regex: ::: None of those are word-initial, though. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:19, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311509 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/July: Found match for regex: I just noticed that we don't have automatic category sorting for Vietnamese, which has an extremely diacritic-rich writing system. Should we? How does it work? Are the tone diacritics ignored for sorting purposes, so that à ả ã á ạ are all sorted as a? What about the non-tone diacritics? Are ă/â ê ô/ơ ư sorted together with a e o u, or are they sorted separately? And what about đ? Is it equivalent to d for sorting purposes, or are they separate? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:56, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311509 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/July: Found match for regex: :For pinging purposes: our currently active editors who claim some knowledge of Vietnamese are {{ping|Wyang|Atitarev|Fumiko Take|HappyMidnight|Monni95|MuDavid|Mxn|PhanAnh123}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:01, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311509 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/July: Found match for regex: ::: Based on the thread you linked to, I think at the very least we should edit Module:languages/data2 to strip the tonal diacritics. I can do that right now if there are no objections. Categories already ignore capitalization for sorting purposes for all languages. Anything beyond that would go beyond my editing abilities, but at least I can take the first step. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:42, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311509 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/July: Found match for regex: ::::: We have a vote on whether or not we have too many votes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:53, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311509 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/July: Found match for regex: Solution 2 is what we've done for Greek, which is divided into grc and el, and solution 4 is apparently what we've mostly done for Latin and what we're currently arguing over. For that reason I'd prefer NOT to apply solution 4 to Hebrew. My preferred solution is 2, but others may disagree. (Personally I think 2 is actually the only logical solution to the Latin Question as well, but this thread isn't for talking about Latin.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:45, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311509 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/July: Found match for regex: :::There do seem to be true Biblical Hebrew hapaxes , but we don't have entries for them yet, either because our coverage of Hebrew skews heavily toward Modern Hebrew, or because people know they wouldn't pass RFV. The words in question may be discussed (i.e. mentioned) later, but are they used later? I know some of them are (I mentioned some above), but all of them? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:43, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311509 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/July: Found match for regex: ::::: No, I understood. My question is, are all of them used (not merely discussed) again? What about the two entries other than {{m|he|פלדה}} (which is a modern Hebrew word too) in Category:Hebrew hapax legomena? Are they used (not mentioned) at least three times across all stages of Hebrew? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:57, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311509 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/July: Found match for regex: ::::::: Then take my "Biblical Hebrew" to mean "all Hebrew from before the 4th century CE" or whatever cutoff point is customary for the line between Mishnaic and Medieval Hebrew. Maybe we can call it "Classical Hebrew". The point remains: if Hebrew is all one language, and that one languages is a WDL, and {{m|he|זדה}} is not used (as opposed to mentioned) at least three times by three different authors, then our current rules do not allow its inclusion. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:16, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311509 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/July: Found match for regex: ::::::::: The reason I brought up Hebrew specifically is that is the only other language I can think of besides Latin where we consider the ancient form and the modern form to be one and the same language. Other cases where the ancient form and the modern form of a language are similar enough that it's conceivable to consider them a single language (Greek, Armenian, Icelandic/Norse) have two codes, one for the ancient form and one for the modern. Although on reflection, I guess we have just one code for all stages of Arabic and Chinese as well. At any rate, what this comes down to is the absurd situation we're currently in where a large number of users are saying "Post-1500 Latin is to be treated like either a WDL or a conlang; pre-1500 Latin is to be treated as an extinct language; but they're both the same language", and I wanted to see how we handle parallel situations. It does look like {{m|he|זדה}} currently does not meet CFI, but I bet if someone were to nominate it for deletion on those grounds, most people would vote to keep it, because generally we do keep words found only in inscriptions of ancient languages. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:28, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311509 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/July: Found match for regex: :::::::{{reply to|Daniel Carrero}} AFAICT everything under γε#References is a dictionary entry of some kind, so I would simply change the header to ===Further reading===. It doesn't look like anything there is being used to reference the usage note. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:40, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311509 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/July: Found match for regex: * Definitely oppose as a de-4. Our three-use rule is sufficient to protect us from most nonce formations (it alone is the reason why {{m|de|Kinderleichenficker}} will be deleted) in WDLs, and the fact that paper dictionaries tend not to list most semantically transparent compounds will protect us from them in LDLs. Really, if we wanted to reduce our size by eliminating forms with transparent morphology, we should start with obvious inflected forms like {{m|en|indicated}} and {{m|en|participles}}. Having forms like that is IMO more absurd than having things like {{m|de|Zirkusschule}}. But I still don't advocate deleting {{m|en|indicated}} and {{m|en|participles}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:20, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311509 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/July: Found match for regex: ::: That's what the Etymology section should say. The definition line should give a definition. And I must say, having looked up {{m|sv|vilt}}, {{m|sv|vård}}, and {{m|sv|område}}, I still don't know what {{m|sv|viltvårdsområde}} is supposed to mean. "Wild health care area"? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:05, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311510 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/August: Found match for regex: ::: We are completely indifferent to official "recognition". We consider things separate languages (and give them separate codes) based on linguistic considerations, though admittedly our results are not always consistent: we treat all Serbo-Croatian and Chinese varieties as a single language (each), but we treat Bokmaal and Nynorsk as separate languages. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:23, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311510 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/August: Found match for regex: ::We had a discussion about this many years ago. At first I was in favor of using /r/ in the phonemic representation of English, but eventually I came around to the idea of using /ɹ/, chiefly because we are not an English-only dictionary. If we were, if English Wiktionary had only English entries, I still would prefer /r/; but because we have entries in thousands of languages, including ones where /r/ really does stand for , I think it's ultimately less misleading to use /ɹ/ for English. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:39, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311510 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/August: Found match for regex: *:: My views haven't changed since that 2013 discussion. I think mga, ga, gd, and gv are sufficient to cover all Goidelic lects from the 10th century to today. The problem with making it an etymology-only language is that etymology-only languages are varieties of one particular existing language, but the whole motivation behind ghc is to avoid calling it either Irish or Scottish Gaelic (because it's basically both). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:33, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311510 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/August: Found match for regex: *:::: No one considers Middle Irish going as late as 1800, though. Middle Irish is generally seen as ending around 1200 (much earlier than Middle English, for example), so we consider everything after that to belong to one of the modern languages, even though the literary language (as opposed to the colloquial language) is virtually identical in Ireland and Scotland until around 1800. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:55, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311510 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/August: Found match for regex: *:::::::: There will have to be three entries for modern Irish anyway, since the spellings Gaoidheal and Gaedheal were used up until the mid-20th century, long after ghc would be over. That's the main reason for my opposition to ghc: it would increase unnecessary redundancy. If we had it, we would have to have {{m|ga|Gaoidheal}} in both ga and ghc instead of just ga; likewise we would have to have new ghc entries for common words whose spellings haven't changed, like {{m|ga|fear}}, {{m|ga|bean}}, {{m|ga|mac}}, {{m|ga|cú}}, {{m|ga|bó}}, {{m|ga|athair}}, {{m|ga|máthair}}, and so on and so forth. It doesn't seem worth it to me to duplicate the effort. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:15, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311510 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/August: Found match for regex: :It sounds a bit like {{m+|en|-'s}} or {{m+|la|-que}}, i.e. a clitic that can be added to virtually anything. And we don't have entries for {{m|en||person's}} or {{m|la||virumque}}, so I'd say we shouldn't have an entry for {{m|tl||malaking}} either, but just one for {{m|tl|malaki}} and one for {{m|tl|-ng}}. BTW, how do words ending in other sounds behave? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:58, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311510 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/August: Found match for regex: ::: {{reply to|Mar vin kaiser}} Well, look at {{m|en|butcher's}}: it has several meanings of its own, but the transparent one of {{m|en|butcher}} + the clitic {{m|en|-'s}} isn't actually listed. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:42, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311510 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/August: Found match for regex: :::::: {{reply to|Mar vin kaiser}} It's probably at {{m|en|it's}} because in the standard written language, the one thing {{m|en|it's}} isn't is {{m|en|it}} + the possessive {{m|en|-'s}}, but only {{m|en|it}} + the contracted verb {{m|en|-'s}}. As for the headword line, that's not a problem. At the entry for {{m|tl|malayang loob}}, just add |head=]] ] to the headword template. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:13, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311510 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/August: Found match for regex: * Provisional support for both Wyang and CodeCat, or for neither. I oppose restoring admin rights for only one and not the other. And I support immediately desysopping both of them if the wheelwarring starts again. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:55, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311511 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/September: Found match for regex: **:* We reconstruct them for Proto-Germanic. Many linguists don't even believe in Proto-West-Germanic. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:47, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311511 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/September: Found match for regex: ::: You call it "less than ideal", but from your description I don't see much choice beside ʰːp, unless it's ʰʰp. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:37, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311511 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/September: Found match for regex: :: We call them suffixes, but for many languages we do distinguish between inflectional and derivational suffixes (e.g. CAT:Irish inflectional suffixes and CAT:Irish derivational suffixes). Note that not all inflectional affixes are suffixes, e.g. {{m+|mt|ni-}}, {{m|mt|ti-}}, {{m|mt|ji-}} (and their equivalents in other Semitic languages) are prefixes, i.e. endings that are actually "beginnings". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:07, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311512 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/October: Found match for regex: :::::::: I agree with RuaCat. Ordinal numbers should be categorized as such using {{para|cat2}} or {{tl|cln}} but not using {{tl|lb}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:21, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311512 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/October: Found match for regex: : I thought that in English at least, the term Roman Catholic meant a Catholic who is in communion with the Bishop of Rome, i.e. the Pope, and thus includes Eastern Catholics. The "Roman" is necessary in order to exclude Anglicans and the Eastern Orthodox (who are also considered part of the Catholic Church as that term is used in the Creed). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:54, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311512 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/October: Found match for regex: ::: That's not how I've ever understood "small-c catholic"; I've always taken it to refer to the nonreligious sense of {{m|en|catholic}}: "universal; all-encompassing; pertaining to all kinds of people and their range of tastes, proclivities etc.; liberal", while "big-C Catholic" has the religious senses. I suppose that, just as with the word {{m|en|American}}, there are different meanings to both {{m|en|Catholic}} and {{m|en|Roman Catholic}} and different people prefer different meanings and get into arguments with other people as to the "proper" meaning. The trouble is, there is no term that is both unambiguous and commonly used that refers to all churches in communion with the Pope. Both "Catholic Church" and "Roman Catholic Church" are ambiguous as they mean different things to different people, and "Church in communion with the Pope" is unwieldy and not exactly a common term (quite apart from the ambiguity of {{m|en|pope}}, which can refer to other people than the Bishop of Rome}}). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:44, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311512 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/October: Found match for regex: :::::: {{reply to|Mar vin kaiser}} The Anglo-Catholic in me rebels at seeing "Catholic Church" used to mean only the parts of it in communion with the Pope (and I was opposed to Wikipedia's moving "Roman Catholic Church" to "Catholic Church" several years ago), but the pragmatist in me says I suppose it's the least bad solution. What do others think? I feel like this isn't a decision that should be made by Mar vin kaiser and me alone. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:47, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311512 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/October: Found match for regex: :We had a vote on this 7 1/2 years ago, which more people supported than opposed, but not enough more for it to pass, so the motion failed for lack of consensus. Perhaps 7 1/2 years is long enough to warrant a new vote to see if there's a clearer consensus now than there was then. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:34, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311512 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/October: Found match for regex: :What do published works use? In the font I use, the macron above looks just fine; another option would be to use the acute accent to mark length in this case since precomposed ǻ (U+01FB) is an existing Unicode point. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:18, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311512 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/October: Found match for regex: ::: No, I guess not. Is this just for headword lines, not for page names? I'm still partial to ǻ. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 23:08, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311512 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/October: Found match for regex: ::: Some languages have a bigger difference between literary and colloquial registers than English does; Welsh, for example, is a pro-drop language and makes wide use of synthetic verb forms in its literary register, but is non-pro-drop and uses primarily analytic verb forms in its colloquial register. I always use {{tl|lb|cy|colloquial}} for the Welsh colloquial register because "informal" doesn't quite feel right, though I'd be hard pressed to say exactly why. Maybe just because "colloquial" is and always has been the usual word for the register opposed to literary. Some other languages with very far-reaching linguistic differences between literary and colloquial registers are Burmese and Bengali. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:52, 1 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311512 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/October: Found match for regex: :: {{reply to|Barytonesis|Stephen G. Brown}} We need to wait and see the extent to which the switchover is accepted by the linguistic community. If Kazakh books, magazines, newspapers, billboards, product packaging, etc., really start using the Latin alphabet, then we need to reflect that by moving the content to the Latin spelling and having the Cyrillic spellings be soft redirects (do we have a template {{tl|Cyrillic form of}}?). If not—if only the government switches to the Latin spelling while the rest of the Kazakh-speaking world blithely goes on using the Cyrillic alphabet—then we should keep the content where it is and have the Latin spellings be soft redirects. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:56, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311512 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/October: Found match for regex: ::: Note that we have both {{tl|inflection of}}, which requires arguments, and {{tl|inflected form of}}, which doesn't. If you don't want to specify exactly which forms the term corresponds to, just use {{tl|inflected form of}}. Granted, the doc page for that template says to use {{tl|inflection of}} instead, but that recommendation doesn't match the RFD "keep" outcome archived at Template talk:inflected form of. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:01, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311513 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/November: Found match for regex: :: So am I. I've seen a bunch of these replacements over the last several weeks and they always seem to give the right results. It is possible to give a phonetic respelling in {{para|1}} for words whose pronunciation is not predictable from the spelling. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:12, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311513 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/November: Found match for regex: :I don't think it has widespread consensus yet, but I prefer it because it's much easier to associate synonyms with specific senses that way. When they're in a separate ====Synonyms==== section, there's a risk that a sense will get deleted, or a sense will be split into two, and then the synonyms listed in a separate section get stranded. When they're right there under the sense, people are more likely to remember to move them at the same time. They're also easier for users to find when they're right there. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:52, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311513 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/November: Found match for regex: ::::{{reply|Widsith}} No it doesn't, but see my suggestion below. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:08, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311513 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/November: Found match for regex: * Support and for non-Latin scripts too. However, although "Pronunciation can be found in appendices like Appendix:English pronunciation" as Suzukaze-c points out, those appendices do not usually contain spelling-to-pronunciation rules. Perhaps we could have separate appendices for those, e.g. Appendix:English reading rules (or a better name?) which tells us that ⟨a⟩ is most often pronounced /æ/, /eɪ/, /ɑː/, and /ə/, and in what environments; ⟨b⟩ is most often pronounced /b/ but is silent at the end of a word after ⟨m⟩; and so on. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:24, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311513 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/November: Found match for regex: :::: {{reply|Backinstadiums}} Did you see w:Wikipedia:Translation#Requesting a translation from a foreign language to English? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:38, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311515 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/January: Found match for regex: :I can't figure it out either, and the documentation is definitely out of date. Calques are handled by Module:etymology/templates now, but I can't figure out how. Writing <code><nowiki>{{calque|en|fr|-|nocap=1}} {{m|fr|galette des rois||] of the ]s}}</nowiki> will work properly, but it seems clumsy. {{ping|CodeCat}}, can you help? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:14, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311515 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/January: Found match for regex: At neenish tart I find that {{tl|etyl|de-AT-vie|-}} displays correctly as "Viennese German", but {{tl|cog|de-AT-vie|-}} creates a module error "attempt to index local 'parent' (a nil value)". I suspect that's because Module:etymology languages/data lists the parent of de-AT-vie as de-AT, which is itself an etymology-only language with de as its parent. The easy way to fix this would be to simply change the parent of de-AT-vie to de, but I wonder if it wouldn't be preferable to allow {{tl|cog}} to accept etymology-only languages with etymology-only parents. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:22, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311515 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/January: Found match for regex: :Thanks, Crom daba! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:54, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311515 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/January: Found match for regex: ::: I think the overline looks better, and is less likely to be confused with the p̄ found in the scholarly transliteration of Hebrew. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:55, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311515 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/January: Found match for regex: :Thank you. I wasn't sure anyone but me even used {{tl|x2i}}. It will still be useful to use it inside {{tl|rhymes}} and {{tl|IPAchar}}, though. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:40, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311515 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/January: Found match for regex: ::: {{reply to|Erutuon}} If you like, but I don't see that {{tl|x2i}} is so clunky that it can't be used for {{tl|rhymes}}. I also use it in reconstructions like {{m|ine-pro|*gʷʰen-}} by typing {{m|ine-pro|*g{{subst:x2i|_w_h}}en-}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:18, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311515 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/January: Found match for regex: ::::: PIE isn't the only language that uses IPA characters, though. Lots of proto-languages do, as do a tolerable number of attested ones. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:40, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311515 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/January: Found match for regex: : {{ping|Erutuon}}: Whatever happened to change "Hungarian verbses" back to "Hungarian verbs", it also seems to have changed "Burmese compound words" to "Burmese compound word", see e.g. စက်ဘီး. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:13, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311516 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/February: Found match for regex: : {{reply to|Smuconlaw}} Yes, I object, because {{tl|gloss}} is most often used to provide a disambiguator rather than a true gloss. For example, the definition of {{m|dsb|njetopyŕ}} is given as "] <code><nowiki>{{gloss|small flying mammal}}</nowiki>", but bat doesn't actually mean "small flying mammal". Instead, the {{tl|gloss}} tag is there merely to indicate which sense of bat is being referred to. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:19, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311516 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/February: Found match for regex: ::: I guess the crucial difference is that {{tl|gloss}} is usually used after English words, while the t= parameter of templates like {{tl|m}} is usually used after non-English words. In "<code><nowiki>{{m|dsb|njetopyŕ|t=bat}}</nowiki>", ‘bat’ is a full definition, a full translation, of the dsb word, while in "] <code><nowiki>{{gloss|small flying mammal}}</nowiki>", ‘small flying mammal’ (and even more so in "] <code><nowiki>{{gloss|animal}}</nowiki>"), the so-called gloss is really just providing enough info so the reader knows we're not talking about a baseball or cricket bat. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:37, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311516 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/February: Found match for regex: :::The ordinary g has always given an "invalid IPA character" message, and it should, because it shouldn't be used in IPA transcriptions. It should be changed to ɡ wherever encountered inside {{tl|IPA}} or {{tl|IPAchar}} or {{tl|rhymes}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:24, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311516 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/February: Found match for regex: :::::At this point, it's showing both the position and the characters themselves. But I'm about to fix geliştir. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:21, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311516 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/February: Found match for regex: ::Yes: don't use the curly apostrophe ’ (U+2019) as a letter. Anytime something apostrophe-looking is used as a letter (in any language, not just Nivkh), we should be using ʼ U+02BC (MODIFIER LETTER APOSTROPHE). If you move к’еӄ to кʼеӄ, it should transliterate correctly. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:46, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311516 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/February: Found match for regex: ::::Because that's what it's there for. Cases like this are exactly why Unicode has two separate characters, one for the punctuation mark and one for the letter. It's not our problem if other people use the characters incorrectly; we should still use them correctly. We can leave hard redirects from the spellings using the wrong character. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:28, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311516 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/February: Found match for regex: :What have these been replaced by? Do you have a link? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:47, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311516 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/February: Found match for regex: ::::After reading the reasons for deprecation for all the languages mentioned, I've deleted all the codes from the language modules. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:14, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311516 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/February: Found match for regex: :{{reply to|Jan.Kamenicek}} For suffixes, you can use {{tl|suffixusex}} instead of {{tl|ux}}. See my recent edits to {{m|cs|-e}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:02, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311517 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/March: Found match for regex: ::::: The whole reason we deprecated {{tl|context}} in favor of {{tl|label}} is that these labels are not always contexts. As for this case, I don't understand how a pronoun can be copulative anyway. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:08, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311517 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/March: Found match for regex: ::::::: But that's not a lexical property of the individual pronouns, that's just a fact of Semitic syntax. הוא in both Aramaic and Hebrew is just a pronoun meaning "he, it". It doesn't mean "is", even if it's used in the same position of the sentence as the English verb "is". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:25, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311517 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/March: Found match for regex: :::::::::::::: The Irish copula {{m|ga|is}}/{{m|ga|ba}} isn't a verb either, though it is usually glossed "is"/"was". Neither is it a pronoun. It's just a particle; maybe that's what these Semitic forms are. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:36, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311517 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/March: Found match for regex: :::::::::::::::: It was a verb as recently as Old Irish, but not anymore. For one thing, it takes the disjunctive form of pronouns, while verbs take the conjunctive form (is é vs. tá sé); for another, it's followed by the predicate (when the predicate is indefinite) with the subject at the end (is múinteoir é Seán "Seán is a teacher"), while verbs are followed by the subject with the predicate at the end (tá Seán ina mhúinteoir "Seán is a teacher"). See this paper and the references it cites. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:31, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311517 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/March: Found match for regex: All the "Terms with redundant transliteration" categories are suddenly being populated even though the terms don't have redundant transliterations. For example, there are now more than a thousand entries in Category:Terms with redundant transliterations/ar, but most if not all of them are false positives. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:10, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311517 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/March: Found match for regex: :Module:labels/data/regional says that "American spelling" should link to w:American and British English spelling differences, but for some reason it dosn't seem to be working. At any rate, it looks like something in a module needs to be fixed, rather than having a bot fix a bunch of entries. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:46, 12 March 2017 (UTC).
Page 5311517 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/March: Found match for regex: :If the language code is a language family, like ine = Indo-European, then the second parameter must not be present, otherwise a module error will occur. If the language code is a specific language (whether attested or reconstructed), then the second parameter must be present, but it can be simply |- if you don't want to mention a term. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:17, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311517 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/March: Found match for regex: ::::::: Sometimes {{tl|cog}} doesn't list a term because an editor wants to insert a word in between the language name and the term, e.g. "the {{tl|cog|sa|-}} root {{tl|m|sa|गम्}}". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:45, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311517 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/March: Found match for regex: Can someone modify {{tl|trans-top}} so that it autobalances the columns the way {{tl|col-top}} does? That way we wouldn't have to keep balancing the columns manually. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:36, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311517 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/March: Found match for regex: :::: At the same time that {{tl|trans-top}} becomes self-balancing, all content can be deleted from {{tl|trans-mid}}, so its presence has no effect on anything. Then a bot can go through and remove it, but in the meantime it does no harm. As for the other suggestion, I don't have "favorites" implemented on translation tables, so I have no opinion, but I do think the two things could be done separately from each other. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:16, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311518 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/April: Found match for regex: :: If we implement my suggestion at Wiktionary:Grease_pit/2017/March#Autobalancing_translation_tables, then there's no need to fix entries missing trans-mid. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:38, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311518 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/April: Found match for regex: ::::: Once {{tl|trans-top}} is made auto-balancing, all content can be removed from {{tl|trans-mid}} so that it has no effect whatsoever. That way, it doesn't even have to be removed quickly. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:18, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311518 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/April: Found match for regex: :: But should that be the case? In principle, even if Old Italian is considered a "dialect" of Italian, shouldn't it be possible to write the modules so that {{tl|der|it|roa-oit|...}} categorizes into CAT:Italian terms derived from Old Italian just as {{tl|der|en|roa-oit|...}} categorizes into CAT:English terms derived from Old Italian? I think that would be beneficial. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:15, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311518 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/April: Found match for regex: ::: I usually like the collapsibility too, but not when it becomes more trouble than it's worth. If things like this are possible, I'd rather get rid of it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:52, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311518 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/April: Found match for regex: ::::: I'm not fond of the name "subst=" since that string already has an entirely different meaning in connection with templates. How about "sptr=" for "specific (or special) transliteration"? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:16, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311518 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/April: Found match for regex: ::::::: That'll work too. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:43, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311518 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/April: Found match for regex: ::: {{reply to|Wikitiki89}} Isn't that exactly what Vahagn himself proposed above? At any rate, I agree. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:32, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311518 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/April: Found match for regex: :::: Tabbed languages aren't working either. I don't think the problem is with our individual browsers; there's something wrong serverside. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:18, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311518 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/April: Found match for regex: :::: I'm very partial to conflating these things on a single line, especially when the forms in question always or usually pattern together. From the {{m|grc|δίκαια}} example above: in Ancient Greek (indeed, in all IE languages I know of), the nominative, accusative, and vocative of all neuter nouns, singular and plural, are always the same. So conceptually, it's preferable to say that {{m|grc|δίκαια}} is the nominative/accusative/vocative plural, rather than suggesting it's the nominative plural, and coincidentally also the accusative plural, and coincidentally also the vocative plural. In other forms, where it is just coincidence that the same word belongs to two different nonlemma forms, it makes more sense to list them separately. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:30, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311518 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/April: Found match for regex: :: As a stopgap, it's possible to specify how the headword is supposed to look with head=. I've done that for {{m|sit-pro|*p(r)an/t ~ b(r)an/t}} now. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:45, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311519 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/May: Found match for regex: When I link to a word in Sauraseni Prakrit (psu) written in Devanagari (according to Module:languages/data3/p the only script for this language) with a template like {{tl|l}} or {{tl|m}}, the transliteration comes out in Devanagari as well, which seems counterproductive (e.g. {{l|pra-sau|वेदस}}). Either we should automatically transliterate the Devanagari into the Latin alphabet, or we shouldn't transliterate it at all. But "transliterating" it into the exact same script can't be right. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:06, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311519 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/May: Found match for regex: ::: Or at the very least, edit some module so that no transliteration appears at all, as already happens for other Devanagari-script languages like Awadhi and Bhojpuri: {{tl|l|awa|वेदस}} and {{tl|l|bho|वेदस}} simply surface without transliteration, and that would be preferable for Sauraseni rather than this ridiculous "transliteration" into itself. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:19, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311519 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/May: Found match for regex: So we have automatic interlanguage links now. I don't know where this is coordinated, but it apparently isn't working for entries containing certain non-ASCII characters. When I tried removing the interlanguage links from mało, łopata, and Sigolène, they vanished. The same problem is occurring in some other languages as well, but not all: cy:łopata is showing the links (although they've been removed from the page by bot), but pl:łopata has no links showing. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:08, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311519 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/May: Found match for regex: ::The Cognate extension has been discussed at length and announced at N4E, but the problem that it works on some pages and not on others has AFAICT not been discussed yet anywhere. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:30, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311519 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/May: Found match for regex: :::::: But collapsible tables are working again, so that's good. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:20, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311519 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/May: Found match for regex: :I've turned my tabbed languages off, which helps. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:13, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311519 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/May: Found match for regex: * Please see #Show-and-hide templates not working properly above. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:53, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311519 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/May: Found match for regex: :While someone is running a bot doing this, you could also check for any instances of "Future reading". I may have made that typo from time to time when renaming the sections manually. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:47, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311519 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/May: Found match for regex: :Also, it's being transcribed as a two-syllable word, but it's a monosyllable with a long diphthong. The 5th-century BC pronunciation should be {{IPAchar|/nɛ̂ːu̯s/}}, not {{IPAchar|/nɛː.ŷːs/}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:56, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311519 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/May: Found match for regex: :Pinging {{ping|Erutuon}} and {{ping|JohnC5}} as the people most likely to be able to help. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:58, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311519 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/May: Found match for regex: :{{reply to|CodeCat}} Like {{diff|43053805|text=this}}? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:11, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311519 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/May: Found match for regex: Could someone who's better at editing templates than I am please add (1) options for 1=m-p, 1=f-p, 1=f-m-p, 1=m-f-p (also for g= and g2=) to {{tl|cy-noun}}, and (2) the function that 2= displays "singulative" instead of "plural" whenever 1= is set to one of the plural options? See abwyd for what I'd like the end result of [{cy-noun|m-p|abwydyn}} to look like. Thanks! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:05, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311519 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/May: Found match for regex: :: Hmm, maybe it would be better for someone to make a module for Welsh headword lines. Unfortunately, I'm not the one to do that. Would anyone like to try? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:23, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311519 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/May: Found match for regex: ::: I've started a new template {{tl|cy-noun/new}} that shows "singulative" when the gender is set to m-p or f-p. It doesn't have accelerated entry creation (green links), though. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:30, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311519 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/May: Found match for regex: :::::::::::::: ಠ_ಠ —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:17, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311519 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/May: Found match for regex: :: Broken for me on Firefox too. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:55, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311519 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/May: Found match for regex: *I have no idea what U+02E4 is for or why it was added to Unicode, but I'd say U+02C1 is correct for normal IPA purposes, since it immediately follows U+02C0 MODIFIER LETTER GLOTTAL STOP and there is no MODIFIER LETTER SMALL GLOTTAL STOP. And of the full-size letters, U+0294 LATIN LETTER GLOTTAL STOP is the one intended for IPA, not U+0242 LATIN SMALL LETTER GLOTTAL STOP. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:26, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311519 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/May: Found match for regex: :::: Yeah, I asked about this years ago as I wanted {{tl|lb|en|Ulster}} for CAT:Ulster English, {{tl|lb|sco|Ulster}} for CAT:Ulster Scots, and {{tl|lb|ga|Ulster}} for CAT:Ulster Irish, but that apparently isn't possible. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:38, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311519 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/May: Found match for regex: *:: While we're at it, can a new version of HotCat be written to put the category in the correct language section? As of now, it puts the category at the bottom of the page, regardless of the language. So for example, if I wanted to use HotCat to add a category to cha#English, it would actually be added under cha#Zulu, which isn't good, especially in tabbed languages view. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:39, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311520 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/June: Found match for regex: Why are the various "terms derived from Chinese" categories (e.g. CAT:Irish terms derived from Chinese) not subcategories of the corresponding "terms derived from Sinitic languages" categories (e.g. CAT:Irish terms derived from Sinitic languages)? Can and should it be fixed? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:24, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311520 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/June: Found match for regex: :: Then why do we have both? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:26, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311520 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/June: Found match for regex: :::: Then I'd say we should merge them to "Chinese". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:00, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311520 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/June: Found match for regex: ::Yes. It's no different than {{noncog|la|vidēbitis}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:03, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311520 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/June: Found match for regex: :::: The see-also links are mostly added by hand anyway. There was one bot that briefly added some, but it missed a lot. I just recently added {{tl|also|weder}} to the top of Weder, for example. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:54, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311521 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/July: Found match for regex: See maître d'#Etymology. Is there any way to get the word "French" deitalicized, or is there a better way to use both {{tl|clipping}} and {{tl|der}} to show that this is a clipping of a foreign word? We don't have an English entry for {{m|en|maître d'hôtel}}, so I'm not sure the unclipped form is used in English. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:29, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311521 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/July: Found match for regex: :: Thanks! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:53, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311521 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/July: Found match for regex: Usually when a headword consists of multiple words, each one is automatically linked in the headword line, e.g. at ethnic cleansing, ethnic and cleansing are linked separately without {{tl|en-noun}} explicitly doing so. However, {{tl|de-noun}} appears not to do that: at ethnische Säuberung the two words are not linked separately. Of course I could go in and add {{para|head|] ]}} to force it, but I'd rather it did it automatically. Can someone please edit Module:de-headword to fix this behavior? Thanks. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:31, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311521 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/July: Found match for regex: ::: But why is it a maintenance category? Maintenance categories keep entries that require some sort of cleanup. It would make more sense to have a category for pronounceable entries that don't an IPA pronunciation. Why do we need to categorize entries that do have an IPA pronunciation at all? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:47, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311521 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/July: Found match for regex: ::::: maintenance: "Actions performed to keep some machine or system functioning or in service". If no action needs to be performed to keep Wiktionary functioning or in service, no maintenance (and thus no maintenance category) is required. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:56, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311522 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/August: Found match for regex: :Fixed. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:27, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311522 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/August: Found match for regex: :::Isn't {{g|c}} how such things are usually marked? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:10, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311522 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/August: Found match for regex: Check out Special:WhatLinksHere/~a and Special:WhatLinksHere/~e. There are hundreds of pages there, all of which use {{tl|ga-noun}} and the parameter |~a or |~e. However, if you look at the actual pages, they don't have links to ~a and ~e, because the template knows to convert them to ] and ]. So why are the "whatlinkshere"s being created? And how can we stop them from being created? To make the phenomenon even weirder, {{tl|ga-noun}} uses other similar shortcuts like |~í, but those aren't creating spurious "whatlinkshere"; Special:WhatLinksHere/~í is empty, even though that parameter is also used on hundreds of pages. What gives? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:23, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311522 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/August: Found match for regex: Special:WhatLinksHere/~ is also populated by a large number of pages using {{tl|ga-noun}} but without actual links to ]. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:55, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311522 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/August: Found match for regex: ::{{reply to|Suzukaze-c}} I could see that that would populate CAT:Missing Irish noun forms even when the noun forms aren't missing, but it's still weird that it would create imaginary links to ]. Anyway, I'm not a fan of Category:Missing Irish noun forms anyway (it seems really useless to keep track of that, especially when it only looks at the headword line and not at the inflection table), and the person who created it has been blocked indefinitely, so I'm tempted to just remove that bit of code. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:28, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311522 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/August: Found match for regex: :Yes, it would make it easier to find entries in the language(s) one is interested in. Each one should go in that languages "entry maintenance" category too. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:32, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311522 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/August: Found match for regex: :: I agree. I don't use "Inflection" much, but I do use it for the inflected prepositions of the Celtic languages (e.g. wrth#Inflection). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:45, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311523 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/September: Found match for regex: :: In cases where the two glyphs are identical, though, such as كتف vs. کتف and دليل vs. دلیل, I wonder if a hard redirect would be a better solution. We can still use separate pages for words in which ك/ک and ي/ی appear differently. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:19, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311523 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/September: Found match for regex: ::: I don't have strong feelings one way or the other. I guess it makes sense to include links from the Reconstruction namespace as well, and probably Appendix namespace too. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:24, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311523 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/September: Found match for regex: ::::: {{reply to|JohnC5}} We have lots of lemmas in Appendix namespace: Swadesh lists, lists of names, various other lists (e.g. Appendix:Burmese units of measure). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:18, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311523 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/September: Found match for regex: :: In other words, if you want to write {{tl|bor|...|nocap=1}}, write {{tl|bor|...|notext=1}} instead and write in "borrowing from" by hand. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:20, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311523 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/September: Found match for regex: Some pages aren't displaying Tabbed languages correctly. At bod, the ==Volapük== line is at the very bottom of the page and all the Volapük info is inside the Swedish tab. At faen, it's the ==Norwegian Bokmål== that's at the very bottom of the page and all the Norwegian Bokmål info is inside the Bislama tab. But other pages with multiple languages are displaying everything correctly. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:14, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311523 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/September: Found match for regex: :No ideas? It still isn't fixed. It's apparently related to the special characters in the language names, because changing them to ==Volapuk== and ==Norwegian Bokmaal== solves the problem, though obviously that's not a desirable solution. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:54, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311523 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/September: Found match for regex: :: Seems to be. Thanks for your help! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:29, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311524 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/October: Found match for regex: :::: I prefer to use {{tl|m+}} in etymologies when the language has already been mentioned. That way, the link appears only at the first mention of the language, but not at subsequent mentions, which would be annoying. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:06, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311524 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/October: Found match for regex: *Better now? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:08, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311524 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/October: Found match for regex: *** Named parameters can come in any order. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:23, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311524 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/October: Found match for regex: :: {{done}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:34, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311524 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/October: Found match for regex: :: I agree. It's a particularly high priority when one form has an alternative spelling (in this case, {{m|en|catalyzes}}) that the other form doesn't have. When only the pronunciation is different, the solution at {{m|en|houses}} is adequate IMO. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:11, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311524 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/October: Found match for regex: :: I have no idea. Has anyone pung me lately? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:21, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311524 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/October: Found match for regex: :::::: No, of course not. I said it as a joke. (But pung is only the past participle; the past tense would of course be {{m|en|pang}}.) It would also be possible to model it on bring and have ping – pought – pought. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:36, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311524 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/October: Found match for regex: :::If they're etymology-only languages, they need a parent language (i.e. the language that they're considered a "dialect" of). That can be und, as it is for Turfuli, but in that case Xianbei probably shouldn't be given a code starting with xgn-. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:58, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311524 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/October: Found match for regex: :: {{reply to|Eirikr}} As you noticed, g and ɡ are not visually identical in all fonts. If you paste them into a word processor like Microsoft Word and view them in Times New Roman, you'll see the difference. U+0261 is a valid letter of the IPA, U+0067 isn't, so we use U+0261 in IPA transcriptions here. It's no different from using Cyrillic А and Greek Α correctly even though they're both visually identical to Latin A. As for other IPA letters that can be mistaken for regular Latin letters, depending on your font, the IPA letter ɑ may look identical to a, the IPA letters ǀ and ǃ may look identical to the punctuation marks | and !, and the IPA letters ɛ, ɸ, and ʋ make look identical to the Greek letters ε, φ, and υ. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:34, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311524 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/October: Found match for regex: :::: U+0261 is in the "IPA and enPR" quick-insert list toward the end of the "Pulmonic consonants" section, after ɧ and before ɫ. The templates {{tl|x2i}} and {{tl|X2IPA}} make inputting easy because they let you type XSAMPA characters (all of which are simple ASCII characters) and get IPA characters output. The pros to using U+0261 in my opinion are (1) it's the correct character and (2) it's the character people will be expecting us to use. U+0067 is an acceptable alternative when it appears as an open-tail g (if you're writing a book in a font where U+0067 is open-tail, no one is going to notice, let alone, complain, if you use U+0067 to indicate a voiced velar stop), but is at best grudgingly accepted by phoneticians (less grudgingly by phonologists) when it appears as a loop-tail g. And if we were to switch over to using U+0067 consistently, I can almost guarantee you we would get complaints from know-it-all newbies and occasional editors saying that we're using the wrong character – and attempts from them to correct the character back to U+0261, but only sporadically in some entries and not others, leading to an inconsistent mess – and we would have to have this whole conversation over and over again. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:01, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311524 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/October: Found match for regex: :* @Aɴɢʀ, thank you for where to look -- I saw the version of U+0261 with the over-circle, but in scanning the list, I didn't see the other plain one further along. Any insight into how that list is ordered? I'm scratching my head about that. :) And thanks too for the template pointers, I didn't know those even existed.
Page 5311524 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/October: Found match for regex: Good news, everyone! Thanks chiefly to Daniel Carrero (though of course many people helped!) {{tl|term}} is no longer used at all in the main, Appendix, or Reconstruction namespaces, or on instruction pages in the Wiktionary namespace. It's only used on talk pages and in archives of old discussions in Wiktionary namespace. I've added it to CAT:Successfully deprecated templates and marked it with class="deprecated" so uses of it appear green. {{ping|Rua}}: could you (or anyone else who's good at editing modules) edit Module:term cleanup so it no longer sorts usages according to script? That seems unnecessary now; sorting according to namespace is probably sufficient, and even that might not really be necessary. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:35, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311524 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/October: Found match for regex: :: Fine with me if there are no objections from anyone else. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:12, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311524 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/October: Found match for regex: :::: {{reply to|Daniel Carrero}} Unfortunately, I've discovered there are still around 6 dozen mainspace entries in Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:term. For some reason they're not being categorized in CAT:term cleanup or any of its subentries. They're all fairly recent creations and they all use {{para|lang}}; perhaps that's the reason. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 01:34, 28 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311524 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/October: Found match for regex: I would like it if any mainspace pages using {{tl|term}} were categorized into CAT:Pages using deprecated templates, but if I simply <includeonly> the category name into the page, it will categorize all pages transcluding {{tl|term}}. How do I restrict it so only mainspace pages (or better yet, mainspace, Appendix: and Reconstruction:) are categorized, while talk pages and the like aren't? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:37, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311524 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/October: Found match for regex: :: {{reply to|Rua}} Can I use und as the language code if the person who added {{tl|term}} hasn't specified a language using {{para|lang}}? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:36, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311524 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/October: Found match for regex: :::: What I did was {{categorize|{{{lang|und}}}|Pages using deprecated templates}} and when I tested it in preview mode it seemed to work okay. Come to think of it, simply {{tl|categorize|und|Pages using deprecated templates}} ought to work too, since there's no language-specific categorization going on anyway. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:00, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311524 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/October: Found match for regex: ::::: {{reply to|Rua}} I must have done something wrong, because CAT:Pages using deprecated templates is now all full of talk pages. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:57, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311524 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/October: Found match for regex: ::::: I've tried again using #switch: as you recommended and that seems to work. I suppose it'll take a few hours for the category to empty again. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:09, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311525 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/November: Found match for regex: :::::: I think they're very different cases. The default text should be kept on {{tl|back-formation}}. But the period should be removed from {{tl|deftempboiler}} as well and all templates made from it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:08, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311525 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/November: Found match for regex: :: Is this really usually vandalism? I insert line breaks into template calls all the time. Sometimes {{tl|der3}} will have a great long list of derived terms all written together as a block, and I'll add line breaks to make the individual entries easier to read. For the edit linked to above, I'd say what's noticeable is the deletion of the closing }}, not the insertion of a line break. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:50, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311525 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/November: Found match for regex: :I'd rather not, because automatic parsing like that isn't language-specific as far as I know, which means there would have to be a break at a hyphen and apostrophe in all languages. And I don't want {{m+|en|won't}} parsed as ]] or {{m+|ga|t-athair}} as ]]. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:43, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311525 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/November: Found match for regex: ::: I don't know. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:13, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311525 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/November: Found match for regex: ::: Does {{tl|catfix}} do what you want? I put it on the category you mentioned. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:34, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311525 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/November: Found match for regex: :This sounds like an enormous amount of effort to set up and maintain compared to quite a modest benefit. I wouldn't even say it's a mistake to say that {{m+|hu|láma}} is borrowed from Quechua and Tibetan: it is borrowed from those languages, just not directly. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:53, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311525 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/November: Found match for regex: :::::What about anchors to subsections? For example, how would I link to Etymology 2 of Irish bán? {{tl|l|ga|bán|id=Etymology 2}} doesn't work, and I don't suppose it would be kosher to write ==={{tl|senseid|ga|grassland}}Etymology 2===. Sometimes I want to link to the whole Etymology section and not just a single sense line. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:42, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311525 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/November: Found match for regex: ::::::: So, ] works as a bare link, but there's no way to get {{tl|l|ga|...}} to link to it, because {{tl|l|ga|...}} will always add #Irish to the URL? That's frustrating. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:30, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311525 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/November: Found match for regex: :There was a bot, but it wasn't very reliable, and it hasn't run in a long time. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:28, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311525 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/November: Found match for regex: : I don't know. I've never tried. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:16, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311525 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/November: Found match for regex: :::: I can confirm that the "Delete" and "Move" options that every other main-namespace article has do not appear on the Main Page at English Wikipedia. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:46, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311525 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/November: Found match for regex: :::::: {{reply|Metaknowledge|Rua}} You get a Permission error saying, "You do not have permission to delete this page, for the following reason: You cannot delete or move the main page." —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:08, 17 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311525 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/November: Found match for regex: ::: I'd be opposed even to letting people opt in to this setup. Even experienced users will sooner or later be baffled and frustrated by the fact that the language codes aren't listed in alphabetical order, since we alphabetize by full name, not by code. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:20, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311525 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2017/November: Found match for regex: :: {{reply|Erutuon}} Thanks! Can you also arrange it so that {{tl|IPA}} accepts {{para|sort}} for manual sorting? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:49, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311527 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/January: Found match for regex: :: I don't think it's a new meaning, it's just a different understanding of what constitutes cowardliness from yours. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:46, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311527 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/January: Found match for regex: :: I'm the one who added the Hebrew; I just took it off Wikipedia. The answers to both your questions are "I don't know", so feel free to remove it or change it as necessary. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:08, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311527 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/January: Found match for regex: ::If it can't be modified by an adverb, it's probably an attributive noun: *very women warriors, *more women warriors (i.e. warriors, not more ), etc. And they have to be truly ungrammatical, not just difficult to understand; contrast those examples with the true adjective female. It's hard to understand what very female warriors and warriors might mean, since "female" is usually interpreted as something binary rather than gradated, but they're still grammatical. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:38, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311527 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/January: Found match for regex: :Yes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:51, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311527 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/January: Found match for regex: ::::::: Part of the reason we decided against allowing entries for possessives in 's is that the 's can be added not only to the noun that's doing the possessing; it can be added to literally any word that can be final in a noun phrase. Consider {{w|The King of Ireland's Son}}, where it's actually king, not Ireland, that's in the possessive (he's the son of the king, not the son of Ireland), or the boy I was talking to's mother (very common in speech if avoided in writing). Examples like these prove that 's is really a word (a clitic) in its own right, not just as case ending the genitive -s of German and the Scandinavian languages is. So it would just as much be a violation of rules against SOP constructions to have entries for possessive 's forms as it is to have entries for any word followed by the 's that's a contraction of is/has (The boy I was talking to's interested in chess; The boy I was talking to's played cello for three years). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:47, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311527 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/January: Found match for regex: ::: I've heard Americans use zhuzh/zhoosh in the sense of "spice up, make fancy" too, although it's possible I've only heard it from gay Americans, who probably got it from Polari. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:10, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311527 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/January: Found match for regex: :: The usual word is {{m|en|phonemicize}}; likewise the adjective is usually {{m|en|phonemic}}, not {{m|en||phonematic}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:32, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311527 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/January: Found match for regex: :I think it's attested as both a two-syllable and a three syllable-word, so it should probably have both /ˈkoe̯piː/ and /koˈeːpiː/. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:17, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311527 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/January: Found match for regex: :: When it comes to Wiktionary entries, I'm generally opposed to narrow transcriptions anyway, because they tend to conceal more than they reveal by making it impossible to see the forest for all the damn trees. But when I do use a narrow transcription elsewhere (when I used to be a phonologist for a living and writing papers), I generally relied more on published phonetic descriptions and (when I could get hold of them) spectrograms than on my own ear. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:11, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311527 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/January: Found match for regex: ::Unless it's SOP with sense 4 of design, which actually shows this collocation in one of its quotes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:58, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311527 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/January: Found match for regex: :Isn't sense 2 ("To put or bring into credit; to invest with credit or authority; to sanction") the appropriate meaning of {{m|en|accredit}} for your purposes? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:22, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311527 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/January: Found match for regex: :::: I think it's spelled {{m|en|bodega}}. And I think I've heard {{m|en|Korean market}} in the States, but maybe only when the owners are actually Koreans. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:40, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311527 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/January: Found match for regex: I feel like we're missing a sense here of a large group of people saying the same thing in the same rhythm, e.g. an angry mob chanting "Down with so-and-so", or a stadium of soccer fans chanting "Block that kick!". Both of our current senses of the verb refer to singing, but this kind of chanting isn't singing at all. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:51, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311528 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/February: Found match for regex: :I never realized that. I thought the micro sign was intended for use as the SI prefix. I certainly didn't know it's deprecated, especially since it's available as AltGr+m on my German keyboard. But reading the link you provided convinced me, so I have no objection to your switching the direction of the redirect. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:06, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311528 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/February: Found match for regex: :I don't think I've ever heard {{IPAchar|/tɹeɪ/}} in en-US at all; I'm pretty sure {{IPAchar|/tɹeɪt/}} is the only pronunciation in all uses. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:28, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311528 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/February: Found match for regex: ::::::{{w|John C. Wells}} in the Longman Pronunciation Dictionary gives both options for UK English but gives preference to /tɹeɪ/. He says nothing about the two pronunciations being used in different contexts. For US English he lists only /tɹeɪt/. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:18, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311528 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/February: Found match for regex: :The difference between French and English is that the "h" in hour is silent while the "h" in house is actually pronounced. But French phonology distinguishes between mute h and aspirated h by their behavior, even though both of them are in fact silent: le héros is pronounced {{IPAchar|/lə e.ʁo/}}, not {{IPAchar|*/lə he.ʁo/}}. So mute h in this sense is something English and Spanish don't have, because English just has ordinary silent h’s opposed to pronounced h’s, and in Spanish there's no different behavior between two different kinds of silent h. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:45, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311528 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/February: Found match for regex: :: I can't tell if CodeCat is joking or not, but I've certainly never heard either the adjective or the adverb stressed on any syllable other than fæt. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:47, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311528 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/February: Found match for regex: A relative newbie, Mr. Yazar, just added this as a preposition, but the leading hyphen makes me doubt this analysis. {{ping|Strombones|Hekaheka|Hyark|Puisque|Tropylium}} and anyone else who knows Estonian: what is this really? A preposition? A postposition? A suffix? A case ending? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:50, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311528 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/February: Found match for regex: :: We usually call case endings suffixes, don't we? Do we have entries for other Estonian case endings? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:33, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311528 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/February: Found match for regex: :::: Thanks for your help, everyone. I've changed the POS to suffix, and CAT:Estonian inflectional suffixes now has one more member. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:46, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311528 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/February: Found match for regex: :::::::: That doesn't look like a durably archived source, and it still doesn't look like the word has been used by multiple, independent sources, in other words, by people who have nothing to do with the coiner of the term. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:58, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311528 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/February: Found match for regex: ::: If we needed it, it should be at Reconstruction:Latin/amo, since we use the 1st person singular present active indicative as the lemma for Vulgar Latin just as for Classical. But IMO we don't need a reconstruction page for an attested lemma just to show its unattested inflected forms. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:03, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311528 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/February: Found match for regex: :You have? I've only heard Germans use it as a mistranslation of {{m|de|Adaption}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:40, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311528 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/February: Found match for regex: :It isn't supposed to mean the amount that's refunded; that's tax refund in American English (at least). I wouldn't be surprised if some people get confused because of the similarity in sound and because of the ambiguity of the word return, though; nor would I be surprised if such confusion is occasionally found in permanently archived sources. But I would still call it an error. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:29, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311528 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/February: Found match for regex: :::Yeah, a lot of people misuse the term. Though I noticed that it wasn't only Americans, since some people were talking about their tax "returns" (i.e. refunds) in pounds sterling. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:47, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311528 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/February: Found match for regex: :{{reply to|Backinstadiums}} You can check your own history at Special:MyContributions. You can select "Talk" from the dropdown menu labeled "Namespace:" to see only your contributions to entry talk pages. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:49, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311528 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/February: Found match for regex: ::{{reply to|Backinstadiums}} You may, but you might be more likely to get good responses if you don't overwhelm us with a bunch of questions at once. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:29, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311528 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/February: Found match for regex: :The expected genitive is {{m|de|Olmütz'}} (with an apostrophe) before a noun, e.g. {{m|de||in Olmütz' engen Gassen}}. In other contexts the genitive is probably identical to the nominative, e.g. {{m|de||die Häuser des alten Olmütz}} or {{m|de||wegen Olmütz}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:16, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311528 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/February: Found match for regex: ** Better yet, make an entry in WT:RFV (Requests for Verification). Sometimes, people assert that a given word "does not exist" in a certain language, but it turns out that the word is used in that language, but isn't standard or is looked down by language purists, or that sort of thing. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:36, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311528 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/February: Found match for regex: : {{reply to|Quadcont}} It's at CAT:English back-formations. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:56, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311528 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/February: Found match for regex: :The redirect is there because the page daoch used to be at dāh, and the redirect was kept when the page was moved. In fact, dāh shouldn't redirect anywhere (that's not how we used redirects here), so I'll just delete it now instead. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:55, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311528 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/February: Found match for regex: :Not exclusively British English, at any rate; Americans certainly use it in the senses illustrated by the usexes too. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:07, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311528 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/February: Found match for regex: :{{reply to|CodeCat}} Yes, it's also the past participle of {{m|de|vertun}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:29, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311529 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/March: Found match for regex: :It would help if you'd give links to the pages you're talking about; it makes it easier to follow your comment. The Latin word from which Spanish {{m|es|pollo|t=chicken}} is derived is {{m|la|pullus|t=chick, young animal}}, with a "u". Lewis and Short don't list a corresponding feminine noun {{m|la|pulla}}, but I wouldn't be surprised if it existed at least in Late Latin. The Latin word {{m|la|polus|t=pole}} has nothing to do with it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:29, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311529 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/March: Found match for regex: :It is true. My GP told me not to call her Frau Doktor because she doesn't have a doctorate. However, holding a doctorate doesn't preclude you from being an Arzt, so it's more accurate to say an Arzt does not necessarily hold a postgraduate degree, not that an Arzt does not hold a postgraduate degree. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:50, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311529 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/March: Found match for regex: :Well, what does it say? As an American, I'm only familiar with our sense 1 of the noun. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:06, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311529 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/March: Found match for regex: :: Well, this North American would only use the sense marked "North American" above. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:46, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311529 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/March: Found match for regex: :: I'd have difficulty parsing "unmarried widow" as it seems to be either a tautology or a contradiction in terms, or possibly both simultaneously. Personally, I would probably describe such a person as "surviving boyfriend/girlfriend". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 00:24, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311529 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/March: Found match for regex: :::: Nevertheless, I'd have difficulty understanding it. If I heard someone described as an "unmarried widow", my first thought would be that she hadn't remarried since the death of her husband. I wouldn't understand it to mean that her previous life partner, whom she wasn't married to, had died. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:19, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311529 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/March: Found match for regex: ::::: The separation of an unmarried couple is simply called a breakup. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:44, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311529 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/March: Found match for regex: :{{reply to|ArséniureDeGallium}} Yes! Similarly to {{noncog|de|Mädchen}}, the gender of the word for "girl" is determined by its suffix (in this case, {{m|ga|-ín}}), not by its meaning. Nevertheless, pronouns referring back to {{m|ga|cailín}} are feminine. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:36, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311529 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/March: Found match for regex: :Other cases where grammatical gender doesn't match natural gender in Irish are {{m|ga|gasóg|g=f|t=boy scout}} and {{m|ga|stail|g=f|t=stallion}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:40, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311529 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/March: Found match for regex: ::@Aɴɢʀ - thank you very much --ArséniureDeGallium (talk) 22:12, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311529 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/March: Found match for regex: :In North America, I think so, yes, but I've heard British speakers use it in that sense. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:16, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311529 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/March: Found match for regex: ::I'd call it a phrase. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:06, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311529 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/March: Found match for regex: :I agree; not a prefix. The forms in question are compounds of {{m|de|Haupt}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:04, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311529 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/March: Found match for regex: :::: I think the separable prefixes aren't true prefixes either, but the inseparable ones are, so {{m|de|übersetzen|ˈüberˌsetzen|t=to pass over}} is a compound, while {{m|de|übersetzen|ˌüberˈsetzen|t=to translate}} has a prefix. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:41, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311529 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/March: Found match for regex: :::::: The stress pattern: "pass over" has the stress pattern of a compound word; "translate" doesn't. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:17, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311529 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/March: Found match for regex: ::::::::: Hmm, good point. I was just remembering when I first moved to Germany I referred to Norway as Norˈwegen; the person I was talking to corrected my pronunciation to ˈNorwegen, saying, "Even though it's a place name, it still has the stress pattern of a compound". The other example that occurs to me is that the place in southeastern Niedersachsen is ˌSalzˈgitter, but a literal grid or grille made of salt would be a ˈSalzˌgitter. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:09, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311529 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/March: Found match for regex: :: A lot of the words, except for the ones in French and Romansh and maybe some of small languages, seem to be borrowings rather than inherited terms. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:58, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311529 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/March: Found match for regex: :::My intuitions are different. If I say "X was the 39th President" it sounds like he's dead; "X is the 39th President" sounds like he's alive, even if he's no longer president. Helmut Kohl is still the 6th Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany, even though we're now up to 8 Chancellors. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:57, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311529 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/March: Found match for regex: :::::: I agree that "Obama is an African-American president" is infelicitous since January 20, but I still can't say "Obama was an African-American president" either, because he's still alive. For me it has to be "Obama is an African-American ex-president". As for Kohl, I disagree that when he's dead he'll still be the 6th chancellor. Rather, when he's dead he will have been the 6th chancellor. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:20, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311530 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/April: Found match for regex: :I can't find anything useful on b.g.c. except an old-fashioned dialectal form of {{m|en|rinse}} (e.g. , ). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:05, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311530 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/April: Found match for regex: ::::::: I also like the Participle header and use it in a wide variety of languages. However, I think "accelerated page creation" or whatever it's called with the green links automatically inserts a ===Verb=== header for participles, which is why so many participles (and probably not just in German) are labeled Verb. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:02, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311530 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/April: Found match for regex: By the way, can Dutch say the equivalent of Das ist gelogen! to mean "That's a lie!" or gelogenes Alter to mean "an age that's been lied about"? I think we have to consider those usages a real adjective, and not just the past participle of {{m|de|lügen}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:02, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311530 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/April: Found match for regex: :: The main reason I think this is a real adjective is that {{m|de|lügen}} is an intransitive verb; that's the difference to Das ist ausgedacht. Das ist bestätigt. Das ist richtig gerechnet. Der Kuchen ist gegessen. Could you call a conversation held on the phone ein telefoniertes Gespräch? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 23:11, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311530 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/April: Found match for regex: : I suspect what it means is far away but with motion towards a far-away place, i.e. "he's going far away" but not "he's living far away". {{ping|Hekaheka}}, what say you? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:23, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311530 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/April: Found match for regex: :: I've used both "Baptism" and "Baptistry" jokingly to refer to the Baptist denomination, but in fact, neither word has that meaning. You have to just say "Baptist denomination/faith/beliefs", etc. Actually, Baptistism is attestable, but it's very rare. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:14, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311530 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/April: Found match for regex: :: I know it as laugh out of the other side of one's mouth. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:36, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311530 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/April: Found match for regex: :I've certainly never heard it in English. What does it mean? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:53, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311530 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/April: Found match for regex: :Until I added it {{diff|37527727|text=13 months ago}}, we didn't even have that sense! Feel free to generalize it, or add a new sense along the lines of "the corresponding part of an animal's body". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:48, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311530 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/April: Found match for regex: ::: Isn't that just sense 2? A spinning top doesn't really have a front and back to distinguish from its sides, the way a human or animal body does. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:40, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311530 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/April: Found match for regex: ::: Although, come to think of it, a house does, and we do speak of the side of a house as distinct from its front and back. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:41, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311530 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/April: Found match for regex: :No, just a difference in transcription habits. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:28, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311530 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/April: Found match for regex: :::: {{reply to|Wikitiki89}} Are you saying you consider these a kind (an extreme kind) of spelling pronunciation? Because that's what I'd call /aɪˈɹæn/. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:19, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311530 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/April: Found match for regex: Is it true that this word is stressed on the first syllable (and with the /u/ vowel) in Portugal, but on the second syllable in Brazil? Wouldn't /ˈfuβiɐ/ have to be spelled *fúbia? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:18, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311530 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/April: Found match for regex: :: There may be cases where an alt-form entry needs its own Etymology section, but I don't believe the two instances linked above are such times. I agree with Meta that Etymology sections are unneeded in those two entries. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 04:35, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311530 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/April: Found match for regex: *Fixed. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:07, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311530 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/April: Found match for regex: :: But the point is, it shouldn't be tagged "chiefly US". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:47, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311530 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/April: Found match for regex: :: Redirected. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:11, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311530 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/April: Found match for regex: ::Wikisource hosts Wikimedian-led translations, but only of public-domain works. This book is still under copyright, so any translation of it would be a copyvio unless we had permission from the copyright holder. And in that case, it wouldn't be usable under our CC-BY-SA and GFDL licenses anyway. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:09, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311530 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/April: Found match for regex: :Quoting individual sentences would probably fall under fair use, but hosting it publicly anywhere (even on a non-Wikimedia site) would be a copyvio. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:27, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311530 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/April: Found match for regex: :How about "caused, or believed to be caused, by"? But I don't think it's a myth that sugar gives you a burst of energy that drops off rapidly, even if there's no evidence that sugar consumption causes ADHD. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:45, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311531 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/May: Found match for regex: :If is accurate, both terms refer to both senses. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:13, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311531 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/May: Found match for regex: *No, we're a dictionary, not an encyclopedia. I've removed all mention of both Israel and Palestine and just defined the variety of orange as what it is, and mentioned the city in the etymology section. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:05, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311531 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/May: Found match for regex: *{{done}}; and some other cleanup as well. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:07, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311531 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/May: Found match for regex: :: I've moved the main entry to vandalisieren and labeled vandalieren "rare". That can be altered as necessary. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:05, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311531 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/May: Found match for regex: :: This page calls it a "high visibility reflective triangle sash tabard v-vest", which doesn't exactly trip off the tongue. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:01, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311531 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/May: Found match for regex: :: I agree, perfectly standard in spoken English. I wouldn't use it in writing, though, not even informal writing. Same with y'all'd've. I'd say them this way, but I'd spell them "you'd have" and "y'all'd have" no matter how casual my writing was. I don't think I'd ever say you'dn't've, though. Even in rapid speech it would come out with an uncontracted would. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:31, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311531 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/May: Found match for regex: :: Couldn't {{cog|gem-pro|*langaz}} be a loanword from {{cog|la|longus}}? Is there any other way to get it into the {{m|ine-pro|*dl̥h₁gʰós}} family? Especially considering the expected {{m|gem-pro|*tulguz}} also exists. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:37, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311531 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/May: Found match for regex: ::::: It's a pity there's no Celtic cognate, since Celtic preserves dl-. But maybe there is: some scholars believe that {{cog|sga|long}}/{{cog|cy|llong|t=ship}} is not a loanword from Latin at all, but a native Celtic word of unknown etymology. What if they're right that's a native Celtic word, but the semantics of the loanword argument ("long" > "ship") are also correct, and {{cog|cel-pro|*longā|t=ship}} started out as a substantivization of an adjective {{m|cel-pro|*longos|t=long}}? Then Celtic, Germanic, and Italic would all share an etymon {{m|ine-pro|*longʰos|t=long}}, which would be unrelated to {{m|ine-pro|*dl̥h₁gʰós}} (with which, after all, it shares nothing but l and gʰ). There are certainly plenty of words that are geographically restricted to those three branches. All just speculation, but I find it an intriguing idea. Is there any evidence for a *d in the Latin word? Or do people just postulate *dlongos so it looks more like {{m|ine-pro|*dl̥h₁gʰós}}? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:29, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311531 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/May: Found match for regex: ::::::::: She doesn't gloss Gaulish longo-, but she must be talking about {{m|cel-pro|*longā|t=ship}}, attested in the place name Longaticum (today's {{w|Logatec}}, Slovenia). At any rate, if the Celtic "ship" word really is related to the Italic/Germanic "long" word, then that's good evidence that the pre-form is *longʰo- without d-, because Celtic would have retained the dl- cluster of a *dlongʰo-. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:58, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311531 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/May: Found match for regex: ::::::::::: If *longā is just a noun meaning "ship", then *longo- is a mistake; but if the noun is derived from an adjective meaning "long", then *longo- is the stem of that adjective. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:44, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311531 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/May: Found match for regex: :: But even if die took to be as its auxiliary, we'd still expect "be died", not "be dead", since "dead" isn't the past participle of "die", and wasn't in Early Modern English either. This is different from French, where {{m|fr|mort}} is both the adjective "dead" and the past participle of {{m|fr|mourir}}, so that il est mort is ambiguous between "he is dead" and "he has died/he died". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:13, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311531 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/May: Found match for regex: :Did you see sense 2 of {{m|en|iota}}? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:41, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311531 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/May: Found match for regex: ::: We also need the relatively modern intransitive sense of {{m|en|slay}}, roughly "be awesome", as in " McCarthy ... slayed during her monologue ... as she joined SNL’s famous Five-Timers Club." —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:03, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311531 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/May: Found match for regex: ::: It's definitely meant as hyperbole. Some translations use "beam" or "log" (see {{w|The Mote and the Beam}}). The Greek word is {{m|grc|δοκός}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:35, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311531 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/May: Found match for regex: :We shouldn't say that any of these words comes from Old Church Slavonic. People sometimes lazily consider OCS to be basically the same thing as Proto-Slavic, but it isn't. Modern Slavic languages—especially those whose speakers are predominantly Eastern Orthodox—often have OCS loanwords, but the modern languages don't descend from OCS. And I really doubt that {{cog|sla|že}} is really from {{cog|sla-pro|*juže}}, {{m|sla-pro|*uže}} rather than from {{m|sla-pro|*že}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:52, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311531 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/May: Found match for regex: ::: But {{m|sla-pro|*že}} and {{cog|sa|घ|t=at least , surely , verily , indeed , especially}} can both come from {{m|ine-pro|*gʰe}} with a pure velar; in which case they're not related to {{m|grc|γε}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:41, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311531 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/May: Found match for regex: :I've never heard this, but I've heard its synonyms God thirty (in the morning) and stupid o'clock (in the morning), both meaning unreasonably early. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:12, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311531 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/May: Found match for regex: : I think "clipping" is correct. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:57, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311531 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/May: Found match for regex: :: I don't think I've ever heard an American say "I took a yak last night", and if I did, I would think they were referring to the wooly bovid and ask "Where did you take it? To the movies?" —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:46, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311531 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/May: Found match for regex: :Yes, though I'd call it "rare". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:47, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311531 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/May: Found match for regex: :: Sure looks like it. I'm'a change it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:48, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311531 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/May: Found match for regex: :: Incidentally, the term is definite article. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:40, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311532 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/June: Found match for regex: :The entry for the written-together form (e.g. you betcha) is at -cha; however, the usage note there says it is sometimes written as a separate word (e.g. you bet cha). If that's attestable, then it definitely needs to be listed at cha. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:02, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311532 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/June: Found match for regex: :: I don't either, but perhaps "retroactively" should be added as a sense of {{m|en|later}}? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:04, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311532 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/June: Found match for regex: :I think it's just sense 3. However, in this particular case, the first "(ɹ)" shouldn't be there at all if the pronunciation is labeled RP. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 05:57, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311532 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/June: Found match for regex: :: I found a small number (43) of b.g.c hits for Castrovian. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:07, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311532 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/June: Found match for regex: :: I doubt that, because Upper Saxon is a Central German dialect that should have undergone the High German consonant shift of /t/ to /ts/. It's more likely to be the Low Saxon dialect of Low German (WP's {{w|West Low German}}), which we can label nds since it's spoken in both Germany and the Netherlands. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:59, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311532 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/June: Found match for regex: :I strongly suspect that one will be able to find both senses in use in English, i.e. sometimes it will refer only to the country of Denmark (Jutland and the adjacent islands), and sometimes it will refer to the entire realm (continental-ish Denmark + Faroe Islands + Greenland). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:38, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311532 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/June: Found match for regex: ::: All prepositional phrases are adverbial. I think of adverbs as "pro-prepositions": just as pronouns stand in for noun phrases, and pro-verbs stand in for verb phrases, adverbs stand in for prepositional phrases. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:19, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311532 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/June: Found match for regex: :The American Heritage Dictionary, which is known for its prescriptivism and is not inclined to list misspellings, lists programed and programing as acceptable alternative spellings. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:09, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311532 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/June: Found match for regex: :Yes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:15, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311532 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/June: Found match for regex: ::: I feel like it's just ] + ]. It's common to delete subject pronouns in colloquial phrases like this. People say "Looks good" and "Looking good!" as quasi-interjections too (and didn't a character in the first Matrix movie say, "Smell good, don't they?"), but that doesn't mean we need entries for them. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:33, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311532 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/June: Found match for regex: ::: I agree; it's sense 2 of the verb. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:21, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311532 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/June: Found match for regex: ::As are people who don't want to get married, and people who are already married. Of course it means marriage for everyone who wants to get married and is old enough to legally do so, and isn't currently already married to someone else. But that's too wordy for a hashtaggable slogan. I suspect the slogan started out as an allusion to einer für alle, alle für einen. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 23:29, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311533 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/July: Found match for regex: **{{reply to|SemperBlotto}} in U.S. English at least, {{m|en|homogenous}} is proscribed when it means {{m|en|homogeneous}}. The opposite situation almost never applies, since it's so rare for someone to actually use {{m|en|homogenous}} correctly; though I can imagine that a correct usage of {{m|en|homogenous}} may occasionally be altered to {{m|en|homogeneous}} by hypercorrection. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:06, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311533 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/July: Found match for regex: *: I absolutely want citations proving that in Canada, something can be called a "chocolate bar" without containing any chocolate. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:12, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311533 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/July: Found match for regex: :One for the mind and one for the chin? Yes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:20, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311533 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/July: Found match for regex: :I can't speak for the Russian, but the German word is certainly better as a translation of Mohammedan than of Muslim. Just like Mohammedan, German Mohammedaner is very old-fashioned and might even be vaguely offensive if used nowadays. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:43, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311533 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/July: Found match for regex: :I tagged it as Byzantine Greek and removed the dual (which AFAIK was no longer in use by Koine, let alone Byzantine). Are there any other differences in the inflection? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:10, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311533 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/July: Found match for regex: :Fixed the genitive and removed the second reference. Lewis & Short doesn't mark the -es as long, but then it doesn't for {{m|la|nūbēs}} either, so it could be wrong. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:06, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311533 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/July: Found match for regex: ::Checked the OLD, but the word isn't even listed there! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:38, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311533 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/July: Found match for regex: :::::: Lewis & Short have it because of a possible use in Martial, but they mark it "dubious" and list some alternative readings. Its absence in the OLD suggests to me that modern scholars have probably accepted one of the alternative readings as the accurate one. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 05:51, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311533 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/July: Found match for regex: ::::{{reply to|Leasnam}} What accent of English do you speak with? For me Modern English {{m|en|bath}} and Old English {{m|ang|bæþ}} sound basically identical. As for stack, it's true that open vowels tend to be longer than close vowels, so stack has a longer vowel than stick, but as Chuck Entz points out, it has a shorter (and more monophthongal) vowel than stag. But at the phonemic level, there's no reason to consider the vowel of stack long, because there's no short vowel it contrasts with, nor is there any reason to consider the vowel of stag phonemically a diphthong, because there's no monophthong it contrasts with. At the phonemic level, they're both just /æ/. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:23, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311533 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/July: Found match for regex: ::::::Of course we have no way of knowing the precise phonetics of the Old English, but whether or not modern English bath sounds like it depends a lot on what variety of English you speak. Someone from Northern England says , London says (or ), someone from Sydney , someone from Boston (with the now recessive traditional Boston accent) says , someone from New York says , someone from Alabama says , and I say . Which one of these does the Old English (presumably) not sound like? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:42, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311533 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/July: Found match for regex: ::::::::The audio clip at {{m|en|bath}} is more diphthongal than my pronunciation; more like an {{m+|ang||*beaþ}}. Since vowel length was phonemic in Old English, I suspect their short vowels were shorter but also that their long vowels were longer, so an OE speaker might feel like our /æ/ (at least before a voiceless consonant) is somewhere between his /æ/ and his /æː/. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:22, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311533 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/July: Found match for regex: :::::::::: My accent is a very regionally neutral General American. My parents both grew up in Los Angeles, so I have definite West Coast influences (cot-caught merger, for example, though not consistently: Don and dawn are homophones for me, but stocking and stalking are different). From the ages of 2 to 9 (L1 acquisition window) I lived in Rochester, NY, but I don't think I have any significant Inland North/Northern Cities Vowel Shift influences, at least none that I'm aware of. From the age of 9 to adulthood I lived in Austin, TX, but I don't have a canonical Texas accent (as Austin is a cosmopolitan university town, probably more than half of my peer group were from someplace else, so there was no particular pressure to develop a Texas accent); the Texas influence on my speech is more lexical than phonological. And for the past 20 years I've lived in Germany, where most of my English-speaking friends have been British, so that has also had a "leveling" influence on my speech, as I don't want to say anything that my German friends won't understand or that my British friends will snicker at. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:28, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311533 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/July: Found match for regex: ::::: For one thing, using length marks in RP facilities cross-dialect comparison. The vowel in RP heart {{IPAchar|/hɑːt/}} is significantly longer than the vowel in GenAm hot {{IPAchar|/hɑt/}}, so if we're listing both varieties it would misleading to imply they're homophones. (The Longman Pronunciation Dictionary does exactly this, but by marking them both long: it claims that both RP heart and GenAm hot are {{IPAchar|/hɑːt/}}, much to my annoyance. I think there are other British dictionaries that want to show American pronunciation that do the same thing.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:03, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311533 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/July: Found match for regex: ::::::: For {{smallcaps|fleece}}, {{smallcaps|goose}}, and {{smallcaps|thought}} I usually use /iː/, /uː/, and /ɔː/ for a bidialectal pronunciation when nothing else is different (so I would not have separate RP and GA lines for the verb use), but if there are other differences in a word with one of those two vowels (e.g. {{m|en|beater}}, where you need separate lines because of the -er), I use /iː/, /uː/, /ɔː/ in RP and /i/, /u/, /ɔ/ in GA. Maybe that isn't entirely logical, but it makes things easier to read. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:07, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311533 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/July: Found match for regex: :::: I agree that the sense "assume the personality of another person" derives from a sense that we're missing, the New Age sense of channeling spirits. I can't find any earlier usage on Google Books than 1987 either. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:46, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311533 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/July: Found match for regex: :: I'd definitely change "intransitive" to "reflexive". I'm inclined to keep the regular transitive and reflexive senses separate, if only because the reflexive is so much more common. I have heard this word before, but it's rare and kind of old-fashioned; when I have heard it, it's almost always been reflexive. I've definitely heard of people bestirring themselves, but I don't know if I've ever heard of anyone bestirring someone else. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:39, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311533 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/July: Found match for regex: :: I see that Citations:bestir has a couple of examples of transitive use from Pilgrim's Progress, which I've never read. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:42, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311533 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/July: Found match for regex: :::: I think you're right. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:53, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311534 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/August: Found match for regex: :: I'm not finding any instances of traffick without -ing, -ed, or -er at the Al Jazeera cite linked anyway. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:49, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311534 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/August: Found match for regex: :: At b.g.c I'm only finding it as an archaic spelling (up to the 18th century) and in book titles, where it appears to be being used for artistic effect. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:53, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311534 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/August: Found match for regex: ::: I'm inclined to call it a {{tl|misspelling of}} rather than an {{tl|alternative spelling of}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:08, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311534 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/August: Found match for regex: :I'm pretty sure the æ becomes a in the plural of the a-stem declension. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:02, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311534 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/August: Found match for regex: ::: The closest thing I can think of is {{m|en|range}}. A company could say that a certain product is or is not in its range (or range of products), but it would sound a little strange at a supermarket. The supermarket employee would more likely say "Sorry, we don't carry those." —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:40, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311534 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/August: Found match for regex: :: It's also possible that {{m|en|mortem}} on its own is a word of African English, or just Kenyan English, but not of British or American English. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:09, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311534 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/August: Found match for regex: :I'd use {{m|la|recti femoris}} as each rectus muscle is associated with a single thigh. If you said {{m|la||recti femorum}} it might sound like each muscle was associated with both thighs. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:03, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311534 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/August: Found match for regex: ::I assume the latter too, but I know nothing whatever about Greek scribal abbreviations. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:20, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311534 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/August: Found match for regex: :There are accents of American English where /æŋ/ always surfaces as , see w:/æ/ tensing#Additional /æ/ tensing before /ɡ/ and /ŋ/. I'm a little reluctant to assign this to the phoneme /eɪ/ myself, though. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:16, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311534 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/August: Found match for regex: :I think it's bogus. The Greek is probably a cognate, but not an etymon. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:34, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311534 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/August: Found match for regex: :Also gots. The examples in the entry are both in the 1st person, but I've met people who use gots only in the 3rd person singular: I got, you got, he gots. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:47, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311534 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/August: Found match for regex: ::::::It's nonstandard everywhere, and it's by no means limited to the Southern US. Using third-person singular forms outside of the third person singular is widespread in English across the globe. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:36, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311534 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/August: Found match for regex: ::::::::{{reply to|DCDuring}} I really doubt that. I'm sure you can hear constructions like I hates in the speech of people who have no connection to the American South at all. It's like {{m|en|ain't}} or {{m|en|-in'}}: it's used everywhere and is nonstandard everywhere. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:00, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311534 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/August: Found match for regex: :I think {{m|la|compassus|compassvs}} is a single word divided across a line break. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:07, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311535 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/September: Found match for regex: :According to Braune Althochdeutsche Grammatik it's singular hio, plural hiewun in Frankish and singular hiu, plural hiuwen in Upper High German. I've added these to the headword line. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:17, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311535 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/September: Found match for regex: {{ping|I'm so meta even this acronym}} (and anyone else who knows Welsh): Does this form actually occur, or is mutation suppressed for {{m|cy|miliwn}} and {{m|cy|biliwn}}? It would be bad if {{m|cy||dau filiwn}} were ambiguous between "two million" and "two billion". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:03, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311535 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/September: Found match for regex: :Yes, and with "by language" at the end, i.e. Category:First-person pronouns by language etc. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:51, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311535 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/September: Found match for regex: Our only definition is "filled beyond capacity", but I don't think that's true of overstuffed chairs. Certainly the chair in the picture at the entry is not filled beyond capacity, because it is still successfully containing its stuffing. I don't know whether this warrants a separate definition line or whether overstuffed chair is a non-SOP idiom or what, but I think we're missing something. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:22, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311535 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/September: Found match for regex: :::Looks good, thanks for adding it! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:03, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311535 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/September: Found match for regex: :: I don't know how experts familiar with this word pronounce it, but if I encountered it in my reading I would pronounce it /ɡəˈnɑːwə/. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:20, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311535 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/September: Found match for regex: :: I've certainly seen Russian texts that describe things as П-shaped; it gets translated into English as U-shaped! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:22, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311535 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/September: Found match for regex: ::: Likewise, Russian texts that describe things as Г-shaped get translated into English saying L-shaped. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:09, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311535 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/September: Found match for regex: :{{IPAchar|/ˈwɛnzdeɪ/|/ˈwɛnzdi/}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:47, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311535 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/September: Found match for regex: ::As an American, I pronounce the name {{IPAchar|/æbˈduːl/}} to rhyme with pool, not {{IPAchar|/æbˈdʊl/}} to rhyme with pull. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:22, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311535 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/September: Found match for regex: ::: The Stewards don't, but the admins do. I think even non-admins can rename files on Commons, and anyone can nominate a file for deletion there. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:38, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311535 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/September: Found match for regex: :: And not even common typos or anything, just template/bot errors. Deleted. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:28, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311535 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/September: Found match for regex: Is there anyone here who understands the way season names are applied to a person's coloration? Along of the lines of "I'm a summer, you're a fall, she's a winter"? It has to do with a combination of hair color and skin tone. If anyone reading this knows how they work, could you add relevant senses to {{m|en|spring}}, {{m|en|summer}}, {{m|en|fall}}/{{m|en|autumn}}, and {{m|en|winter}}? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:53, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311535 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/September: Found match for regex: :: The same IP has been POV-pushing their heteronormative definitions of inlaws since March, and doing nothing else here. I've rolled them all back and would not be opposed to a block. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:50, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: :: This isn't specific to the word "then", though, since "then" can always be omitted in "if...then" pairs. You often hear waiters say something like "If you need anything, my name is Mike", and every Sunday at church our priest invites people to coffee hour after the service saying "If this is your first time here, the parish hall is around the back in the neighboring building." —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:14, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: :It's true; the plural of {{m|la|caelum}} is masculine {{m|la|caelī}}. I don't know how to fix it. I think we may have to add a word-specific declension to Module:la-utilities, but I don't know how to do that. {{ping|Kc kennylau}}? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:09, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: :I'd say so. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:05, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: :Well, that's what it's getting at, but grammatically it's a rhetorical question parallel to the English "How many times have I told you to stop doing that?!" So {{m|fr|combientième}} doesn't really mean "umpteenth" even though both terms can be used in exasperation. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:28, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: ::: I would certainly transcribe them at Wikisource. Here at Wiktionary they might be worth a hard redirect. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:10, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: :It's unlikely to be a Latin borrowing for both linguistic reasons (the diminutive -ец suffix is pure Slavic and is unrelated to the Latin ending -us) and sociological reasons (both Russian and Bulgarian fall into the Eastern Orthodox sphere of influence, so borrowing words related to Christianity is expected from Greek but not from Latin). Still, the words are related, since {{m+|sla-pro|*agnę}} and {{m|la|agnus}} come from the same source, {{m+|ine-pro|*h₂egʷnós}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:39, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: :: But the singular probably is a back-formation from the plural. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:58, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: :: Right; Chaucer can be used to cite Middle English, not Modern. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:55, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: ::: Try to learn the definition of {{m|en|suffix}} before you claim that things aren't suffixes. Both this and {{m|ru|-ный}} are clearly suffixes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:23, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: ::::: Find a book where a bound morpheme that's attached to the end of a root to form a new word is described as anything else besides a suffix. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:03, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: ::::::: You know why they're called inflectional suffixes? Because they're suffixes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:56, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: :: For me (as an American expat living in Germany), there's considerable denotational overlap between the two terms, but their connotations are rather different. The word immigrant connotes a person from a relatively poor country who's moved to a wealthier country to make a better life for him- or herself (or perhaps to escape persecution, in which case there is again overlap with {{m|en|refugee}}), while expat connotes a person from a relatively wealthy country (not necessarily an English speaker, though) who's moved to another country (regardless of its wealth) to live and work either temporarily or long-term. (For example, Germans living in Spain are expats even though they aren't English speakers.) Technically I meet Wyang's definition of immigrant, because I have no intention of living in the U.S. again, but I would rarely use that word to describe myself, because my home country is quite affluent, and although I did come to Germany for a job, I never felt like I had to leave the U.S. in order to find a job. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:50, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: ::: It never occurred to me that there would be varieties of English that didn't say this. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:38, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: :Sorry, I'm not sure exactly what you're asking. There is an Ancient Greek word {{m|grc|σκέψις|t=examination, observation, consideration}}. It doesn't actually mean "skepticism", just as {{m|grc|σκεπτικός}} doesn't actually mean "skeptical". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:32, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: ::There's also {{m|grc|σκῆψις|t=pretext}}, but that's unrelated to these words. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:47, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: :I don't know if I've ever head either "You can't talk" or "You can talk" used this way. The usual expression in my experience is "You're one to talk". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:31, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: :{{reply to|Vox Sciurorum}} I'm not a Swedish speaker, but there's no doubt in my mind it's from the same origin as {{m+|de|Schluss}}, which has the same meanings. {{m|de||Schluss}} is from the same root as {{m|de|schließen|t=to close}}, which is from {{m+|gem-pro|*sleutaną}}. That page lists a related term {{m|gem-pro|*slutą}}, which I suppose is the source of both the German and the Swedish words. However, since {{m|gem-pro||*sleutaną}} appears to be only a West Germanic word, I suspect that {{m+|sv|slut}} is not inherited from Proto-Germanic via Old Norse, but rather a loanword into Swedish from Low German. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:12, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: :Actually it occurs to me that {{m|gem-pro|*slutą}} is more likely to be the source of {{m+|de|Schloss}}, not {{m|de|Schluss}}. But the rest of what I said still applies: {{m|gem-pro|*sleutaną}} seems to be only a West Germanic word, so {{m+|sv|slut}} is probably a loanword from Low German. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:31, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: :::: For the record, I'm fine with us using curly apostrophes in entry titles, but then we should use them for all languages that use apostrophes. As long as hard redirects are in place in both directions, and as long as we have a single style that applies to all languages, either option is fine with me. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 05:49, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: ::A straight apostrophe is an apostrophe, and anyway that's typography, not linguistics. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:18, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: :To my knowledge, of the first and second person pronouns, only {{m|ga|tú}} mutates; {{m|ga|thú}} is the disjunctive form, i.e. it appears in the same positions as {{m|ga|], ], ]}}, while {{m|ga|tú}} appears in the same positions as {{m|ga|], ], ]}} (at least in the standard language; dialectal usage may be more complicated). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 05:54, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: :What anomaly is that? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:05, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: ::{{reply to|Aɴɢʀ}} farce, larceny, sparse, Mars --Backinstadiums (talk) 17:32, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: :::{{reply to|Backinstadiums}} That's a deficiency in English spelling, not an anomaly in the pronunciation of {{m|en|scarce}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:14, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: ::::{{reply to|Aɴɢʀ}} I disagree in this case. The key is its pronunciation in Middle English, which following the "general rule" for its spelling, shouldn't deviate from the rest. --Backinstadiums (talk) 19:26, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: ** The Online Etymology Dictionry's entry says "see a (2) + piece"; their "a (2)" is the one derived from {{m+|ang|an|t=on}}, which makes it the same as our a-#Etymology 2. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:46, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: :I think sleep with the enemy is definitely worth an entry, and I'm quite surprised we don't have one yet. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:48, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: :: And is it really 0, or is it 〇? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:14, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: ::: No. No one added it yet, I guess; that's the wiki way. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:33, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: ::::: I just have to say I really like the idea of using 1 and 0 to mean top and bottom respectively. I had hoped 10#Chinese would mean {{l|en|vers}}, but it doesn't, it means anal sex. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:25, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: ::::: {{reply to|Backinstadiums}} In gay slang, a top is a man who prefers to be the one doing the penetrating in anal sex, a bottom is a man who prefers to be the one getting penetrated, and a vers is a man who likes both. So it's kind of cutely symbolic in my opinion to use 1 to mean "top" and 0 to mean "bottom". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:48, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: :In some languages a single diacritic is certainly enough to warrant the existence of two entries, e.g. {{m+|ga|cuan}} vs. {{m|ga|cuán}}. But to judge from síya#Usage Notes, in this case síya should probably just be an {{tl|alternative spelling of}} siya. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:03, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311536 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/October: Found match for regex: :The easiest solution is to make w:Translingual language a hard redirect to w:Translingualism. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:23, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311537 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/November: Found match for regex: :I have no answer to your question, but I do wonder why Mass is {{m|ko|밋사}} in the first term and {{m|ko|미사}} in the other two. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:40, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311537 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/November: Found match for regex: :::{{reply|Barytonesis}} But it isn't apocope. Apocope is the deletion of the final vowel (plus any consonants that may follow it). The apocope of {{m|en|clitoris}} would be {{m|en||*clitor}}. It may sound unfortunate in this circumstance, but it is a clipping, like it or not. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:15, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311537 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/November: Found match for regex: ::::: Well they are, but those terms are more specific than clipping, and since clit~~oris~~ removes more than the word-final V(C) sequence, it's not apocope. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:40, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311537 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/November: Found match for regex: :: I didn't answer because I don't know. Sorry if you felt ignored! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:32, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311537 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/November: Found match for regex: :Yes, there are. As with many words ending in -ary, there is a British pronunciation in /(ə)ɹi/ and an American pronunciation in /ˌɛɹi/. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:37, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311537 Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/November: Found match for regex: :Probably both. Word-final g and h are more or less in free variation in Old English. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:19, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311539 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/January: Found match for regex: :In Old English, -a is a kind of agentive suffix, isn't it, as in {{m|ang|dēma}}? But I guess that wouldn't be -a in Gothic too. Maybe the Gothic word is a bahuvrihi? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:32, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311539 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/January: Found match for regex: ::::: Since the word isn't attested except in a latinized form was altered to conform to Latin morphology, how do we know the form wasn't {{m|got||*𐌷𐌰𐌻𐌾𐍉𐍂𐌿𐌽𐌾𐍉}} anyway? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 23:35, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311539 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/January: Found match for regex: ::::::::: {{reply to|KIeio}} actually, the nn of the Latin made me wonder if this word came from some variety of Gothic that had undergone the gemination of consonants before /j/ followed by deletion of /j/ otherwise known only from the West Germanic languages (e.g. {{m|gem-pro|*sunjō}} > {{m|ang|synn}}). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:11, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311539 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/January: Found match for regex: :::::::::::{{reply to|Leasnam}} Good point. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:21, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311539 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/January: Found match for regex: :: Indeed, we have lots of examples of this in English, e.g. {{m|en|unlike}}, which is diachronically from {{cog|ang|unġelīċ}} and synchronically from {{m|en|] + ]}}. There's nothing wrong with listing both; indeed, it's preferable to do so in order to get the categorization right, since unlike ought to be in both CAT:English terms inherited from Old English and CAT:English words prefixed with un-. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:02, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311539 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/January: Found match for regex: ::::: The wording I usually use is "synchronically analyzable as {{affix|en|nocat=1|un-|like}}" or just "synchronically {{affix|en|nocat=1|un-|like}}". I don't think every single etymology like this has to have the exact same wording. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:24, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311539 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/January: Found match for regex: :::::: If a user doesn't know what a word means, he can look it up. We are a dictionary, after all. And I do think we should be including synchronic etymologies at least for transparent root + affix words, especially when the affix is still productive, because when a speaker uses a word like {{m|en|goodness}}, for example, we have no way of knowing if he's learned that word as a whole, the same way he learned {{m|en|good}} (in which case the etymology is only diachronic), or whether he's combining {{m|en|good}} and {{m|en|-ness}} himself "on the fly" (in which case the etymology is synchronic, as the speaker has coined the word afresh). So while {{m|en|goodness}} does go back to {{m|ang|gōdnes}} and very probably {{m|gem-pro|*gōdanassuz}}, it is also being constantly re-coined in Modern English as {{m|en|] + ]}}. It isn't simply equivalent to good + -ness, it is good + -ness. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:11, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311539 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/January: Found match for regex: ::::::::: Then what is? "Equivalent to" isn't the right concept either. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:59, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311539 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/January: Found match for regex: ::::::::::: Because unlike isn't merely "equivalent to" un- + like; it *is* un- + like. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:02, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311539 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/January: Found match for regex: :::::::::::::: I know what it's supposed to mean, but it isn't merely equivalent to a derivation from un- + like. It is simultaneously *both* an inheritance from Old English *and* a concatenation of two Modern English morphemes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:38, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311539 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/January: Found match for regex: :::::::::::::::: Can you think of an example where there is no reason to say that? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:25, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311539 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/January: Found match for regex: ::::::::::::: Yes, that would work too. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:38, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311539 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/January: Found match for regex: ::::::::::::::: We shouldn't have only the synchronic analysis any more than we should have only the diachronic one. But saying "etymology is by definition diachronic" is flatly untrue, since words are coined simultaneously with their usage all the time (cf. {{w|wug test}}). A word like "goodness" is not only inherited from Proto-Germanic/Old English/Middle English; it is also built by contemporary English speakers by combining "good" and "-ness". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:25, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311539 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/January: Found match for regex: :Pretty sure it's {{af|la|nihilō|minus}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:00, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311540 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/February: Found match for regex: :: I smell yet anUther sock. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:48, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311541 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/March: Found match for regex: :Monier-Williams's 1899 Sanskrit Dictionary says that the analysis of {{m|sa|दुःख}} (the Sanskrit ancestor of {{cog|pi|dukkha}}) as {{m|sa|दुस्-|t=bad}} + {{m|sa|ख|t=axle hole}} is a folk etymology and it's probably actually a Prakritization of {{m|sa|दुस्-|t=bad}} + {{m|sa|स्थ|t=standing}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:05, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311541 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/March: Found match for regex: :It's probably best to cite all three gospels; people remembering the phrase from the Bible and using it in other contexts are probably not going to be remembering it from only one of the gospels and not the other two. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:24, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311541 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/March: Found match for regex: :{{reply to|91.66.15.220}} What do you mean the source, Fortson, is lacking? It's right there at the bottom of the page: "Fortson, Benjamin W. (2010) Indo-European Language and Culture: An Introduction, second edition, Oxford: Blackwell, page 1". And it isn't just him. All Indo-European scholars agree that {{m|grc|θεός}} and {{m|la|deus}} are unrelated and their similarity is coincidental. It's true that you can't prove a negative, but in this case the positive claim (that the two are related) has no evidence whatsoever to support it, so the negative claim (that they're unrelated) is not exceptional at all; it is of necessity the default assumption in the absence of evidence to the contrary. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:55, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311541 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/March: Found match for regex: ::: You're right; I hadn't seen the whole thread at Talk:θεός before. It's pretty clear he's arguing along the same lines as someone who, never having taken a class in biology, believes that bats and butterflies must be birds because they have wings and can fly, and is unwilling to accept the word of a textbook that mentions in passing that they aren't. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:45, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311541 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/March: Found match for regex: :Yes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:57, 29 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311541 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/March: Found match for regex: ::: BGC ngrams can't even find enough instances of cheerleaded to plot, but cheerled is common enough: , , (though the last is split across a line, so it might have been intended as cheer-led). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:50, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311542 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/April: Found match for regex: :: I was the one who called it a calque, just because it was clearly not a straightforward borrowing of burung. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:21, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311542 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/April: Found match for regex: :::: The comparison is not that unusual, cf. {{m|en|budgie smugglers}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:14, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311542 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/April: Found match for regex: :In German it's called {{m|de|Antarktis}}, which suggests an Ancient Greek pattern of nominative {{m|grc|Ἀνταρκτίς}} / genitive {{m|grc|Ἀνταρκτίδος}} (compare {{m|grc|Ἀτλαντίς|Ἀτλαντίς, Ἀτλαντίδος}}, so maybe there is a byform with "-id-" running around the Middle Ages somewhere. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:27, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311542 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/April: Found match for regex: :It's said to be from {{cog|ine-pro|*h₃eyt-}}, which is also the source of {{cog|la|ūtor}} and thus of {{cog|en|use}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:49, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311542 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/April: Found match for regex: :The Online Etymology Dictionary says the ML. etymon of the English word is {{m|la|tragonia}}, which is doubtless the source of the Manx word as well. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 05:55, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311542 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/April: Found match for regex: :The only difference would be that Classical Latin /ʊ/ became Vulgar Latin /o/ as usual, but I don't see any need to posit a specific VL form between soffrance and sufferentia as the former derives quite regularly from the latter. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:07, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311542 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/April: Found match for regex: ::: {{reply to|I'm so meta even this acronym}} I guess, but showing the VL. is really unnecessary. Also, if we're going to show VL., we should show the difference between close mid and open mid vowels somehow, so either sọffęręntia or soffɛrɛntia or something like that. But personally, I wouldn't show the VL. at all. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:30, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311543 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/May: Found match for regex: :Linguistically, I don't think there's any way to know, as {{m|gem-pro|*knībaz}} would have shown up in OE as {{m|ang|cnīf}} anyway. I suppose some slight additional evidence for a borrowing is that OE already had a native word for "knife", namely {{m|ang|seax}}, but of course languages are perfectly happy to have synonyms that are both inherited native words, so it isn't very strong evidence. Evidence against borrowing is the fact that {{m|gem-pro|*knībaz}} has descendants throughout West Germanic, suggesting that it's a very old word in our branch of Germanic. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:51, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311543 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/May: Found match for regex: :It's there now. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:53, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311543 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/May: Found match for regex: :Swahili has historically had intensive contact with Arabic, so the /f/ may be due to the influence of {{m|ar|الْفُرَات}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:43, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311543 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/May: Found match for regex: ::: I considered that, but in that case why would Swahili have deleted the u? *Furati is a perfectly well-formed Swahili word; perhaps even better formed than Frati, since I don't think Swahili has fr- in native words. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:44, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311543 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/May: Found match for regex: ::: {{m|grc|ἵππος}}, if it really is from {{m|ine-pro|*h₁éḱwos}}, is also evidence that Ḱw and Kʷ merged in Greek. I rather like the idea of bear come from {{m|ine-pro|*ǵʰwer-}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:49, 15 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311543 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/May: Found match for regex: :: I agree that Lucanian and Samnite can be considered dialects of Oscan. As -sche mentioned, Sabine already has an ISO code sbv. Hernician can probably be considered a dialect of Umbrian. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:51, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311543 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/May: Found match for regex: :::: I'd say so, yes. osc-luc, osc-sam, and xum-her? Or do they have to start with itc? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:06, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311543 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/May: Found match for regex: :::::: I wasn't sure, because the etymology-only code for Old Italian is roa-oit, not it-oit. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:41, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311543 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/May: Found match for regex: :Etymonline mentions the possibility of an origin from the Tamil word, but doesn't say how the t managed to become a p in Latin. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:43, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311543 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/May: Found match for regex: ::: I'd call it a misspelling. FWIW you get a lot of hits for "Tajikhistan", "Kazakstan", and "Kazakistan" too. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:12, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311543 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/May: Found match for regex: This etymology is weird because the entry is for a noun but the etymology is for a verb. Also, it's very unlikely pizzo would come from a Vulgar Latin *pinco, pincare. The etymon of the latter, *picco, piccare, is slightly more likely to be the source of pizzo, but still not very likely because Latin /k/ before a back vowel usually remains /k/ in Italian. And, of course it's a verb while pizzo is a noun. Anyone have a better etymology? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:56, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311543 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/May: Found match for regex: Has anyone ever suggested in print that the synonyms {{m|ine-pro|*bʰewg-}} and {{m|ine-pro|*bʰegʷ-}} are related? Or is their similarity pure coincidence? Obviously there's no regular correspondence between the phoneme gʷ and the cluster wg, but perhaps some irregular kind of metathesis led from one to the other? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:13, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311543 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/May: Found match for regex: ::Thanks! One possibility that occurs to me is that the earliest form was *bʰewgʷ-, which then dissimilated differently, either to *bʰewg- or to *bʰegʷ-. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:14, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311543 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/May: Found match for regex: :::: The thing about dissimilation is it almost never follows hard and fast rules; it's usually quite unpredictable. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:15, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311543 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/May: Found match for regex: :::::: But the boukolos rule doesn't say the other possibility can never happen. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:07, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311544 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/June: Found match for regex: :I think we're more likely to be right. Considering the cognates it has, it's unlikely to have been an intra-Latin coinage. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:40, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311544 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/June: Found match for regex: I recently bought a copy of Karin Stüber's The Historical Morphology of n-stems in Celtic, not realizing I already owned a copy. Would anyone care to buy the spare copy for €16 (I paid €22) plus postage? Send me an e-mail if so. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:52, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311544 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/June: Found match for regex: :I'm not convinced PEDMAS is a mistake. Division and multiplication are not ordered with respect to each other, so PEMDAS and PEDMAS are equivalent. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:25, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311544 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/June: Found match for regex: The headword line says it's masculine, but the inflection table is for neuters. And aren't r/n-stems always neuter? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:13, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311545 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/July: Found match for regex: ::Since Russian оа comes from (postlaryngeal) PIE *ā and *ō, while ао comes from *a and *o, I suppose this alternation goes all the way back to PIE ablaut. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:13, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311545 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/July: Found match for regex: ::::: {{reply to|CodeCat}} Fixed. I did know that, I was just typing faster than I was thinking. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:48, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311545 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/July: Found match for regex: ::::::: Germanic also has exactly the /a~o/ vs. /ā~ō/ alternation in class VI strong verbs (shake/shook < *skakaną/*skōk). The obvious place for this contrast to originate is in zero grades with interconsonantal h₂/h₃ (> Gmc. a, BSl. a, Sl. o) vs. full grades with eh₂/eh₃ (> Gmc. ō, BSl. ā/ō, Sl. a). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:33, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311545 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/July: Found match for regex: :::::: I agree with -sche and Mihia. It's absurd to have separate etymology sections for each POS in cases where one is clearly derived from the other, especially in isolating and analytic languages like English. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:09, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311545 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/July: Found match for regex: ::At any rate, cannabis#Latin and cannabis#English have totally different etymologies for the Scythian. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:28, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311545 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/July: Found match for regex: :::: Good idea. I've created {{m|grc|κάνναβις}} now; feel free to add an etymology section. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:21, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311545 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/July: Found match for regex: :It's genitive singular neuter agreeing with generis, yes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:18, 18 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311545 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/July: Found match for regex: :{{reply to|Barytonesis}} It seems very likely. {{m|gmy|𐀒𐀵𐀙}} is exactly how both the accusative singular {{m|grc|χθόνα}} and the accusative plural {{m|grc|χθόνας}} would be spelled in Mycenaean. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:48, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311545 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/July: Found match for regex: ::{{m+|it|Stati Pontifici}} isn't an exact calque of {{m+|la|Status Pontificius}} because the former is plural and the latter is singular. Is {{m|la|Statūs Pontificiī}} also attested in Latin? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:45, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311545 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/July: Found match for regex: :{{reply to|Hillcrest98}} Not all of them. The senses meaning "his", "her", and "their" certainly are from various genitive forms of it; the sense meaning "how" is probably ultimately the same as "his"; the relative particles and the pronoun for "all that, whatever" might be from it as well. The vocative particle and the preposition with verbal noun definitely aren't; the numeral particle probably isn't. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:35, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311546 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/August: Found match for regex: ::: Since the preposition triggers nasal mutation in both Goidelic and Brythonic, why is it reconstructed with a final i at all? Shouldn't it just be *en? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:21, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311546 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/August: Found match for regex: ::::: Sounds to me like the prefix was {{m|cel-pro|*eni-}} but the preposition was {{m|cel-pro|*en}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:53, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311547 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/September: Found match for regex: {{m|grc|Βαΐαι}} says it's a borrowing from {{m+|la|Baiae}}, which in turn says it's a borrowing from {{m|grc||Βαΐαι}}. They can't both be right. Which is? (Wikipedia says it was named after Odysseus's helmsman Baius, but that could be folk etymology.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:39, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311547 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/September: Found match for regex: :Welsh {{m|cy|-edd}} is from the Proto-Celtic nom./acc.pl. of feminine yā- and ī-stems, {{m|cel-pro||*-iyās}}, and the same form of neuter yo-stems, {{m|cel-pro||*-iyā}}; {{m|cy|-ydd}} is from the nom.pl. of i-stems, which was {{m|cel-pro||*-iyes}} in Proto-Insular Celtic, from Proto-Celtic {{m|cel-pro||*-eyes}} (though our {{tl|cel-decl-noun-i-mf}} gives the form as {{m|cel-pro||*-īs}} in PC, but I don't think that can be right). According to {{w|Peter Schrijver}}, {{m|cy|-oedd}} comes from an *-es-ī that arose when certain neuter s-stems (whose original plural was in *-esa) became masculines; but the older explanation of {{w|John Morris-Jones}} is that {{m|cy|-oedd}} is from any of {{m|cel-pro||*-iyoi}}, {{m|cel-pro||*-iyās}}, {{m|cel-pro||*-iya}} or {{m|cel-pro||*-iyes}} when the stress was on the antepenult. Frankly, neither of them sounds very convincing to me; I'd say the jury is still out. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:07, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311547 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/September: Found match for regex: ::What I do find convincing is the argument, going all the way back to Pedersen, that -oedd is from *-esa, the nom./acc.pl. of the neuter s-stems; it's paralleled by the verb form {{m|cy|oedd|t=was}} < {{m|cel-pro||*esāt}} (cf. {{m+|la|erat}}). Schrijver, however, is unconvinced by both -oedd < *-esa and oedd < *esāt. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:52, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311547 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/September: Found match for regex: :No, that's bullshit. I removed it from Wikipedia. Someone has misunderstood {{m|grc|διᾱ́κονος}} as being related to {{m|grc|κονῑ́ω|t=make dusty}}, which it isn't. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:12, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311547 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/September: Found match for regex: :::No, I don't. Maybe the PIE root was *Hken-? Or maybe there's an alpha intensivum or alpha copulativum between the δια- and the root? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:27, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311547 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/September: Found match for regex: :: I've removed it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:30, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311548 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/October: Found match for regex: ::: It certainly doesn't sound like a typical Eastern Algonquian loanword, as they tend to be longer and full of velar consonants (compare Appendix:English terms of Native North American origin#from Algonquian languages). But of course there are exceptions to any generalization. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:10, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311548 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/October: Found match for regex: :It's unlikely to be from Proto-Germanic. First of all, the semantics are wonky. Second, even accepting it as a dialect borrowing from Low German (to explain the lack of p > pf), the long vowel is hard to explain away. Surely if {{m+|nds|Polle}} had been borrowed into German, it would be {{m|de||Polle}} or {{m|de||Poll}}, not {{m|de|Pol}}. (de-wikt does list a {{m|de|Polle|t=piece of pollen}}, but it's a back-formation from {{m|de|Pollen}} and has nothing to do with this word.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:20, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311548 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/October: Found match for regex: :Without doing any research whatsoever, I assume English got it from French in about 1066. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:54, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311548 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/October: Found match for regex: :::Was it? Wikipedia says "By the 14th century, had been declared both the patron saint and the protector of the royal family", so you'd think people would be naming their sons after him. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:17, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311548 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/October: Found match for regex: :It's probably a calque of one of the other names, like {{m+|tr|Şeker Bayramı|lit=sugar festival}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:20, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311548 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/October: Found match for regex: :{{m+|sa|आयत्त|t=adhering, resting on, depending on}}. But the compound appears not to be Sanskrit; at least, Monier-Williams has no entry for a {{m|sa||पञ्चायत्त}} that I can find. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:08, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311548 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/October: Found match for regex: :Probably the same place as the v’s of {{m|en|Shavian}} and {{m|en|Peruvian}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:40, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311548 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/October: Found match for regex: ::: Yes. After I wrote the above it occurred to me that even if the v is the same as in Shavian and Peruvian, why should the o be there? I'd expect simply "Vukian". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:53, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311548 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/October: Found match for regex: :{{done}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:54, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311548 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/October: Found match for regex: :Is it a {{tl|calque}}? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:30, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311548 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/October: Found match for regex: :: To me too. The East and West Slavic descendants are from the definite declension, but they're still descendants. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:32, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311549 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/November: Found match for regex: The etymology section says this is inherited from {{m+|sla-pro|*sǫka}}, but it can't be, can it? Wouldn't the inherited term have to be {{m|pl||*sęka}} or {{m|pl||*sąka}}? If so, then suka must be borrowed from some other Slavic language (almost any other Slavic language besides Slovene), right? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:38, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311549 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/November: Found match for regex: :: I had forgotten that I had already asked this at Reconstruction talk:Proto-Slavic/sǫka almost 2 years ago. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:41, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311549 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/November: Found match for regex: ::: I don't know anything about Kashubian and Polabian; can {{m|csb|sëka}} and {{m|pox|sauko}} be inherited? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:44, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311549 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/November: Found match for regex: :I've always assumed it is, yes. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:10, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311549 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/November: Found match for regex: :: I agree. Pidgins and creoles neither exactly borrow nor exactly inherit vocabulary from their lexifier languages, so {{tl|der}} is really the only template appropriate in most cases. That said, however, it is possible for a creole to borrow words from other languages, including their lexifier language, for example technical terms and other learnèd vocabulary. In fact, I suspect that {{m+|ht|adaptasyon}} is a loanword from French (i.e. it was deliberately taken from French rather than belonging to the everyday vocabulary of the first Haitian Creole speakers), just as {{m+|fr|adaptation}} itself is indeed a loanword from Medieval {{m+|la|adaptātiō}}, and not an inheritance. I suppose it's also possible for a creole to inherit words from the pidgin that it evolved from, but I don't know whether we have separate codes for any pidgin/creole pairs in a mother/daughter relationship. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:36, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311549 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2017/November: Found match for regex: ::: I've made the redirect and used {{tl|attention}} to draw attention to differences between the two pages' descendants lists. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:14, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311551 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/January: Found match for regex: :Each Wiktionary is intended to be a dictionary of all words in all languages; the nominal language of that Wiktionary (the "xx" in "xx.wiktionary.org") is the language in which definitions are written and in which discussion takes place. But French Wiktionary is as entitled to have Chinese and Russian words as English Wiktionary is (CAT:Chinese lemmas, CAT:Russian lemmas); likewise Chinese and Russian Wiktionaries are entitled to have French and Russian words, and so on. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:27, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311551 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/January: Found match for regex: :As for getting just the French words from French Wiktionary, you need the subcategories of fr:Catégorie:Grammaire en français. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:30, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311551 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/January: Found match for regex: ::: In other words, the distinction is purely political, not linguistic. There are linguistic differences within Serbo-Croatian, of course, but they don't correspond to the artificial Serbian vs. Croatian vs. Bosnian (vs. Montenegrin) distinctions. {{w|You've Got to Be Carefully Taught}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:38, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311552 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/February: Found match for regex: :The talk page of the relevant "About language X" page (e.g. Wiktionary talk:About French) is often a good place to coordinate work on a specific language, or else the Beer Parlor, but of course that isn't language-specific. I don't think there's any attempt to homogenize the different language versions of Wiktionary (en-wikt, de-wikt, fr-wikt, etc.). It would be an enormous undertaking and require consensus at all projects, which is probably unattainable. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:42, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311552 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/February: Found match for regex: :Although the entry manoeuvering doesn't say anything about standardness, the entry manoeuver does say it's a nonstandard alternative spelling (which in my opinion is a euphemism for "misspelling", but other people may feel differently). Certainly the most common spellings are manoeuvre in GB-based spelling and maneuver in US-based spelling. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:24, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311552 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/February: Found match for regex: :Nebuchadnezzar itself is in CAT:en:Biblical characters and CAT:en:Individuals, but not CAT:English given names. Probably 𐌰𐌹𐌻𐌴𐌹𐍃𐌰𐌱𐌰𐌹𐌸 could be treated the same way. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:19, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311552 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/February: Found match for regex: :: I think the loss of -en in the infinitive was not a phonological change; not only did many past participles keep their -en, so did adjectives like {{m|en|open}}, nouns like {{m|en|heaven}}, and noun forms like {{m|en|oxen}}. I think it was really a morphological change, where the infinitive in -en was replaced by the bare stem. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:37, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311553 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/March: Found match for regex: :::: Most widely used templates and modules are semiprotected anyway, so they're less likely to be vandalized. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:23, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311554 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/April: Found match for regex: :::::: If I were teaching English as a foreign language, I'd probably focus more on the names of fruits and animals and the present tense of "to be" rather than on niceties of punctuation, too. I don't remember ever being taught where to put periods and commas with respect to quotation marks in school in the U.S., either. I think I learned it by observation while reading books. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:03, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311554 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/April: Found match for regex: :When Robert Ullmann died, a notice was put on his user page. He was also desysopped and (temporarily at least) blocked. There seems to be some disagreement as to whether dead users should be blocked. I'm in favor, because it means their accounts can't be hacked into, but others disagree. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:58, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311554 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/April: Found match for regex: :::Oh, that I don't know. It probably helped that he used his real name and that there were, I believe, Wiktionarians who knew him in real life. There may well be Wiktionarians who have died and the community isn't aware of it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:04, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311554 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/April: Found match for regex: :: You don't need a family, just an executor. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:50, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311554 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/April: Found match for regex: :::: {{small|If you have the latter, you still need the former. —] (]) 16:58, 3 May 2017 (UTC)}}
Page 5311554 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/April: Found match for regex: :Probably the most efficient way would be to ask at the Etymology scriptorium. In practice, if there's no gloss for a word in an etymology section, the most likely reason is that it has the same meaning as the word being discussed. It would be kind of tedious to read that fish comes from Middle English fish 'fish', from Old English fisc 'fish', from Proto-Germanic *fiskaz 'fish', from Proto-Indo-European *peysk- 'fish'; so people often omit the glosses when they seem obvious from context. Unfortunately, what's obvious to one person isn't always obvious to someone else. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:23, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311554 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/April: Found match for regex: ::: Most threads go stale after a week or so. If you find several in a short space of time, you can list them all together in a single discussion, but if you find new ones two weeks or a month later, it's probably more effective to start a new discussion. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:06, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311555 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/May: Found match for regex: :: You could call it a misspelling, especially if it occurs only in that one text. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:31, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311555 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/May: Found match for regex: :::: You could call it an s-mobile variant! Seriously, if you don't like {{tl|misspelling of}}, I think {{tl|alternative spelling of}} is your best bet. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:14, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311555 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/May: Found match for regex: ** On the other hand, Wikipedia has only one article on the {{w|Dog}}, while we have probably over 100 entries on the same topic ({{l|ar|كَلْب}}, {{l|zh|狗}}, {{l|en|dog}}, {{l|fr|chien}}, {{l|ru|пёс}}, {{l|es|perro}}, just to name a few). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:04, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311556 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/June: Found match for regex: :::I think honky is the term usually used in films and TV shows. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:01, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311557 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/July: Found match for regex: :: I much prefer sticking to the transcription system we've established here, as it's easy to read, it matches expectations, it's phonemically no less accurate (even if it doesn't perfectly match the phonetic realization in all accents), and it minimizes the need for multiple listings in multiple accents. It's bad enough that have to use RP /əʊ/ vs GenAm /oʊ/ for the {{smallcaps|goat}} vowel; I'd be very unhappy to see us introduce a wholly unnecessary distinction between RP /ɔɪ/ and GenAm /ɔi/ for the {{smallcaps|choice}} vowel. I have no objection to using the nonsyllabicity marker for all accents (i.e. /ɔɪ̯/), but neither to I feel it's really necessary. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:41, 23 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311558 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/August: Found match for regex: ::"No matter how eloquently a dog may bark, he cannot tell you that his parents were poor, but honest." —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:32, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311558 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/August: Found match for regex: ::: {{reply to|Robotukas11}} Why do you need to? {{tl|l-self}} already strips diacritics. Or did you mean you want it to display without diacritics, even when {{para|1}} is given with them? Also, note that CodeCat's solution above will not put the display in bold face the way {{tl|l-self}} will. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:17, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311559 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/September: Found match for regex: ** Since we consider Lombardic a dialect of Old High German, it should be sufficient for these spellings to be attested somewhere in OHG, although if they're not attested in Lombardic they shouldn't be tagged {{tl|lb|goh|Lombardic}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:34, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311559 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/September: Found match for regex: ::: The "list of materials" may not have been drawn up yet, but there is no doubt that OHG is an LDL and that words attested only in glosses are eligible for inclusion. We certainly have gloss-only entries for Old Irish, and plenty of Ancient Greek words that appear only in Hesychius's glossary. I don't think anyone here wants to exclude any attested term in an ancient language with a limited corpus. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:42, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311559 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/September: Found match for regex: :: I'd pronounce it in one syllable, /dʒoʊl/, to rhyme with bowl and coal and dole and foal and goal and hole and mole and pole and sole/soul and toll and vole. And I'd pronounce Noel (as a first name, e.g. Noel Coward) to rhyme with the same set. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:37, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311560 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/October: Found match for regex: :I wouldn't, unless it means something beyond "(Are) ] ], ]?" —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:23, 2 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311560 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/October: Found match for regex: :If I had been the one to remove it, it would have been because "Q5" is not an appropriate senseid. The ID should be something easy to remember, like {{tl|senseid|ru|guy}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:23, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311560 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/October: Found match for regex: ::: But тип corresponds to only one of them. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:41, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311560 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/October: Found match for regex: ::It's probably just an editorial decision; they probably thought it was easier to read without the diacritics. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:00, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311560 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/October: Found match for regex: ::: I've deleted all the forms and the category. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:58, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311560 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/October: Found match for regex: :We're a dictionary, we can't help you with this. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:36, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311560 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/October: Found match for regex: :: And not just on phrasal verbs. All our multiword entries have to be idiomatic, otherwise they'd be deleted by dint of being SOP. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:32, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311561 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/November: Found match for regex: :{{reply|Sarri.greek}} Our own page Appendix:Greek pronunciation specifies /o/ as the IPA for Greek ο and ω, so that's what I would recommend using here. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:34, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311561 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/November: Found match for regex: ::You don't get permission from admins to make edits. That's not how wikis work. You just edit boldly in good faith, and remain polite and open to discussion if anyone objects. When you correct Greek transcriptions, you're not doing so because I as an admin told you that you could; you're doing so because you believe it's an improvement to Wiktionary to do so. If anyone objects, you can point them to Appendix:Greek pronunciation and say you're making the transcriptions consistent with that page. If they disagree with that page, it should be discussed among the larger group of Greek-language editors, preferably in the Beer Parlor. And yes, these conventions apply only to English Wiktionary; it's entirely possible that el-wikt and fr-wikt etc. have different conventions. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:00, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311561 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/November: Found match for regex: :::: It's true that we should be focusing on broadly phonemic transcriptions and so we should primarily use //, though we can also use in addition. But it's also true that the symbol is meaningless unless you've already defined what is, because simply means "a vowel more open than ", so clearly you have to know where your is before you can know what vowel is more open than it. And where is can be different from one language to the next: the Greek and the Turkish and the Spanish might all be slightly different from each other while still all being . It's important to remember that the IPA vowel symbols do not represent only the extreme positions of the so-called {{w|cardinal vowels}}; each vowel symbol represents a whole area of vowel space. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:54, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5311561 Wiktionary:Information desk/2017/November: Found match for regex: ** But only if you're not a native speaker. Or are there accents of English that have both a {{smallcaps|north}}–{{smallcaps|goat}} merger and final devoicing? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:48, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5321183 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2017-01/Policy on place names: Found match for regex: # {{support}} with Dan's amendments. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:08, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
Page 5321183 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2017-01/Policy on place names: Found match for regex: ::::: You may interpret my vote as "Support with or without Dan's amendments, but preferably with them". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:11, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5325138 Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/sleydʰ-: Found match for regex: May be a {{af|ine-pro|*-dʰh₁eti|alt1=*-dʰ(h₁)-}} extension of {{m|ine-pro|*(s)ley-||to slip, slide, be slimy}} (or {{m|ine-pro||*(s)leh₁y-}}): compare {{m|ine-pro||*(s)leyG-}} in {{cog|gem-pro|*slīkaną||to slide, glide, slither}}, {{m|gem-pro|*slīkaz||{{l|en|sleek}}, {{l|en|slick}}, smooth}}, possibly also {{cog|sq|shlligë||viper}}; {{m|ine-pro||*(s)ley-m-}} in {{m+|gem-pro|*slīmą||{{l|en|slime}}}} and {{m|gem-pro|*līmaz||glue, clay, {{l|en|lime}}}}, {{cog|la|līmus||mud, slime}}, {{cog|ine-bsl-pro|*sleiˀnāˀ||saliva}} ({{cog|sla-pro|*slìna}}, {{cog|lv|sliēnas|g=m-p}}), {{m+|sq|llënjëz||mud}}, {{cog|grc|λεῖμαξ||snail, slug}}, {{m+|sla-pro|*slimakъ||snail}}, and perhaps {{m+|ine-pro|*léymō|*ley-men-|body of water (marsh ~ lake ~ bay)}}; {{m|ine-pro|*leyp-||to stick, be sticky; fat, oil, glue}}; {{m|ine-pro||*(s)leyb(ʰ)-}} in {{cog|gmw-pro|*slīpan||to make smooth, whet}}, {{m|gmw-pro|*slipr||{{l|en|slippery}}, smooth}}, {{cog|en|slip||mix of clay and water|pos=n}}.
Page 5329542 Wiktionary:Votes/2017-01/Dominic for de-admin: Found match for regex: # {{support}} He's been contacted by e-mail and hasn't responded, so I assume he doesn't care. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:04, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5357568 Wiktionary:Votes/2017-02/Richardb for de-admin: Found match for regex: # {{support}}, though to be fair, it hasn't actually been {{diff|42351810|text=35 years}} since he was active. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:45, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5359026 Wiktionary:Votes/2017-03/"External sources", "External links", "Further information" or "Further reading": Found match for regex: # {{support}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:47, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
Page 5368292 Wiktionary:Votes/2017-03/Request categories 2: Found match for regex: # {{support}} I guess, though this isn't something that I care strongly about. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:28, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5369409 Wiktionary:Votes/2017-03/Reference templates and OCLC: Found match for regex: # {{abstain}} I had never heard of OCLC until this instant, so I don't feel qualified to make an informed vote. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:31, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5370110 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2017-03/CFI and place names cleanup: Found match for regex: # {{support}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:31, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5373328 Wiktionary:Votes/2017-03/Atelaes for desysop: Found match for regex: # {{oppose}} per TheDaveRoss —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:32, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5376870 Wiktionary:Votes/2017-03/Deprecating 4=, 5= and gloss= parameters in favor of t=: Found match for regex: # {{abstain}} This is a matter of absolutely no importance whatsoever. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:33, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5376870 Wiktionary:Votes/2017-03/Deprecating 4=, 5= and gloss= parameters in favor of t=: Found match for regex: #:: That was when I thought it was already well established that 4=, 5=, and gloss= had been deprecated. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:55, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5376870 Wiktionary:Votes/2017-03/Deprecating 4=, 5= and gloss= parameters in favor of t=: Found match for regex: # {{abstain}} This is a matter of absolutely no importance whatsoever. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:33, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5390607 Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/ǵʰreh₁d-: Found match for regex: ** {{desc|cel-pro|*glādītor|unc=1}} {{q|deponent}}
Page 5396357 Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2017-04/User:Kiwima for admin: Found match for regex: # {{support}}. I see no reason to oppose, and there's certainly no reason the majority of our editors shouldn't be admins if they can be trusted with the tools. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:11, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5396357 Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2017-04/User:Kiwima for admin: Found match for regex: *Isn't there a requirement that e-mail be enabled for all admins? AFAICT {{gender:Kiwima|he doesn't|she doesn't|they don't}} have e-mail enabled. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:14, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 5406516 Wiktionary:Translation requests/archive/2017: Found match for regex: :The Pocket Burmese Dictionary doesn't mention {{m|my|ဘား}}, but gives {{m|my|အရက်ဆိုင်}} for bar. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:15, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
Page 5408758 Wiktionary:Votes/2017-05/Modern Latin as a WDL: Found match for regex: # {{oppose}} Modern/New/Contemporary Latin, whatever you want to call it, is not a constructed language nor is it well documented on the Internet. It should qualify as an LDL, though we do need to define "a list of materials deemed appropriate as the only sources for entries based on a single mention". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:13, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5408758 Wiktionary:Votes/2017-05/Modern Latin as a WDL: Found match for regex: #:::::: I don't see any way in which Wiki and I are being illogical. The second clause of the sentence you quoted is, "but on whether we want to treat it like a constructed language, and have tighter restrictions on what words we accept", and Wiki and I are saying it isn't a constructed language and therefore shouldn't be treated like one. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:38, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
Page 5439212 Wiktionary:Requests for verification/Non-English: Found match for regex: : So with the names of channels only examples I analyze: Anglophone channel: “ ꑭ Oppressed Lifters” https://t.me/OppressedLifters Ukrainophone: https://t.me/sooproon Супрунята ꑭ Iдея Nауки ⚛️✡️Супрунята ꑭ Iдея Nауки ⚛️✡️ – Where apparently ꑭ is basically a shorthand for українська, the other symbols meaning that he is also a Jew or Philosemite and interested in science. Though on the other hand it occurs right after “Ukrainian” in the English channel name of an Ukrainian-language channel “ukrain1an ꑭ news” https://t.me/ukrain1an_news. Surely however in “𝙄𝙣𝙨𝙤𝙢𝙣𝙞𝙖 ꑭ 𝙉𝙎𝘽𝙈” https://t.me/InsomniaNSBM or “ꑭ ᴠᴀʟʜöʟʟ ✙” https://t.me/vallholl it means the channel is of Ukrainian origin and alledged with the said troops; in the former you cannot even claim a language since it is basically only dumping music. There is at least a point to make about why this symbolic is so frequent.
Page 5503241 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2017-05/Modern Latin as a WDL 2: Found match for regex: # {{oppose}} for the same reason as before. Latin after 1500 is neither a constructed language nor is it well documented on the Internet. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 06:34, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5503241 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2017-05/Modern Latin as a WDL 2: Found match for regex: #:: Apparently modern Latin isn't treat so uniformly at RFV. Certainly this vote proves there's no consensus for doing so. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:42, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5504778 Wiktionary:Votes/2017-05/Templatizing topical categories in the mainspace: Found match for regex: #: {{reply to|Dan Polansky}} I don't understand. {{tl|C}} and {{tl|c}} both redirect to the same target, so they're not functionally different. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:34, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5504778 Wiktionary:Votes/2017-05/Templatizing topical categories in the mainspace: Found match for regex: #:: @Aɴɢʀ: My mistake; indeed, {{tl|C}} and {{tl|c}} both redirect to {{tl|topics}}. I retract my above rationale for opposition, replacing it with a new one: {{tl|C}} should not be capitalized, consistent with {{tl|m}} and {{tl|lb}}. I abstain as for {{tl|c}} in lowercase. --Dan Polansky (talk) 15:46, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 5554003 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2017-06/Modern Latin as a LDL or extinct language: Found match for regex: # {{abstain}} I oppose treating modern Latin differently from Classical/Vulgar/Late/Medieval Latin. It's all one language. Either the language as a whole is extinct, or it isn't. If we are going to treat post-1500 Latin differently from pre-1500 Latin, we should give it its own language code. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:25, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5554003 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2017-06/Modern Latin as a LDL or extinct language: Found match for regex: # {{abstain}} I oppose treating modern Latin differently from Classical/Vulgar/Late/Medieval Latin. It's all one language. Either the language as a whole is an LDL, or it isn't. If we are going to treat post-1500 Latin differently from pre-1500 Latin, we should give it its own language code. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:25, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5555599 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2017-06/NORM: multiple spaces align equal signs in templates: Found match for regex: # {{oppose}}. Utterly trivial, not worth enforcing one way or the other. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:06, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
Page 5633418 Wiktionary:Votes/cu-2017-08/User:Koavf for checkuser: Found match for regex: #::: I have no interest whatsoever in being a checkuser. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:29, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
Page 5665168 Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2017-09/User:Justinrleung for admin: Found match for regex: # {{support}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:44, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
Page 5679548 Wiktionary:Votes/cu-2017-10/User:Chuck Entz for checkuser: Found match for regex: # {{support}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:50, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
Page 5702257 Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2017-11/Desysopping CodeCat aka Rua: Found match for regex: # {{oppose}} I agree that Rua needs to work on her civility and consensus-building skills, but at this point I don't think desysopping is a necessary step. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:11, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 5702257 Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2017-11/Desysopping CodeCat aka Rua: Found match for regex: #:: I don't know yet. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:27, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Page 6229459 Wiktionary:Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense/Second hundred: Found match for regex: : Non-squirrel (, ). —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:17, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Page 6275970 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2019/May: Found match for regex: * I think that the etymology sections should be removed from any straightforward, obvious non-lemma entries. If altered to redirect to the most relevant entry, however, this template could be useful for non-lemmas in entries—such as {{l|pl|abak}} in Polish—that contain both lemma and non-lemma (with obvious etymologies) definitions to avoid blank etymology sections. Another application for the template could be to direct the reader to the non-lemma entry with the etymology for non-obvious non-lemmas that are obviously related to another non-lemma—like {{l|pl|tygodnie}}, {{l|pl|tygodni}}, et cetera to {{l|pl|tygodnia}}, whose lemma is {{l|pl|tydzień}}. Maybe format it like this: nonlemma|lang|entry . By the way, I think the etymology of {{l|en|housen}} should stay as it is unusual in English and would not be obvious whether it was inherited from an inflection of its predecessors or occurred due to some alternative dialectal construction of plural forms. İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 01:23, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
Page 6275970 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2019/May: Found match for regex: :I'm disinclined to include them. They're morphemes, but they aren't things that readers are going to want to look up in a dictionary. The same goes for the zero morpheme that "marks" the plural of words like {{m|en|sheep}} or the past tense of words like {{m|en|put}}. Readers aren't going to want to look up a suffix -∅ for those forms, or a suffix -ʲ for certain Irish genitive singulars and nominative plurals (e.g. {{m|ga|báid}}), or a prefix ʀᴇᴅ- for Malay plurals, Ancient Greek perfects, or anything else languages use reduplication for. —Mahāgaja · talk 10:25, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
Page 6275998 Wiktionary:Tea room/2019/September: Found match for regex: Feedback? İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 00:41, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
Page 6276012 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2019/November: Found match for regex: * I reformatted and corrected the etymology at Abib as well as I could, but I am still uncertain. With the original etymology saying "The month was so called from barley being at that time in ear" and the definitions at {{l|he|אביב}} as they are, the literal translation clearly was not "an ear of corn," but I am uncertain whether "an ear of barley" is a missing translation at {{l|he|אביב}} or incorrect. I am also uncertain whether the use of "literally" is proper or not. İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 02:35, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
Page 6443600 Wiktionary:Votes/2019-05/Excluding self-evident "attributive form of" definitions for hyphenated compounds: Found match for regex: # {{support}} İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 14:24, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
Page 6559817 Wiktionary:Votes/sy-2019-09/User:Erutuon for admin: Found match for regex: # {{support}} İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 16:37, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
Page 6649515 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2020/July: Found match for regex: The template {{template|ky-decl-noun}} is incapable of handling singulare and plurale tantum declensions. Could someone add that ability? İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 20:58, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Page 6649515 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2020/July: Found match for regex: ::: {{ping|Benwing2}}, {{re|Atitarev}} Thank you both! İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 03:09, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
Page 6649515 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2020/July: Found match for regex: : {{ping|Benwing2}} The module cannot handle capital letters such as at the entry Ош. Can you fix that? İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 20:31, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
Page 6649515 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2020/July: Found match for regex: ::: {{ping|Benwing2}} Thanks! Ош is uncountable by the way. İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 21:10, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
Page 6649515 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2020/July: Found match for regex: : {{ping|Benwing2}} One more thing—could you add possessive suffix support? I think the best resource for that is https://www.researchgate.net/publication/313774172_Kyrgyz_Orthography_and_Morphotactics_with_Implementation_in_NUVE at page 7 (the key is at page 3). The forms with "з" in it are polite forms. İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 13:31, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
Page 6649515 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2020/July: Found match for regex: Even though I specified the transcription as outlined at Template:alter at өсүмдүк, the untranscribed text was still returned. I also tested it with Template:link and the same thing happened so it's a problem with a module somewhere. İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 03:09, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Page 6649539 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2020/July: Found match for regex: Almost every entry on this page is listed as being borrowed directly from Slovak, which I think is extremely unlikely. I think a lot of them are rather borrowed from Russian or should be listed as ultimately from Slovak. I also think it is worth noting that this occurred in a {{diff|36195120|text=single edit}}. Thoughts? İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 16:17, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
Page 6649553 Wiktionary:Information desk/2020/August: Found match for regex: Both here and on Wikipedia, it says that there are 62 letters in the Abkhaz alphabet, but I counted 64. Is the count a mistake, or is the alphabet? İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 00:09, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
Page 6649553 Wiktionary:Information desk/2020/August: Found match for regex: :: {{ping|Lambiam}} According to the World Abaza Congress, there are 64 letters. Signs (such as ъ and ь) are also counted as letters in every Cyrillic-script language I have seen to date (except this one if one goes by Wikipedia or sources based on Wikipedia). Thoughts? İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 22:12, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
Page 6705452 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2020-02/CFI for chemical formulae: Found match for regex: # {{support}} İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 21:40, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
Page 6778805 Wiktionary:Votes/2020-04/Style changes to the criteria for inclusion: Found match for regex: # {{support}} The headers should be enough to draw the reader's attention. Elsewhere, bolding provides no adequate change of meaning and may confuse the reader regarding the importance of certain sections. In WT:SOP, the top sentence has the only bolded words in this section thus shifting emphasis to the top while the sentences below are the most important as they are the ones that describe the policy. If any of the words or sentences below were bolded, however, the reader may be led to believe that these are the only sections necessary to read (bolding is particularly problematic in WT:BRAND, "Given and family names," "Genealogical content," and "Company names" with each having a bolded introductory sentence). Generally speaking, while bolded words can shift attention to the desired area, they also deemphasise the other important areas. İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 19:15, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
Page 6778805 Wiktionary:Votes/2020-04/Style changes to the criteria for inclusion: Found match for regex: # {{support}} İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 19:15, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
Page 6778805 Wiktionary:Votes/2020-04/Style changes to the criteria for inclusion: Found match for regex: # {{support}} İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 19:15, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
Page 6778805 Wiktionary:Votes/2020-04/Style changes to the criteria for inclusion: Found match for regex: # {{support}} İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 19:15, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
Page 6778805 Wiktionary:Votes/2020-04/Style changes to the criteria for inclusion: Found match for regex: #: ~~Support~~ İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 19:15, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
Page 6778805 Wiktionary:Votes/2020-04/Style changes to the criteria for inclusion: Found match for regex: #:: Changing to oppose. İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 22:26, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
Page 6778805 Wiktionary:Votes/2020-04/Style changes to the criteria for inclusion: Found match for regex: # {{oppose}} Per Dan Polansky. I like standardisation, but this seems an awkward way to do it. İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 22:26, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
Page 6786722 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2020-04/Use of "eye dialect" label: Found match for regex: # {{oppose}} İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 22:59, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
Page 6786722 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2020-04/Use of "eye dialect" label: Found match for regex: # {{oppose}} İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 22:59, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
Page 6786722 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2020-04/Use of "eye dialect" label: Found match for regex: # {{support}} İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 22:59, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
Page 6839204 Wiktionary:Votes/bc-2020-06/User:Surjection for bureaucrat: Found match for regex: # {{support}} İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 21:53, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
Page 6847819 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2020-06/Changes to usage of Template:also: Found match for regex: # {{oppose}} Per Mahāgaja and Μετάknowledge. I may have approved of some formal regulation around this template however—especially regarding upper limits of terms and specific ordering. Prior discussion is very important. İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 13:49, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
Page 6856539 Wiktionary:Votes/bt-2020-06/User:Aryamanbot for bot status: Found match for regex: # {{support}} İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 22:12, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
Page 6869949 Wiktionary:Votes/2020-07/Converting policy and guide pages as for quotes and apostrophes: Found match for regex: # {{oppose}} İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 22:43, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
Page 6869949 Wiktionary:Votes/2020-07/Converting policy and guide pages as for quotes and apostrophes: Found match for regex: # {{support}} İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 22:43, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
Page 6957729 Wiktionary:Votes/2020-09/Misspellings and alternative spellings: Found match for regex: # {{support}} İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 17:13, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
Page 6989151 Appendix:Caucasian word lists: Found match for regex: | ʜɪɪ̆zə
Page 7062286 Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2020-12/CFI for appendix-only conlangs: Found match for regex: # {{support}} İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 13:48, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
Page 7064069 Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2021/August: Found match for regex: :::This is too far out of my comfort zone but I do have to note that almost all examples in the masculine category appear to be following ruki-law, which is not well compatible with those items etymologized from Latin. The derivation from ᴄᴀᴘᴜᴛ is uncanny in this respect, where its original PIE status may be subject to debate. There is also a Hittite suffix/clitic that is reconstructed *-sor though without congeners as far as I can tell. Kapuze ultimately compares Romanian -uț /uts/, but it's uncertain if cappa, cape, vel sim. belongs with caput (cp. hat for the anlaut, or Kutte and cut if equivalent to shirt, skirt, as a Rocker-Kutte tends to be a vest, typically adorned with emblems, which may as well be original since the word has close to no use outside the scene; see in that sense also {{m|fro|jaque||... an alternative origin connects it with jaque de mailles (“coat of arms”)}}, {{m|frm|jacquet}}; NB: Fr. {{m|en|-et}} would be simply *-tos ("Creates verbal adjectives from verb stems."), cp. cognatus). ApisAzuli (talk) 10:03, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
Page 7066819 העלים: Found match for regex: #*: {{quote|he|וַתָּבֹא אֶל אִישׁ הָאֱלֹהִים אֶל הָהָר וַתַּחֲזֵק בְּרַגְלָיו וַיִּגַּשׁ גֵּיחֲזִי לְהָדְפָהּ וַיֹּאמֶר אִישׁ הָאֱלֹהִים הַרְפֵּה לָהּ כִּי נַפְשָׁהּ מָרָה לָהּ וַיהוָה '''הֶעְלִים''' מִמֶּנִּי וְלֹא הִגִּיד לִי.|tr=vatavó el ish ha'elohím el hahár vatakhazék b'ragláv vayigásh gekhazi lehadafáh vayómer ish ha'elohím harpéh lah ki nafsháh mará lah veYHVH he'elím miméni velo higíd li. wattāḇō ʾ el-ʾ îš hā ʾ ĕlōhîm ʾ el-hāhār, wattaḥăzêq bəraḡlāw; wayyiggaš gêḥăzî ləhāḏəp̄āh, wayyōmer ʾ îš hā ʾ ĕlōhîm harpêh-lāh kî-nap̄šāh mārāh-lāh, YHVH '''heʿlîm''' mimmennî, wəlō higgîḏ lî.|t=When she reached the man of God at the mountain, she took hold of his feet. Gehazi came over to push her away, but the man of God said, "Leave her alone! She is in bitter distress, but the Lᴏʀᴅ '''has hidden''' it from me and has not told me why."}}
Page 7208312 Wiktionary:About Proto-Abkhaz-Abaza: Found match for regex: ! Stress !! Root (UR) !! Definite (/á-ʀᴏᴏᴛ/) !! Indefinite (/ʀᴏᴏᴛ-kʼ/) !! Translation
Page 7418718 hoogie: Found match for regex: * {{alter|en|hoogy}}
Page 7429749 hoojah: Found match for regex: {{unk|en}}. Compare {{m|en|Hoosier}} and {{m|en|hoogie}}.
Page 7745932 Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2022/July: Found match for regex: The etymology of Romagnol {{m|rgn|bo}} says the word is from Latin {{m|rgn|bos|bōs|t=cow}}, but actually there are different stages from Latin onward and phonetic changes as much. {{l|rgn|bo}} < {{l|la|bovem|ʙŏᴠᴇ}} < {{l|la|bōs}} (the intermediate form doesn't undergo metaphony because of the final -e). Are all these changes and phonetics rules allowed on Wiktionary, and are the former required to be in ꜱᴍᴀʟʟ ᴄᴀᴘꜱ characters? BandiniRaffaele2 (talk) 19:10, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
Page 8374005 Wiktionary:Todo/Westrobothnian cleanup/20: Found match for regex: # a mouthful of liquor (spirits)
Page 8428137 בהה: Found match for regex: * The verb {{m|he|בָּהָה|t=to stare at|tr=båhǻ}} is always followed by the preposition {{m|he|בּ־|t=in|tr=b-}} and never followed by the definite direct object marker preposition {{m|he|]|t='''ᴏʙᴊ'''|tr=eth ha-}}.
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: The letter ⟨e⟩ in most Spanish words should be retained when borrowed into Ilocano ({{m|ilo|mant'''e'''n'''e'''r}} ɴᴏᴛ *mantenir ᴏʀ *mantiner, {{m|ilo|d'''e'''snudo}} ɴᴏᴛ *disnudo, {{m|ilo|'''e'''stilo}} ɴᴏᴛ *istilo, {{m|ilo|kons'''e'''ntidor}} ɴᴏᴛ *kunsintidor ᴏʀ *konsintidor).
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: *: {{m|ilo|p'''u'''r'''o'''k}} ɴᴏᴛ *poruk, {{m|ilo|b'''uo'''k}} ɴᴏᴛ *bouk, {{m|ilo|sal'''u'''ds'''o'''d}}, {{m|ilo|p'''u'''y'''u'''p'''o'''y}}
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: *: {{m|ilo|bud'''o'''budo}} ɴᴏᴛ *budubudo, {{m|ilo|kill'''o'''killo}} ɴᴏᴛ *killukillo
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|par'''ia'''}} ɴᴏᴛ *parya
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|ar'''ie'''k}} ɴᴏᴛ *aryek
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|p'''ie'''}} ɴᴏᴛ *piye ᴏʀ *pye
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|kabal'''io'''}} ɴᴏᴛ *kabalyo
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|s'''iu'''man}} ɴᴏᴛ *siyuman ᴏʀ *syuman
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|d'''ua'''}} ɴᴏᴛ *duwa ᴏʀ *dwa
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|al'''ua'''d}} ɴᴏᴛ *alwad
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|k'''ue'''rdas}} ɴᴏᴛ *kuwerdas ᴏʀ *kwerdas
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|s'''ui'''tik}} ɴᴏᴛ *suwitik ᴏʀ *switik
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|bisk'''ui'''t}} ɴᴏᴛ *biskuwit ᴏʀ *biskwit
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|'''ya'''ta}} ɴᴏᴛ *iata
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|'''ye'''ro}} ɴᴏᴛ *iero
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|'''yo'''do}} ɴᴏᴛ *iodo
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|'''yu'''pana}} ɴᴏᴛ *iupana
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|'''wa'''ig}} ɴᴏᴛ *oaig ᴏʀ *uaig
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|'''we'''n}} ɴᴏᴛ *oen ᴏʀ *uen
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|'''wi'''do}} ɴᴏᴛ *oido ᴏʀ *uido
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|ag'''ya'''man}} ɴᴏᴛ *agiaman
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|pag'''wa'''dan}} ɴᴏᴛ *pagoadan ᴏʀ *paguadan
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|ta'''ya'''b}} ɴᴏᴛ *taiab
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|nga'''ye'''d}} ɴᴏᴛ *ngaied
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|ku'''yo'''g}} ɴᴏᴛ *kuiog
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|a'''wa'''n}} ɴᴏᴛ *aoan ᴏʀ *auan
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|ta'''we'''n}} ɴᴏᴛ *taoen ᴏʀ *tauen
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|a'''wi'''d}} ɴᴏᴛ *aoid ᴏʀ *auid
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|wagay'''wa'''y}} ɴᴏᴛ *oagayoay ᴏʀ *uagayuay
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|kadaw'''ya'''n}} ɴᴏᴛ *kadawian ᴏʀ *kadaoian ᴏʀ *kadauian
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|'''ya'''w'''ya'''w}} ɴᴏᴛ *iawiaw ᴏʀ *iaoiao
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|'''ye'''g'''ye'''g}} ɴᴏᴛ *iegieg
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|'''yo'''yo}} ɴᴏᴛ *ioio
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|'''wa'''g'''wa'''g}} ɴᴏᴛ *oagoag ᴏʀ *uaguag
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|tara'''wi'''d'''wi'''d}} ɴᴏᴛ *taraoidoid ᴏʀ *tarauiduid
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|ag'''ya'''g'''ya'''g}} ɴᴏᴛ *agiagiag
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|mang'''wa'''t'''wa'''t}} ɴᴏᴛ *mangoatoat ᴏʀ *manguatuat
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|'''yi'''kkis}} ɴᴏᴛ *iikkis
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|'''yi'''it}} ɴᴏᴛ *iiit
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|'''ye'''bkas}} ɴᴏᴛ *iebkas
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|'''wo'''k}} ɴᴏᴛ *uok
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|'''wo'''mbok}} ɴᴏᴛ *uombok
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|ser'''ye'''}} ɴᴏᴛ *serie
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|detal'''ye'''}} ɴᴏᴛ *detalie
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|is'''yu'''}} ɴᴏᴛ *isiu
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|bak'''wit'''}} ɴᴏᴛ *bakoit ᴏʀ *bakuit
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|pas'''wit'''}} ɴᴏᴛ *pasoit ᴏʀ *pasuit
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|bag'''yo'''}} ɴᴏᴛ *bagio
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|sang'''yo'''}} ɴᴏᴛ *sangio
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|antig'''o'''}} ɴᴏᴛ *antiguo
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|bal'''ay'''}} ɴᴏᴛ *balai
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|d'''ay'''t'''oy'''}} ɴᴏᴛ *daitoy ᴏʀ *daytoi
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|lad'''aw'''}} ɴᴏᴛ *ladao ᴏʀ *ladau
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|s'''aw'''-ing}} ɴᴏᴛ *sau-ing ᴏʀ *sao-ing
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|il'''iw'''}} ɴᴏᴛ *ilio ᴏʀ *iliu
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|b'''oy'''kot}} ɴᴏᴛ *boikot
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|kap'''uy'''}} ɴᴏᴛ *kapui ᴏʀ *kapoi
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|'''au'''tor}} ɴᴏᴛ *awtor
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|'''au'''tonomia}} ɴᴏᴛ *awtonomia
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|b'''ai'''larina}} ɴᴏᴛ *baylarina
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|'''ai'''re}} ɴᴏᴛ *ayre
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|m'''ay'''sa}} ɴᴏᴛ *meysa
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|id'''ia'''y}} ɴᴏᴛ *idiey
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|t'''ea'''tro}} ɴᴏᴛ *teyatro ᴏʀ *tiatro ᴏʀ *tiyatro ᴏʀ *tyatro (can be pronounced {{IPAchar|}} or {{IPAchar|}})
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|pagkap'''ea'''n}} ɴᴏᴛ *pagkapeyan ᴏʀ *pagkapian ᴏʀ *pagkapiyan ᴏʀ *pagkapyan (can be pronounced {{IPAchar|}} or {{IPAchar|}})
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|l'''eo'''n}} ɴᴏᴛ *leyon ᴏʀ *lion ᴏʀ *liyon ᴏʀ *lyon (can be pronounced {{IPAchar|}} or {{IPAchar|}})
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|ant'''eo'''hos}} ɴᴏᴛ *anteyohos ᴏʀ *antiohos ᴏʀ *antiyohos ᴏʀ *antyohos (can be pronounced {{IPAchar|}} or {{IPAchar|}})
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|t'''eo'''ria}} ɴᴏᴛ *teyoria ᴏʀ *tioria ᴏʀ *tiyorya ᴏʀ *tyorya (can be pronounced {{IPAchar|}} or {{IPAchar|}})
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|'''Eu'''ropa}} ɴᴏᴛ *Eyuropa ᴏʀ *Yuropa
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|n'''eu'''tral}} ɴᴏᴛ *neyutral ᴏʀ *niutral ᴏʀ *niyutral ᴏʀ *nyutral (can be pronounced {{IPAchar|}} or {{IPAchar|}})
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|hal'''ea'''}} ɴᴏᴛ *haleya ᴏʀ *halia ᴏʀ *halya
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|asot'''ea'''}} ɴᴏᴛ *asoteya ᴏʀ *asotia ᴏʀ *asotiya
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|r'''ea'''lidad}} ɴᴏᴛ *reyalidad ᴏʀ *rialidad ᴏʀ *riyalidad
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|pr'''eo'''kupasion}} ɴᴏᴛ *preyokupasion
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|t'''eo'''logo}} ɴᴏᴛ *teyologo
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|at'''ei'''smo}} ɴᴏᴛ *ateyismo
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|r'''eu'''nion}} ɴᴏᴛ *reyunion ᴏʀ *riunion ᴏʀ *riyunion
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|l'''oa'''}} ɴᴏᴛ *lowa ᴏʀ *lua (distinct from {{m|ilo|lua}})
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|k'''oe'''ksistensia}} ɴᴏᴛ *koweksistensia ᴏʀ *kueksistensia ᴏʀ *kuweksistensia
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|eg'''oi'''smo}} ɴᴏᴛ *egowismo ᴏʀ *eguwismo ᴏʀ *eguismo
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: Old Spanish loanwords containing ⟨rr⟩ are either spelled with ⟨r⟩ (in most southern dialects) and pronounced as a tap /ɾ/, or ⟨rr⟩ (mostly in northern dialects) and pronounced as a trill /r/, such as {{m|es|ba'''rr'''eta}} → {{m|ilo|ba'''r'''eta}} ᴏʀ {{m|ilo|ba'''rr'''eta}}. Both forms are accepted in the orthography. Meanwhile, Spanish personal names and new Spanish loanwords containing ⟨rr⟩ should retain the geminated consonant, but the ⟨rr⟩ may be pronounced either as /ɾ/ or /r/ ({{m|ilo|Se'''rr'''ano}} ɴᴏᴛ *Serano).
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: *: Ivatan {{m|ivv|vakul}} → {{m|ilo|vakul||head covering made of palm}}, Ifugao {{m|ifb|payyo}} → {{m|ilo|payyo||rice terraces}} ʙᴜᴛ cañao → {{m|ilo|kaniaw||ceremonial native dance}}
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: *: {{m|es|estandardización}} → {{m|ilo|estandardisasion}} ɴᴏᴛ {{m|en|standardization}} → *istandardiseysion
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|en|scout}} → {{m|ilo|iskawt}}, {{m|en|traffic}} → {{m|ilo|trapik}} ɴᴏᴛ {{m|en|bouquet}} → *bukey, {{m|en|jaywalking}} → *dieywoking, {{m|en|shock}} → *siak (may be confused with {{m|ilo|siak}})
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{afex|ilo|i-|Ilokano|'''y'''ilokano}} ɴᴏᴛ *y-Ilokano
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{afex|ilo|i-|Ingles|'''y'''ingles}} ɴᴏᴛ *y-Ingles
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{afex|ilo|i-|arrange|'''y-'''arrange}} ɴᴏᴛ *yarrange
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{afex|ilo|i-|scan|'''y-'''scan}} ɴᴏᴛ *yscan
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{afex|ilo|i-|email|'''y-'''email}} ɴᴏᴛ *yemail
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{afex|ilo|i-|organize|'''y-'''organize}} ɴᴏᴛ *yorganize
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{afex|ilo|i-|unionize|'''i-'''unionize}} ɴᴏᴛ *y-unionize ᴏʀ *yunionize
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{afex|ilo|i-|English|'''y-'''English}} ɴᴏᴛ *yenglish
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{m|ilo|ag'''k'''anta}} → {{m|ilo|agka'''n'''kanta}} ɴᴏᴛ *agkangkanta
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{afex|ilo|in-|'''k'''ali|i'''n'''kali}} ɴᴏᴛ *ingkali
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{afex|ilo|is'''e'''m|-an|is'''e'''man}} ɴᴏᴛ *isiman
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{afex|ilo|petp'''e'''t|-an|petp'''e'''tan}} ɴᴏᴛ *petpitan
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{afex|ilo|kamm'''e'''t|-en|kamm'''e'''ten}} ɴᴏᴛ *kammiten
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{afex|ilo|dakk'''e'''l|-imm-|-an|dimmakk'''e'''lan}} ɴᴏᴛ *dimmakkilan
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{afex|ilo|pang-|it'''e'''d|-an|pangit'''e'''dan}} ɴᴏᴛ *pangitidan
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{afex|ilo|sur'''o'''t|-en|sur'''o'''ten}} ɴᴏᴛ *suruten
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{afex|ilo|pag-|tul'''o'''ng|-inn-|-en|pagtinnul'''o'''ngen}} ɴᴏᴛ *pagtinnulungen
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{afex|ilo|pag-|annur'''o'''t|-an|pagannur'''o'''tan}} ɴᴏᴛ *pagannurutan
Page 8627346 Appendix:Ilocano spellings: Found match for regex: : {{afex|ilo|ka-|ru'''o'''t|-an|karu'''o'''tan}} ɴᴏᴛ *karuutan
Page 8744411 Wiktionary:Information desk/2023/December: Found match for regex: :By the way, I didn't get your ping; I saw your question just by coincidence. I recommend using <code><nowiki>{{ping|User:Example}}</nowiki> to ping users automatically. -Vuccᴀʟᴀ (talk) 01:06, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
Page 8744412 Wiktionary:Tea room/2023/December: Found match for regex: :I've added the English viewcount milestone sense, à la Deviantart. Vuccᴀʟᴀ (talk) 07:55, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
Page 8744412 Wiktionary:Tea room/2023/December: Found match for regex: ::{{ping|Chuck_Entz}} thank you, I'll doublecheck all those vernacular fox synonyms and rfd any I may have added too hastily. In this case he used the term just in the preliminary remarks before the proper species description. Vuccᴀʟᴀ (talk) 02:04, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
Page 8744412 Wiktionary:Tea room/2023/December: Found match for regex: :Vuccᴀʟᴀ (talk) 01:02, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
Page 8956657 Template:RQ:cy:Y Beibl cyssegr-lan: Found match for regex: | Gn = LLyfr cyntaf Moſes yr hwn a elwir Gᴇɴᴇsɪs
Page 8956657 Template:RQ:cy:Y Beibl cyssegr-lan: Found match for regex: | Mt = Efengyl Ieſu Griſt yn ôl S. Mᴀᴛʜᴇᴡ
Page 8956657 Template:RQ:cy:Y Beibl cyssegr-lan: Found match for regex: | Jn = Cyſſegr-lan Efengyl Ieſu Griſt yn ôl S. Iᴏᴀɴ
Page 8956657 Template:RQ:cy:Y Beibl cyssegr-lan: Found match for regex: | Rm = Epiſtol Paul yr Apoſtol at y Rʜᴠꜰᴇɪɴɪᴀɪᴅ
Page 8956657 Template:RQ:cy:Y Beibl cyssegr-lan: Found match for regex: | 2Co = Ail Epiſtol Paul at y Cᴏʀɪɴᴛʜɪᴀɪᴅ
Page 8956657 Template:RQ:cy:Y Beibl cyssegr-lan: Found match for regex: | 2Th = Ail Epiſtol Paul at y Tʜᴇꜱꜱᴀʟᴏɴɪᴀɪᴅ
Page 8956657 Template:RQ:cy:Y Beibl cyssegr-lan: Found match for regex: | Phm = Epyſtol Sanct Paul at Pʜɪʟᴇᴍᴏɴ
Page 8956657 Template:RQ:cy:Y Beibl cyssegr-lan: Found match for regex: | 1Pt = Yr Epyſtol cyntaf cyffredinol i Sanct Pᴇᴛʀ
Page 8956657 Template:RQ:cy:Y Beibl cyssegr-lan: Found match for regex: | 2Pt = Yr ail Epiſtol cyfredinol o eiddo Pᴇᴛʀ Apostol
Page 8956657 Template:RQ:cy:Y Beibl cyssegr-lan: Found match for regex: | Ju = Epiſtol cyffredinol Sanct Iᴠᴅᴀs
Page 8956669 Template:RQ:cy:Y Beibl cyssegr-lan/documentation: Found match for regex: | Gᴇɴᴇsɪs || 3 Eſdras || Mᴀᴛʜᴇᴡ
Page 8956669 Template:RQ:cy:Y Beibl cyssegr-lan/documentation: Found match for regex: | Numeri || || Iᴏᴀɴ
Page 8956669 Template:RQ:cy:Y Beibl cyssegr-lan/documentation: Found match for regex: | Ioſuah || || Rʜᴠꜰᴇɪɴɪᴀɪᴅ
Page 8956669 Template:RQ:cy:Y Beibl cyssegr-lan/documentation: Found match for regex: | Ruth || || 2 Cᴏʀɪɴᴛʜɪᴀɪᴅ
Page 8956669 Template:RQ:cy:Y Beibl cyssegr-lan/documentation: Found match for regex: | 2 Cronicl || || 2 Tʜᴇꜱꜱᴀʟᴏɴɪᴀɪᴅ
Page 8956669 Template:RQ:cy:Y Beibl cyssegr-lan/documentation: Found match for regex: | Caniadau Salomon || || 2 Pᴇᴛʀ
Page 8956669 Template:RQ:cy:Y Beibl cyssegr-lan/documentation: Found match for regex: | Ezeciel || || Iᴠᴅᴀs
Page 9070713 mentule: Found match for regex: #* {{quote-book|fr|title=|author=]|year=1861|page=242|text='''Mᴇɴᴛᴜʟᴇ'''. — Mot purement latin (''mentula'') signifiant le membre viril.|translation='''Mᴇɴᴛᴜʟᴇ'''. — Purely Latin word (''mentula'') signifying the male organ.}}
Page 9114138 Wiktionary:Grease pit/2024/March: Found match for regex: This template does not produce the correct rhyme categories if the stress is anything other than penultimate (such as at matematyka and Jujuy). İʟᴀᴡᴀ–Kᴀᴛᴀᴋᴀ (talk) (edits) 16:39, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
Page 9525253 Wiktionary:Language treatment requests: Found match for regex: * {{support}} —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:02, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 9525253 Wiktionary:Language treatment requests: Found match for regex: *: I stick by my motto, "When in doubt, merge". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:53, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
Page 9525779 Wiktionary:Language treatment requests/Archives/2015-19: Found match for regex: :Or we could just merge them into co. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:09, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
Page 9525779 Wiktionary:Language treatment requests/Archives/2015-19: Found match for regex: :I'm all in favor of parenthetical disambiguators, but what should they be? Wikipedia calls toi {{w|Tonga language (Zambia and Zimbabwe)}} and tog {{w|Tonga (Nyasa) language}}, but that seems suboptimal to me since the parentheticals aren't parallel. Ethnologue suggests the majority of toi speakers are in Zambia and all tog speakers are in Malawi, so how about "Tonga (Zambia)" and "Tonga (Malawi)"? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:25, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 9525779 Wiktionary:Language treatment requests/Archives/2015-19: Found match for regex: :Support. We can make Gambian Wolof a regional dialect of Wolof and tag relevant words {{tl|lb|wo|Gambia}}. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:38, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 9525779 Wiktionary:Language treatment requests/Archives/2015-19: Found match for regex: :I'd prefer minimizing ambiguity by calling war "Waray-Waray" and wrz "Warray" so that no language at all is called by the ambiguous name "Waray". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:56, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
Page 9525779 Wiktionary:Language treatment requests/Archives/2015-19: Found match for regex: ** I really don't have a strong opinion on this. Personally, I still think of the language as Kikuyu, which makes it difficult for me to come out and say "Yes, we should rename it", but the reasons you mention make it difficult for me to come out and say "No, we shouldn't rename it". So I abstain. I'll be happy if we continue to call it Kikuyu, but I won't be unhappy if we start calling it Gikuyu. (I will be unhappy if we start calling it Gĩkũyũ, though, since that really isn't an English word.) —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:19, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Page 9525779 Wiktionary:Language treatment requests/Archives/2015-19: Found match for regex: ::: Google Books Ngrams shows what looks to me like virtually a statistical tie since 1950, though Brythonic has been more common since the turn of the century. I really don't have a strong preference either way. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:28, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 9525779 Wiktionary:Language treatment requests/Archives/2015-19: Found match for regex: :And slc should be "Saliba (Colombia)". As a side note, w:Sáliba language redirects to w:Saliba language. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:30, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 9525779 Wiktionary:Language treatment requests/Archives/2015-19: Found match for regex: ::My first choice is "Saliba (Colombia)", my second choice is "Sáliva". It's bad enough we have Anus language to protect from puerile vandalism without also having Saliva language. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 09:40, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 9525779 Wiktionary:Language treatment requests/Archives/2015-19: Found match for regex: :I suppose you could go through w:Category:Languages without ISO 639-3 code but with Linguist List code. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:54, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
Page 9525779 Wiktionary:Language treatment requests/Archives/2015-19: Found match for regex: :Being a "lumper" rather than a "splitter", I support merging the dialects into the macrolanguage. Dialect labels can be added with {{tl|lb}} as needed. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:24, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 9525779 Wiktionary:Language treatment requests/Archives/2015-19: Found match for regex: *: If we want Damin in mainspace, I'd rather consider it a dialect of Lardil than a separate language. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:43, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 9525779 Wiktionary:Language treatment requests/Archives/2015-19: Found match for regex: ::BGC Ngrams shows a statistical dead heat between the two over the years. I personally prefer the shorter name. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 12:51, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Page 9525779 Wiktionary:Language treatment requests/Archives/2015-19: Found match for regex: :{{reply to|-sche}}, AFAIK "Ivernic" is unattested; ond and fern are Old Irish words which Cormac mac Cuilennáin (who lived in the 9th century) believed to be of "Ivernic" origin. I don't think we need to add it. Gallaecian, on the other hand, is attested. If it were to be subsumed under anything else, it would be Celtiberian (xce), but I'd rather keep it separate. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:38, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
Page 9525779 Wiktionary:Language treatment requests/Archives/2015-19: Found match for regex: :The country is called Antigua and Barbuda, so I don't see anything suspicious about the name per se. Nevertheless, I prefer Wikipedia's name, since it's also spoken in Montserrat, Saint Kitts and Nevis, and Anguilla. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:53, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
Page 9525779 Wiktionary:Language treatment requests/Archives/2015-19: Found match for regex: :: That's true: {{tl|subst:\|duo}} yields "Dupaninan Agta", as listed at Module:languages/data3/d. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 11:38, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
Page 9525779 Wiktionary:Language treatment requests/Archives/2015-19: Found match for regex: *Support I guess, but the ISO 639-3 name is actually "Standard Moroccan Tamazight". —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:48, 27 June 2017 (UTC)
Page 9525779 Wiktionary:Language treatment requests/Archives/2015-19: Found match for regex: *Support. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:39, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
Page 9525779 Wiktionary:Language treatment requests/Archives/2015-19: Found match for regex: * This doesn't feel right to me. I think it would be like folding Maltese into Arabic, or merging Hindi and Urdu. I foresee a lot of complaints from anons if entries like дянхуа and شِيَوْ عَر دٍ have a ==Chinese== heading, and I would find it disconcerting myself, too. And what would the definition then say? {{tl|lb|zh|Dungan}} {{tl|form of|Cyrillic script|電話|lang=zh}}? I think readers would find that more confusing than helpful. And then what about the Russian and Turkic loanwords that don't exist in China? They would have to have full definitions without a link to a Hanzi entry, and that would probably baffle readers even more, despite the {{tl|lb|zh|Dungan}} tag. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:14, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Elapsed time: 5 mins 42.83 secs Ending at Tue Jan 7 04:45:02 2025

^ The citation for the passage in the original French work is: {{cite-book |fr|author=Eugène Sue |authorlink=Eugène Sue |coauthors= Jean Cavalier, et al. |chapter=XVII, Révélations |trans-chapter=XVII, Revelations |chapterurl=https://books.google.com/books?id=tpZUAAAAcAAJ&pg=RA1-PA43 |title=Mathilde: Mémoires d'une Jeune Femme |trans-title=Mathilde: Memoirs of a Young Woman |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=tpZUAAAAcAAJ&printsec=frontcover |edition=third |location=Paris |publisher=Librairie de Charles Gosselin |year=1841 |volume=3 |page=53 |pageurl=https://books.google.com/books?id=tpZUAAAAcAAJ&pg=RA1-PA53 |text=Et puis la vengeance ''se mange très-bien froide'', comme on dit vulgairement }}
^ {{R:Oxford Dictionary of Proverbs|page=265|entry=REVENGE is a dish that can be eaten cold|text=Vengeance need not be exacted immediately; but cf. '''1620''' ᴛ. ꜱʜᴇʟᴛᴏɴ tr. ''Cervantes' Don Quixote'' ɪɪ. lxiii. Reuenge is not good in cold bloud.}}
^ {{R:ine:IEW|head=3. lei-|pages=662–664}}
^ {{R:gem:EDPG|head=*slīma-”; “*slīwa/ōn-|page=455|passage=*''sleh₁i-mo-'' (ᴇᴜʀ) *''sleh₁i-uo-'' (ᴇᴜʀ)}}
^ {{R:sla:EDSIL|head=*slìna|page=453|passage=PIE ''*sleh₁i-n-eh₂''}}
^ {{R:sga:EIVN|page=216|section=3.1.55.|head=''-glád-i-ᴅᴇᴘ'' ‘speak’}}
↑ ^7.0 ^7.1 {{cite-book|author=Jonathon Green|entry=hoogie|title=Cassell's Dictionary of Slang|entryurl=https://www.google.com/books/edition/Cassell_s_Dictionary_of_Slang/5GpLcC4a5fAC|edition=2nd|location=Finland|publisher=Weidenfeld & Nicolson|year=1998|year_published=2005|page=734|pageurl=https://www.google.com/books/edition/Cassell_s_Dictionary_of_Slang/5GpLcC4a5fAC?gbpv=1&pg=PA734|isbn=0304366366|oclc=907151321|text=hoogie n. (also hoogy) (US Black) a derog. term for a White person, esp. a racist. }}
^ Rietz, Johan Ernst, “Sᴀᴜᴘ”, in Svenskt dialektlexikon: ordbok öfver svenska allmogespråket (in Swedish), 1962 edition, Lund: C. W. K. Gleerups Förlag, published 1862–1867, page 699

[1] The citation for the passage in the original French work is: {{cite-book |fr|author=Eugène Sue |authorlink=Eugène Sue |coauthors= Jean Cavalier, et al. |chapter=XVII, Révélations |trans-chapter=XVII, Revelations |chapterurl=https://books.google.com/books?id=tpZUAAAAcAAJ&pg=RA1-PA43 |title=Mathilde: Mémoires d'une Jeune Femme |trans-title=Mathilde: Memoirs of a Young Woman |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=tpZUAAAAcAAJ&printsec=frontcover |edition=third |location=Paris |publisher=Librairie de Charles Gosselin<!--English translation: Library of Charles Gosselin--> |year=1841 |volume=3 |page=53 |pageurl=https://books.google.com/books?id=tpZUAAAAcAAJ&pg=RA1-PA53 |text=Et puis la vengeance ''se mange très-bien froide''<!--italics in original text-->, comme on dit vulgairement }}

[2] {{R:Oxford Dictionary of Proverbs|page=265|entry=REVENGE is a dish that can be eaten cold|text=Vengeance need not be exacted immediately; but cf. '''1620''' ᴛ. ꜱʜᴇʟᴛᴏɴ tr. ''Cervantes' Don Quixote'' ɪɪ. lxiii. Reuenge is not good in cold bloud.<!--bold and italics in original text-->}}

[3] {{R:ine:IEW|head=3. lei-|pages=662–664}}

[4] {{R:gem:EDPG|head=*slīma-”; “*slīwa/ōn-|page=455|passage=*''sleh₁i-mo-'' (ᴇᴜʀ) *''sleh₁i-uo-'' (ᴇᴜʀ)}}

[5] {{R:sla:EDSIL|head=*slìna|page=453|passage=PIE ''*sleh₁i-n-eh₂''}}

[6] {{R:sga:EIVN|page=216|section=3.1.55.|head=''-glád-i-<sub>ᴅᴇᴘ</sub>'' ‘speak’}}

[cassell-7] 7.0 ^7.1 {{cite-book|author=Jonathon Green|entry=hoogie|title=Cassell's Dictionary of Slang|entryurl=https://www.google.com/books/edition/Cassell_s_Dictionary_of_Slang/5GpLcC4a5fAC|edition=2nd|location=Finland|publisher=Weidenfeld & Nicolson|year=1998|year_published=2005|page=734|pageurl=https://www.google.com/books/edition/Cassell_s_Dictionary_of_Slang/5GpLcC4a5fAC?gbpv=1&pg=PA734|isbn=0304366366|oclc=907151321|text=hoogie n. (also hoogy) (US Black) a derog. term for a White person, esp. a racist. }}

[8] Rietz, Johan Ernst, “Sᴀᴜᴘ”, in Svenskt dialektlexikon: ordbok öfver svenska allmogespråket (in Swedish), 1962 edition, Lund: C. W. K. Gleerups Förlag, published 1862–1867, page 699

User:Benwing2/small-caps-2025-01-01-dump

Wikious

Boobota

Sagapedia