User talk:Хтосьці

Hello, welcome to Wiktionary, and thank you for your contributions so far.

If you are unfamiliar with wiki-editing, take a look at Help:How to edit a page. It is a concise list of technical guidelines to the wiki format we use here: how to, for example, make text boldfaced or create hyperlinks. Feel free to practice in the sandbox. If you would like a slower introduction we have a short tutorial.

These links may help you familiarize yourself with Wiktionary:

• Entry layout (EL) is a detailed policy on Wiktionary's page formatting; all entries must conform to it. The easiest way to start off is to copy the contents of an existing same-language entry, and then adapt it to fit the entry you are creating.
• Check out Language considerations to find out more about how to edit for a particular language.
• Our Criteria for Inclusion (CFI) defines exactly which words can be added to Wiktionary; the most important part is that Wiktionary only accepts words that have been in somewhat widespread use over the course of at least a year, and citations that demonstrate usage can be asked for when there is doubt.
• If you already have some experience with editing our sister project Wikipedia, then you may find our guide for Wikipedia users useful.
• If you have any questions, bring them to Wiktionary:Information desk or ask me on my talk page.
• Whenever commenting on any discussion page, please sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~) which automatically produces your username and timestamp.
• You are encouraged to add a BabelBox to your userpage to indicate your self-assessed knowledge of languages.

Enjoy your stay at Wiktionary! Vininn126 (talk) 08:53, 27 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hello! Regarding your recent diff and the older @Atitarev's diff.

Would any of you object just a simple fast-track removal of this sense, unless it can be attested and quotations added? There are still many senses in the Belarusian entries, which had been added as copy-pastes from cognates or even false friends in different languages. I don't want the process of their removal to be highly bureaucratized, because this can become truly daunting. On the other hand, I don't want the contributors to strictly follow the academic dictionaries with dogmatic faith either, like @Наименее Полезное appears to be doing lately. Because there are inaccuracies and omissions in the official dictionaries too.

If you are a native speaker, then I suggest to be bold and edit out anything that doesn't look correct and isn't backed by the academic dictionaries or quotations. Still make a polite descriptive comment explaining your reasons and ping the person, who added that entry (just in case if they want to challenge your edit). Avoid being rude, especially if the actual or suspected mistake was done by a non-native speaker. --Ssvb (talk) 22:49, 8 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello! Actually I've double-checked and looks like I'm wrong! In this meaning it's used by Jakub Kołas, so it's definitely OK to use: “Гэта быў палац—будынак, // Дзе ён з думкамі вітаў” in Symon-muzyka.

I guess I should probably change the note to "rare" or maybe "poetic", to reflect that it's missing in dictionaries. But really, if Kołas used it then it must be OK. Хтосьці (talk) 23:16, 8 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Okay, it's actually interesting. The old 1918 version of Symon-muzyka does have «вітаць» in this meaning more then once («ён з думкамі вітаў», «Божы Дух вітаў у высі»), but in newer 1925 version, Kołas did away with it. Was it because he thought this was a word to avoid, or was it because of other changes in the poem (at least the second phrase is obviously removed because Soviet Union didn't like religion, but the first one? not sure)? Anyway, I will add the example. Хтосьці (talk) 23:37, 8 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for looking into it. I added more quotations in order to have 3 different authors and formally satisfy WT:CFI#Attestation. Still this sense is indeed out of fashion nowadays and there are, for example, only 75 google search hits for "вітала ў паветры" vs. 1470 hits for "лунала ў паветры". We may possibly also add a "dated" label in addition to "rare", depending on how common is the use of this sense in the books written by modern authors.

I'm not qualified enough to comment on the content of the etymology section. The Ukrainain language has витати and вітати with a slightly different spelling to differentiate between these two. --Ssvb (talk) 04:04, 9 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

I don't have access to statistics to say it's more common or less common. My hunch is that, at least in modern Belarusian literary language, it has never been very popular. But also, Kołas is one of important sources of this language, so I feel I don't have enough authority to say Kołas is wrong.

But then, that old version of Symon-muzyka has other fun things, like -э in place of -ы, «лясэ — барэ гудуць», which is definitely non-standard now. So.. maybe we can say Kołas is, indeed, wrong? Honestly, I don't know. If you know the correct tags for that, please add them. Or please remove the entry altogether. I don't know what's the right way to handle this.

Yeah, I'm now doubting that Etymology section. If we assumed it's Trasianka, then it would make sense. But if it's not... I don't know. I guess it's better to remove that. Хтосьці (talk) 06:46, 9 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

I apologize for a late response. Yes, Kołas is definitely one of the important authors, but he also lived a century ago and the language might have changed a bit. Some of the old words or some of their senses became obsolete, some new words appeared. I believe that the modern Belarusian language is shaped by the modern authors, who are publishing modern books. But we need to be careful with modern quotations, because the Internet is contaminated by incorrect, ungrammatical or automatically translated Belarusian texts. Many Belarusian news sites also seem to lack proper proofreading, for example, I myself submitted many corrections for the Naša Niva articles (see the screenshot for some examples). They accept feedback from the readers and apply corrections, but this is a double edged sword because the content of the articles may change over time, making them not "durably archived". So far it's probably best to use quotations from the books of those Belarusian authors, who are notable enough to have their own Wikipedia articles. The WT:ABE page tries to provide some explanations.

As for Trasianka. If modern Belarusians perceive some words as unnatural, then this is also a very important feedback for Wiktionary. You don't need to feel sorry for reporting that вітаць (vitacʹ) doesn't sound natural compared to лунаць (lunacʹ), even though Kołas used it this way back in his days.

Thanks for your contributions. Would you consider adding a Wiktionary:Babel box to your user page? --Ssvb (talk) 11:42, 28 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

To be honest, I don't think that Babel, with its distinction of xx and xx-4, represent my situation well.

I've used Trasianka since childhood but only learnt standard Belarusian in school. Am a "native speaker" of Belarusian? (But then, whose Belarusian is not influenced by Russian?)

I've used Ukrainian since childhood, but mostly just with my father (and during summer visits to Ukraine). Am I a "native speaker" of Ukrainian?

I honestly have no idea if I should put be, uk or be-4, uk-4. (Same could be said for ru/ru-4, but I don't like Russian, so this choice is easy.)

I feel that the whole concept of "native speaker" was created for people of big monolingual states, and it's not useful to describe my situation. Хтосьці (talk) 12:35, 28 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for adding the Babel info, it looks good with these extra explanations. --Ssvb (talk) 15:51, 28 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

The glosses of the English definitions don't appeal to me at all, I can try to get the one from the reference dictionary and "filter" them, but getting it directly from the English page is still not "something I see with good eyes." Наименее Полезное (talk) 17:06, 13 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Наименее Полезное: Glosses is an unrelated topic and your response belongs in User_talk:Наименее_Полезное#Glosses_in_the_senses_of_Belarusian_words.

Here I'm talking about trusting the academic dictionaries in general. They never bothered to add certain words, such as спампаваць (see https://nashaniva.com/344109) or землятрус (see https://nashaniva.com/105463). Obscene words, such as хуй are entirely erased (see https://nashaniva.com/336069). The word жыд is also censored. The religious terms look odd. Some common modern words, such as гарбата are unreasonably labelled as "устарэлае слова". And so on.

I'm expecting native Belarusian speakers to follow Belarusian news channels in Belarusian language more or less on a daily basis, and also regularly read Belarusian books. It's necessary to have an agency of your own. If some official academic dictionary obviously deviates from the modern Belarusian language, then you need to be able to see that. We have the "Usage notes" section, which can be probably used for additional explanations. --Ssvb (talk) 07:51, 14 December 2024 (UTC)Reply