User talk:Castillerian

Hello! Thanks for adding all those reconstructed Egyptian pronunciations; I’d been meaning to do something similar, but never did get around to it. Are the ones you’ve been adding derived from published source(s), or have you been reconstructing them yourself? In the former case, it might be good to throw in a footnote with the source; in the latter case, I might ping you now and then with some questions about some of the words. In any case, they look generally solid; hope you don’t mind that I’ve been making a few small changes here and there, mostly just for chronological consistency with our other reconstructions. Again, thanks! — Vorziblix (talk · contribs) 16:43, 8 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

Most of the time, I can take an educated guess of the vowels in an Egyptian word by its Coptic descendant. For example, the Egyptian third-weak verb, jnj, is attested in Bohairic Coptic as ⲓⲛⲓ. From experience in reconstructing similar words and analyzing the vowels in the Coptic descendant, I can safely say that this word, in its infinitive state, was pronounced in the Old Kingdom as /ˈjiːnit/. Also, I can take more educated guesses that in the Middle and New Kingdoms, this word was most likely pronounced as /ˈjiːniʔ/ and /ˈʔiːnə/. TL;DR - I base the vowels off their Coptic descendants. Castillerian (talk) 00:49, 9 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

If you're willing to help me with this, I would like to know what are good, reliable sources to understand how the reconstruction of Ancient Egyptian phonology works, please. This subject is one of the currently most fascinating ones I've been studying. Mere Seconds over Tokyo (talk) 22:58, 10 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

I don't know what else to tell you except LOTS of trial and error. But if you do want to start somewhere, I'd recommend looking at this, a whole page detailing all confirmed sound changes of Egyptian. If you want you could also try diving into Classical Coptic (mainly the Bohairic variety). You can find plenty of study material by just Googling "Coptic lessons". However, I don't think they're there for one to accomplish fluency. Also be aware that most, if not all, of these lessons teach the Ecclesiastical pronunciation (currently used by the Coptic church), which is completely different from the Classical pronunciation (spoken circa 200 CE). Unfortunately, there are no good lessons out there detailing the specifics of the Classical pronunciation, and what I consider to be the "probably correct" pronunciation took me YEARS of trial and error. Other than that, I wish you good luck. --Castillerian (talk) 20:21, 11 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thanks very much for the clues you've provided, I shall look into the appendix of Egyptian pronunciation, acquire some Coptic resources (which has been part of my plan for a long time) and march on, having fun along the way as much as possible. As for fluency: yes, it's a rather complicated aim I have set for myself, especially because I cannot find any willing masochists matching my own level with whom I could learn Middle Egyptian and converse; I tend to think that the Egyptological pronunciation would be good enough in order to acquaint oneself with the language, but even then 'victims' never come forward despite invitations... Mere Seconds over Tokyo (talk) 05:45, 12 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

RMaung (WMF) 14:31, 9 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

RMaung (WMF) 19:12, 20 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

RMaung (WMF) 17:02, 4 October 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hello Castillerian! I write this message to tell you that the work you do on reconstructing Old, Middle and Late-Middle Egyptian is an inspiration to me and the reason why I use wiktionary so much - due to what I wish to accomplish with the language, I am always on watch for when an entry is updated with this information and am very grateful that you choose to share it with us all; my hope is that you continue to provide us with such fascinating windows into this hard-to-access world. I also want to thank you for being patient with my sometimes less than optimal edits: I am still learning my cues, making mistakes while trying to get things right. Mere Seconds over Tokyo (talk) 22:58, 10 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi @Castillerian, I’ve noticed you’ve added quite a few IPA transcriptions of Bohairic words with qualifiers like “Old Bohairic”, "Early Bohairic", “Late Bohairic”, “Greco-Bohairic”, etc. I’m a bit confused over your use of these. Would you mind explaining what you mean by these labels and how you arrive at phonetic transcriptions for each? My concern is that they’re being used on Wiktionary in ways that don’t really reflect their established usage. I’d like to make sure we’re all on the same page regarding terminology so we don’t end up with Coptic entries that contradict each other or the scholarly literature. Rhemmiel (talk) 09:18, 13 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

I made the qualifiers up myself as stages in the language's evolution. My reference point for Early Bohairic (which reminds me I should change all instances of "Old" to "Early" at some point) stems from the pronunciation of the language spoken during the Roman period circa 200 CE, and my reference point for Late Bohairic is circa 1400 CE, where the Arab occupation of Egypt drastically altered the language's phonology. Most of my research is from this page. My knowledge of the pronunciation of Late Bohairic is still lacking, so take what you will with a grain of salt, and if someone wants to come and delete all of my additions of Late Bohairic's phonology, then be my guest. As of right now, I've decided to take a break from this language, and I don't know if I'll ever come back to it. It's been fun, but let's see what the future holds for me. Castillerian (talk) 19:06, 13 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

Instead of “Early Bohairic” (which is not attested before the 4th century CE), what do you think about just using the label “Bohairic”? And regarding “Old Bohairic”, the term, as formulated and promoted by Emile Maher, refers to the pre-1858 standard of pronunciation used in the Coptic Church liturgy. It coincides more or less with what you label as “Late Bohairic,” except that it’s not intended to represent the pronunciation of Bohairic as it was spoken as an actual living language. In general “Old Bohairic” and “Greco-Bohairic” are very politically charged terms representing two sides of a debate within the Coptic Church over the liturgical pronunciation. “Old Bohairic” is very often misinterpreted (understandably) to mean Bohairic as it was spoken in the pre-Islamic period. In order to avoid confusion or to give the impression that we are taking a side on intra-church debates, I think it’s best that we avoid using the labels “Old Bohairic” and “Greco-Bohairic” on Wiktionary. If an editor wants to include the liturgical pronunciation for a word, it would be preferable to use more neutral labels like “Traditional Liturgical Bohairic” and “Modern Liturgical Bohairic,” or similar. Would you be ok with me changing some of the labels on Coptic entries along these lines? And I hope to see you working more on Coptic in the future, you’ve made some really valuable contributions :) Rhemmiel (talk) 00:34, 14 April 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi, {{cog}} only takes one language parameter, so {{cog|de|Speise}} and not {{cog|de|yi|Speise}}. – Jberkel 18:56, 7 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

hi! i was wondering where you got your vocalization for etymologies 2 & 3 of mr? airy—zero (talk) 13:05, 14 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your improvements to the Pronunciation section of various Wiktionary articles for Yiddish words.

I've observed in some Poylish and Litvish speakers that instead of saying, for example, rugelekh, they will say something sounding like rugelakh. I don't know if this is just limited to them, or occurs more or less equally frequently throughout the Eastern Yiddish dialects.

Do you know which vowel exactly they are using here, and when it occurs? It's worth adding to the Pronunciation sections if we can figure it out. פֿינצטערניש (Fintsternish), she/her (talk) 15:08, 27 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi! Thank you for your edit to the pronunciation of ערגעץ. I just wanted to be sure about a few things -- you changed the transcription of the rhotic from /ʁ/ to /r/, stating that "IPA is broader, as not all dialects pronounce /r/ as ". This is certainly true, and there are differences in the rhotic's realization among different dialects (Jacobs 2005, p.109). Nonetheless, I thought the accepted IPA transcription for the rhotic is /ʁ/, and not /r/ (as written in this page; for example, the transcription in this article: פֿאַרראָטן). Similarly, your correction of the second vowel from /ɛ/ to a reduced vowel is absolutely correct, but shouldn't it be transcribed to /ə/? In this case too, it seems that this is the usual trascription (there are also some dialectal differences regarding the reduced vowels' realization, depending also on the phonological slot within the word). I'm rather new to Wiktionary, so I'm still not 100 percent sure regarding the guidelines :) Cymelo (talk) 09:23, 8 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I saw that you added the conjugation of גינען, with the participle being געגינט‎. Do you have any reference for it? The verb פֿאַרגינען, derived from גינען, has the past participle פֿאַרגונען‎; therefore, the past participle of גינען should be געגונט‎ or געגונען‎. I tried to check that both with native speakers and on the web, but was unable to find any information about it. Cymelo (talk) 10:12, 30 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

I noticed that אַחריות and אחריות, which are just alternative spellings, disagree on the gender. Do you know which one is right? also CC @Insaneguy1083. tbm (talk) 05:51, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

According to JNW, both. I'll need some time to check the other usual Yiddish dictionaries. Insaneguy1083 (talk) 13:52, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Verterbukh (CYED) also says both. CEYD (2016) says only neuter. The Yiddish-Belarusian dictionary says both. Make of that what you will. Insaneguy1083 (talk) 17:17, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Greetings @Castillerian. You created this page ⲟⲩⲱϣⲧ where there are given different translations for different dialects, however de dictionaries I have access to dont mention any difference in meaning among dialects. May I ask what source did you use to get that information, and that you double-check it just to make sure it is correct? Sérgio R R Santos (talk) 17:18, 2 September 2024 (UTC)Reply