User talk:Chihunglu83

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) 10:48, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Please add exampoles using the formatting here. The templates categorize the pages and also makes it easier if there are bot changes. Vininn126 (talk) 18:09, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Don't forget to add the animacy of masculine nouns F. V. Lorenz (talk) 18:55, 12 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

The stress is wrong and how can you be sure it is a direct borrowing from French? Anatolijs LTV (talk) 17:30, 23 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

The stress is automatically transcribed so when the word is of foreign origin, yes, in this case, it was wrong to be in the first syllable, feel free to change it. Since we do not have an etymological dictionary yet, I guess it's better to put the ultimate origin, it might be a recent loan from English rather than French, but this is really a minor issue since English borrowed it from Old French. Chihunglu83 (talk) 17:57, 23 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Since you think it's better to put at least the final origin, you should put something like "Ultimately from ((der|mk|fr|vagabond))", saying that it is directly borrowed emphasizes that the etymology is correct or finalized. Anatolijs LTV (talk) 18:44, 23 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello Chihunglu83, I would like to apologize for what I said to you when I was editing Pilnáček, I was very nervous for personal reasons and I called you "čínštinanegr", which is Czech slang for chigga, I feel bad for saying that to you, maybe you didn't see it because my page edit history was deleted, but I hope you can forgive me and we can be good companions on this website. F. V. Lorenz (talk) 03:37, 1 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

@F. V. Lorenz Hi, I did see that. I accept your apology. To be honest, I don't care and I am not here for that. We still have a lot to do for Czech entries, so let's keep going on to make quality stuff 🔥 Chihunglu83 (talk) 06:59, 1 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Chihunglu83, the reference that you have provided for Proto-Slavic *ratь is not for a different form of *ortь (“war”) (from Proto-Indo-European *h₃er-). It is an unrelated term, apparently meaning "hoof", perhaps from Proto-Indo-European *h₂erh₃- (“to plough”). Which of the two do you mean? 2A02:C7C:3848:1700:F8C5:F46D:DF87:C6B6 14:07, 13 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I guess you read some literature about it. According to ESSJa dictionary *ortь (“war”) and *ratь(hoof) may not be a synonym, but some scholars had doubts about it. ESSJ said that Franz Miklosich

cited ratъ as bellum(influenced by his South-Slavic background), Czech scholar Gebauer also used ratъ for war. As for *ratь meaning hoof, unfortunately I am in the process of verification. Since I don't have Kalál or other Moravian dialectal dictionaries with me right now. And maybe yes, probably using *ortь 1 and '*ortь2 might be better in the lemmas. I will definitely add more info in a moment :) Chihunglu83 (talk) 14:22, 13 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Old Church Slavonic рать (ratĭ) and Czech rať are the expected reflexes of Proto-Slavic *ortь, though. They don't require alternative *ratь (the metathesis *or- > *ra- in Czechoslovak and South Slavic is self-understood). 2A02:C7C:3848:1700:F8C5:F46D:DF87:C6B6 18:43, 13 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Please if you remove entries I created from the list at WT:RE:cs, add links in the description (as I started to do), it really helps to make the changes easy to navigate. Also please consider letting me remove my entries myself, for me it always feels like an accomplishment. No hard feelings though :D CaptainPermaban (talk) 15:33, 23 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Sure, no problem 😊. Please also consider contributing Czech audio recordings, since that's the only thing that I can't do myself. I can fix the etymology afterwards. Cheers kapitán. Chihunglu83 (talk) 15:49, 23 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi. I tagged this for verification. What is your evidence the language is written? I don't mean linguistic transcription, but an actual orthography. kwami (talk) 11:03, 27 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Okay, I see there's some external use of an alphabet of the Council of Indiginous Peoples of Taiwan. No indigenous use, and not specific to Kanakanabu, so it's a stretch to claim the language has an orthography, but I suppose it can be used to illustrate the CIPT orthography. kwami (talk) 11:07, 27 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Dude, is it you who is changing References section in Bulgarian, Macedonian, SCr, etc. into Further reading? If you want to change the present convention, first, discuss it on Parlour (btw, I'm against it) and, second, create a bot and change it everywhere. It's irritating. Безименен (talk) 07:52, 29 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

1. Hi, I make my own South Slavic entries (mainly SCr or Slovene), if there is an etymology, I placed it in References and other dictionary links in Further reading in line with Old Czech, Polish, Slovak and Czech.

2. Irritating for what? Do we even know each other? Why do you yell at me on my discussion page? You sound like if you were the admin of Serbo-Croatian. Chihunglu83 (talk) 08:11, 29 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Are you seriously going to ask me what is irritating? There has been an established convention for references that has been ongoing for over a decade. Some bunch of random guys in a pocket of Wiktionary decide to supersede it for a few particular languages and, on their own accord, start pushing the new convention in any similar environment, making a mess for everyone else to clean. How are you going to describe that if not irritating? 2A02:C7C:3848:1700:C036:3D81:593:5A8C 09:58, 29 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

I'm new at editing and I'm still getting a hang of things although I've been using Wiktionary for a long time. I wanted to thank you for cleaning шојма up and I've been using that "regional" thing for new things I make and I added it to all the old pages I made, I think. I'm mostly interested in adding words used in the Bitola dialect but with words that inflect it's difficult because the templates aren't suited to the dialect. Anyway, I was meaning to ask you if you think the meanings for шојма, којма and кајма are given properly. I just copied the template from што, I think, and changed the meaning. I'm also unsure if interrogative pronoun is the right word to describe them, especially with кајма since the кај bit alone is an adverb according to Wiktionary. Thanks again! Iljka (talk) 17:31, 22 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi, since that I am not familiar with the dialect, I really can't tell. You should probably consult other Macedonian editors. I supposed that you are from that region, but as a general rule, it is better to have ref. for Bitola dialectal vocabulary, either using a dialectal atlas or monographs. As for inflection, I think even other Slavic languages did not have that. Chihunglu83 (talk) 02:25, 24 September 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hey there, I noticed your recent edit on the page for blankytná. Although I am a fairly new editor on Wiktionary and understand that this may be up to higher-ups, I'd love to discuss your thoughts since you're the one who added this notice in specific.

• just like with other color names (which, by the way, blankytná is listed on the Czech color template in its noun form) — then take for example červená, which has a noun form as respectively seen. It would only also logically make sense for blankytná to be a noun form aswell.

Color template link: Template:table:colors/cs

• a second weaker argument of mine I still see worthy of stating is that I am a native speaker of the Czech language, both born and raised in Czechia and have heard on my own be blankytná as a noun on its own (alongside blankyt, which I'd say is a slightly literary term to distinguish between these two)
• I've done my research across the web and understand that there is not much about this format in specific to see, so therefore I partly see your point and/or where you're coming from.

I'd love to hear from you and your thoughts, and thank you for correcting and fixing my previous articles, by the way! Thank you for your co-contribution on the Czech side of Wiktionary. Tabberib (talk) 19:39, 29 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi Tabberib, glad to see someone here with me . Probably an interesting question that I have never thought through as a bohemista.

červená is listed alone in IJP, which probably stems from its frequent usage, or rather, a recognized form.

I guess technically and analogically, most color words can also be nominalized nouns from adjectives, but I don't have references with me at the moment, so that's why I've flagged it for verification for someone to pick it up. (but please consider if the older contents are correct or not.)

And I am aware that some Czechs are not good linguists even though they speak the language. Chihunglu83 (talk) 20:05, 29 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for the feedback! I wouldn't necessarily say that each native speaker of a said country is immediately a born linguist, but I totally see your point, haha

I learn a lot from your edits and I have a few questions regarding editorship since my skills that are quite frankly still mediocre, however I think that is a little off-topic.

The lack of information on the web makes it reasonable as to why one may question whether or not these given adjectives can actually be considered as noun forms. What also keeps on catching me off guard is the idea alone that they are not considered as such by the web.

..though now that I think about it, every adjective in the Czech language can be technically pointed at with its respective pronoun without the need of a specific proceeding noun (ex. "Ta nová" — roughly translating to "that new one"), which may be where my personal confusion comes from! Tabberib (talk) 20:29, 29 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

I'll try to ask some professors and check nominalized nouns when I am home :)

I can see you have similar logic with me. Glad you reach out.

Happy editing on wiki, we still have a lot to go 💪. Chihunglu83 (talk) 20:39, 29 October 2024 (UTC)Reply