User talk:Dijan

• 1 - 100
• 101 - 200

This seems to be a Hindi word with usages in Indian English, but I couldn't find anything in my dictionaries (not even in OED Online and Hobson-Jobson). Could you please create an English entry in the main namespace? Thanks :) --Ivan Štambuk 06:00, 1 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

So from what I understood... this one would be yatim-e xâne... but Kaixinguo has just yatim. Thoughts? :D — opiaterein — 14:09, 3 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

I fixed it. It's supposed to be یتیم‌خانه yatim-xâne, with a ZWNJ. --Dijan 20:15, 3 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thanks :) While I'm here, I'll link you to this godawful list I had Conrad run for me... these are all entries that need {{fa-noun}}, {{fa-adj}} and {{fa-verb}}, in case you're ever bored and need something monotonous to do :) I've finished one letter so far. Working on the G...— opiaterein — 20:31, 3 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

Stopping by to show you some of the useless junk I've been making :D Also if you know of one, I could really use a list of all the suffixes and stuff that require a ZWNJ... I can't find anything that makes mention of it.

• Template:fa-gen-c (I want to do more with these like I am with Turkish, so that I can put predicatives (to be) and possessives and everything in one or two head templates)
• Template:fa-gen-c-ân
• I also added comparative stuff to Template:fa-adj

— opiaterein — 17:54, 6 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

Sorry for the late reply. Almost all prefixes and suffixes require ZWNJ. The problem is that ZWNJ is hard to type, and oftentimes, is therefore (erroneously) not used in print. The same is with Urdu. Like Persian, Urdu uses and requires ZWNJ, but due to the fact that it is hard to type, it is often replaced with a space (which is erroneous, because the concept of space is unknown to Arabic script, especially if written in Nasta'liq or Ta'liq style, which Urdu and Persian are). My Persian and Urdu keyboard layouts do not provide ZWNJ, however my Kurdish and Pashto ones do. Instead of switching between them (just so any characters that look the same but are different Unicode points don't get mixed in), I usually have to manually copy and paste. Computerized Nasta'liq wasn't available for a long time and the two languages had to use Naskh in type. When I studied Persian at my university, our books, printed in Teheran, used Naskh throughout the book during the first two years (often providing a Nasta'liq version of the text at the end of the chapter). Although, they did use ZWNJ. We didn't learn Nasta'liq until third year and it is then that the concept of space went out the window completely and ZWNJ was required if we typed our assignments. Our professor always told us that it is up to us whether we wanted to type with a space or ZWNJ when using Naskh, as long as in handwritten assignments we did not leave a large gap (aka space) between the affixes. Nowadays, it becomes really confusing, because you will find books using ZWNJ, some not using it at all and just connecting all the affixes, while others will use it only for the most common ones such as -hâ and mí-. --Dijan 16:24, 10 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

I have a question about plurals with ezafe... I'd like to add the plurals of the quarks (like کوارک سر) but I'm not quite sure if ی gets thrown in after the -hâ. I've seen کوارک‌های written in a few places, so I'm not sure if کوارک‌های سر would be the right way to write the plural. — opiaterein — 20:27, 14 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

Dear Opi, you never bother me! And yes, کوارک‌های سر (kvârk-hâ-ye sar) is correct. --Dijan 21:59, 14 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thanks :D Yay expansion! Speaking of expansion, I've asked Conrad for some help with making it easier to make comparative and superlative forms of Persian adjectives... should be fun :) Do adverbs compare in the same way? — opiaterein — 22:18, 14 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

I urge you to vote. (I don't know which way you'll vote, but I want more voices, especially English Wiktionarians' voices, heard in this vote.) If you've voted already, or stated that you won't, and I missed it, I apologize.​—msh210℠ 17:00, 21 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

I dunno what I was thinking when I decided I wanted this sentence in Persian... Anyway, I wanted this as an example sentence for مرغ مگس‌خوار: "The hummingbird is the only bird that can fly backwards." Well, after messing around for a while this is what I came up with:

مرغ مگس‌خوار پرنده تنها که می‌تواند به عقب پرواز بکند هست.

Morğ-e magas-xâr parande-ye tanhâ ke mi-tavânad be aqab parvâz bekonad hast.

I've never had to use a sentence of this length or relative complexity in Persian so I kinda guessed a bit and thought it would be best to ask you before putting anything in the entry :) — opiaterein — 21:08, 31 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hey, I've checked with a native speaker and according to him, it should be:

مرغ مگس‌خوار تنها پرنده‌ای است که می‌تواند به عقب پرواز بکند.

Morğ-e magas-xâr tanhâ parande'i ast ke mi-tavânad be aqab parvâz bekonad.

Sorry it took me so long to reply, I've been busy with work :( --Dijan 21:05, 5 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Your help is far too valuable for me to get pissy if you don't answer right away. It's totally worth the wait :) — opiaterein — 21:18, 5 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hello there. Could you check these spellings ﺩولاﻣﺎﻦ (dolâmân), and ﺩولاﻣﻖ (dolâmaḳ), please? Thanks. --Baron de Saint-Rémy 22:10, 30 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

دولامان (dolaman) is correct, but the correct spelling for (dolamak) is طولامق. Accents are unnecessary in these words because ا (alif) here doesn't represent a long vowel. --Dijan 03:46, 1 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

Could you please create this template for users with 0 knowledge of Persian, please? Thanks in advance. --Anatoli 04:10, 15 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Done :D --Dijan 04:46, 15 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. Are you able to do the same for Urdu - Template:User ur-0? Please tell me if I'm pushing my luck ;) --Anatoli 05:15, 15 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

No problem. --Dijan 06:18, 15 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

ممنونم and دھنیہ واد to you! --Anatoli 06:26, 15 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

کچھ نہیں and خواهش می‌کنم :D --Dijan 06:40, 15 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hello Dijan.

Is it possible to bold only the vav in the word دستو so that the vav is still connected to the te? Placebo 00:46, 8 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

I'm guessing the only way to do it is to use the extra characters for representing connecting letters by themselves. Here, you will notice that there are extra characters between "te" and the "vav".

دست‍‍و

It doesn't look too pretty, but for now, that's the only way. I hope that helps. --Dijan 04:42, 8 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

Yes that works great. It's for an example sentence and so I wanted to emphasize on the vav. Thanks mate. :) Placebo 12:34, 8 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

Could you please link me to the poll for the Persian transliteration on this website? Thank you. Placebo 21:00, 17 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

The transliteration was selected based on traditional transliteration of the Persian language, most often represented in well-respected Persian language dictionaries as well as books and other study materials. If you would like to request changes to the transliteration, it is recommended that you peacefully, and I emphasize that word here, discuss that firstly with the rest of the community, most notably people who spend (or have spent) considerable amounts of time in contributing to Persian (Opi, Stephen, Sa'y, and myself). If you do not agree with what they say, you may request a wider audience in the community portals or even possibly create a new policy vote. However, if you do opt for voting, make sure you follow the appropriate guidelines. --Dijan 21:13, 17 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

I am interested in reading these sources. I'm not here to discuss anything. I'm just looking for more information. Placebo 21:37, 17 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

No problem. You can look at فارسی عمومی ۱: «ساختارهای پایه» by احمد صفار مقدم and also to W. M. Thackston's book, as well as to F. J. Steingass' dictionary.

There are many other important scholarly sources that will point you in the same direction. --Dijan 22:04, 17 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

To be honest, I never was a fan of the Steingass dictionary. I looked at some of the entries and many of them have really alternative translations. There is even one word that they spelled wrong (they used ف instead of a second غ) which is kind of unacceptable for a dictionary. Placebo 22:41, 17 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

All electronic versions of dictionaries have some kind of flaw with them. Go to your library and find the printed version. --Dijan 22:43, 17 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

Well, nevertheless, I would like to start a vote on whether the letter خ should be transliterated as "x" or "kh". In this article the transliteration/romanization is "kh". The IPA is "x". Thus I believe the correct transliteration for خ should be "kh". Since the romanization of ق is "q", then it doesn't make any sense for Wiktionary to follow the IPA sound of خ (x) and the romanization of ق (q), if you catch my drift. What do you think? Placebo 23:46, 17 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

I do actually catch your drift, and I don't like it. What you're planning to do is only to spite Opi as well the rest of us simply because you cannot get things done fairly. What is written on Wikipedia is somewhat irrelevant to Wiktionary. --Dijan 23:55, 17 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

I'm not doing it in spite of Opi. I'm doing this because you said yourself that it's not about the sounds. "x" is the IPA symbol for the sound and "kh" is the transliteration. It doesn't make any sense that "q" is a transliteration and "x" is a sound. They don't fit together in the same context. It only makes sense to pair "gh" and "x" together if we go by sounds, or "q" and "kh" if we go by transliteration. What we are doing now (x and q) is just mixing these two fields together. Placebo 00:09, 18 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

I do remember making mention of the ease of using one letter=one letter scheme. X is simply the easiest and most logical. — opiaterein — 00:51, 18 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

P, what Opi just said, is pretty much the simplest explanation we can offer you. It is the simplification of transliterations used for not only Persian, but also other languages that use the Perso-Arabic script, such as Urdu, Sindhi, Panjabi, Balochi, etc. --Dijan 01:21, 18 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

If we are going for a one letter scheme, then I have seen "ḵ" being used a lot more than "x". In fact thinking about it, I have never seen "x" being used as a transliteration for Persian, anywhere. Placebo 01:41, 18 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

We typically don't use underlines as diacritics. There are other options for k, ķ and ǩ being two of them, but neither of these are exceptionally attractive - though to my eye the one with the cedilla is superior. Anyway, x is also used by some for Arabic, which just brings the Persian scheme in line with both Arabic and IPA. — opiaterein — 02:04, 18 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

What do you mean they aren't attractive? I have seen it being used many times. "ḵ" is more recognized for خ than "x" is. And why do we have to compare the transliteration to other languages? Are you suggesting we also use "7" for ح like they do in Arabic then? Placebo 07:57, 18 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi Dijan! How are you? Well, may I ask you a personal favour? My friend's going to get a tattoo and he asked me of which language he should have it. Can you please tell me what "she exists as long as her presence is felt" means in Bosnian, Persian and Hindi? (LOL am I asking too much?) I don't want it to sound stupid as he'll have it forever; so if you have a better idea to translate with a similar meaning, I'd appreciate that :) Thank you so much in advance :) Sinek 15:48, 20 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

I wouldn't want your friend to wear a tattoo that might not fully represent what he wanted, therefore I will not give you Persian and Hindi for it. I think it would be better to contact a native speaker for that. I'm sorry. I can give you the Serbo-Croatian (Bosnian) version:

• (Roman script) Ona postoji sve dok se osjeća njeno prisustvo
• (Cyrillic script) Она постоји све док се осјећа њено присуство

--Dijan 19:08, 20 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

Yep, thank you so much for your help! Sinek 21:24, 20 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

Where exactly did you find this? I don't see ja in your Babel. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:54, 5 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Instead of simply deleting a page that some user created before, I checked what links to it, simple. I don't see ja in your babel pages either, so why are you concerned? --Dijan 21:05, 5 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi. I think that ā is more appropriate to be used than â to transliterate Persian, as similarly ē and ō can be used to write long o and long e in Dari Persian. e.g gōšt گوشت, sēb سیب. Long o and long e has been shifted to /u:/ and /i:/ in Iranian Persian wheareas they are presereved in Dari Persian. To have a better romanization solution for Dari and Persian, vowels a, e, o, ā, i, u, (ē, ō) are more suitable. What do you think?--Companionship 17:49, 10 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

I'm sorry for the late reply, I've been quite absent lately from Wiktionary due to school and work. What's wrong with using ê and ô for Dari? I'm quite familiar the shift in Iranian Persian and the preservation of vowels in Dari and other eastern varieties of the language. We are using the circumflex because that is the norm for the Iranian variety and is used as such in most modern textbooks. --Dijan 04:15, 16 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi Dijan. I'm confused about Perso-Arabic spellings of Azeri words. Which z should I use? ﻅ, ﺯ or ﺫ ? Sinek 16:37, 27 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

My first guess would be ﺯ, partly because that's what's used in native Urdu and Persian words, while the other two are used only in loanwords. BUT it's just a guess and I don't speak Azeri at all :D — opiaterein — 17:34, 27 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hehe, good point. But I know that zəfər is spelled as ظفر. Soo we already have a ﻅ and now, I guess, it changes according to the vowel. Maybe ﻅ is for e and ə; and ﺯ is used with "a". Well, just another guess :D Which one looks better? زا or ظا ? :D Right now I saw that in Azeri Wikipedia, müzakirə is written as مذاکره; I'd spell it as موذاکيره, though. Anyway, this is too complex for me :D Aaaa by the way, Merry Christmas chums! Sinek 12:38, 28 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

According to the entry zəfər, it comes from an Arabic word, which is what I meant. Like in words that come from Arabic ﻅ or ﺫ would be used instead. In Persian at least, native Persian words always use ﺯ and words derived from Arabic use ﻅ or ﺫ when they're present in the original words. — opiaterein — 15:46, 28 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

This is crazy. Arabic spelling, I mean. Completely crazy. Sinek 17:03, 28 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

You won't find me disagreeing with that :) — opiaterein — 17:09, 28 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

I'm sorry for the late reply, I'm outside the country on vacation. Opi is right. Native words use the zāl (ﺯ), while other words that are borrowed use their original spelling, whatever that may be. It's not always the case as there are always exceptions due to traditions, but it is a safe to go by rule. I will try to comment more on this when I get home in a few days, as this is a little difficult. The same problem comes when trying to write Ottoman words in Perso-Arabic script, there are exceptions and alternative spellings and inconsistencies everywhere (even in the more standardized Persian!)! --Dijan 19:29, 28 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

Enjoy your vacation! See you soon Sinek 16:56, 29 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

Not every word with ذ is of Arabic root, see and w:fa:ذال معجم --Z 19:33, 28 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

You're correct, not every word with ذ is of Arabic origin in Persian. I think I meant to say that in standardized Azeri ذ is only used in loanwords, not in native Azeri (Turkic) words. Persian does also use ذ in some native words - a remnant of older Persian (Middle Persian) when it began to be written in Arabic script. --Dijan (talk) 22:11, 28 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

Did you notice the vowels? They seem to need fixing. — Laurent — 17:11, 9 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

The Arabic vowels on Wiktionary don't display properly with the shadda. There are tons of discussions about that somewhere; conversations from years ago, but nobody has fixed it yet. --Dijan 17:13, 9 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

I hope nobody's terribly offended if I remove them, then... It'll drive me crazy with it displaying incorrectly. — Laurent — 17:23, 9 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

Not I.  :) --Dijan 17:25, 9 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

I had a feeling you'd be on board, you're definitely one of the most sane people around here :D — Laurent — 17:37, 9 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

Crap, I keep forgetting to ask you what you think of the layout of this template I was working on a while back to replace the current Persian conjugation templates: User:Dick_Laurent/fa-conjoissie. I noticed the ones we have were missing some tenses and other little stuff, so I wanted to make a new one from scratch. — Laurent — 17:39, 9 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

It looks pretty good! :) When I have a little more time, I'll try to confirm if all the tenses are there and things like that. It's so nice to have someone do these. Thanks a lot! --Dijan 19:00, 10 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

I love making templates :) Before I finish this one, I'll have to re-learn the basics of Persian conjugation, I've forgotten almost all of it lol... But it shall be done. And then I'll have to see what other templates I can make for Persian. I'm not satisfied with the ones I've started for nouns. Not by a longshot. — Laurent — 15:17, 11 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

Nominated for deletion. Nominator wants to know if these are just verbs which are also colloquial; if so add to Category:Persian verbs and Category:Persian colloquialisms. --Mglovesfun (talk) 11:40, 12 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

Persian has numerous verbs which happen to be pronounced differently in the spoken and the informal language. The category presently doesn't have many verbs in it, because the editors (myself included) have mostly worked on the literary language so far. But, the number of such verbs is extensive. They are quite important to all learners of the language. Why would they not deserve their own category? --Dijan 21:11, 12 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

So, it really drives me crazy that I can't use {{suffix}} and {{prefix}} to add categories and whatnot for Persian because the category names display incorrectly, with the hyphen seeming to come at the end of a suffix or beginning of a prefix. Hebrew has its own unicode hyphen thing that works for it, but I've never seen one for Arabic script. The closest I can come up with really is the keshide. So, I'm going to be radical about this and give Persian its own system for suffixation (not really Arabic because I don't see as much of a suffixation process, except for the adjectival -i ending, which is all I can think of) that might spread to Urdu, but anyway...

So, I was thinking it would be best to leave affixes that don't join with the word written normally ("Persian words suffixed with فشان") and ones that do join with the keshide ("Persian words suffixed with ـی"). I'll have to give them their own templates, but you know I love that. :D — Laurent — 13:52, 12 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

So, one of my foremost concerns on pronunciation (which is a big thing of mine) is dialectology. Do you know of Dari and Tajik specifically if the short a (which is æ in Iranian dialects) is /a/ or /æ/ in Dari and Tajik? Different sources seem to say different things, but I think it's important for me to add at least Dari to Perso-Arabic entries if they differ from Iranian pronunciation. Right now, the short "a" is my biggest obstacle. Don't want to add to many things that say /a/ if that's not right. I've been using /a/ a bit for Tajik, since that's what the pedia entry on Tajik uses and I've yet to see a specifically Tajik-oriented source that says otherwise, but... You're more familiar with Persian in general, so your viewpoint would trump mine :D — Laurent — 03:52, 25 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

None of the books on the Tajik dialect accurately describe the pronunciation. After looking in Khojayori's and Baizoyev's books and listening to the audio that came with them, as well as listening to Tajiki media, I will say it is /a/ and not /æ/. --Dijan 04:30, 25 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks :) I'll have to see if my recently-acquired audio sources for Dari are worth having and using... I hope they are, that would make me happy lol. — Laurent — 14:53, 25 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello Dijan,

Isn't this improper way of dealing with this entry? I have described it as a word of Bosnian language. Other editors could have added to that entry –and– not deleted the main context of that word – that being that it is a word of Bosnian language.

Furthermore, the other editors, who wished to add additional contextes, they should have sources that list the word (Ermenija) in other languages. I'm explicitly against seeing the entries I create merged in some umbrella macrolanguage. Thanks for your comments. Yours truly, -- Bugoslav 14:04, 8 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

If you do not want your writing to be edited and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here. Tough luck, kiddo. — Laurent — 14:11, 8 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Dijan, please read this comment. Thanks. -- Bugoslav 14:21, 8 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

I understand your concern Bugoslav. It is however the consensus of the native speakers who are regular contributors, myself included, that all varieties be merged based on not only linguistic but also practical value. --Dijan 04:17, 9 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Some of Bugoslav's concerns were concernable, IMNSHO. But not anymore I hope. --Biblbroks дискашн 10:42, 9 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

...I've been trying to work on this little bit of insanity. However, my main source so far has been a slightly lax Hippocrene guide so all I've got to go on is a youtube video which won't load all the way cuz my laptop sucks. =D Whenever you've got some free time, if you can tell me anything at all about Dari verbs that'd be bangin' sweet. =D

I'm planning on this being kindof a subtemplate in Template:fa-conj-full, which will have little turn on/off things to show the different conjugations, in case somebody doesn't know one or one isn't used, or whatever. =] — Laurent — 18:41, 17 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

On a completely unrelated but also important note, when writing out numbers fully, should they have spaces or ZWNJ? Like should devist-o-bist-o-yek be دویست‌وبیست‌ویک or دویست و بیست و یک? I'm hoping it's the ZWNJ lol... — Laurent — 02:19, 18 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure about the ZWNJ yet when it comes to certain compounded expressions (such as آب و هوا) and numbers. It definitely has a lot to do with publishing in the last few decades and the availability of fonts, which ultimately might also affect prescribed language policies. I will definitely look into this (and Dari) for you today and get you the answer as soon as I can. --Dijan 15:39, 18 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

You're a lifesaver =) I've begun to suspect that Persian speakers might be even worse than Americans with weird random spellings... I've been seeing people using Urdu and Arabic letters, it's been driving me completely insane. =D — Laurent — 16:26, 18 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi. I saw that you undid my last edit on the entry "اب" and I need an explanation for it. This word is not used in Persian, it is in Arabic. اب is not used in Persian literature, nor it is understood by Persian speakers. It's not even a borrowing. Optional 03:38, 8 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

You might personally not use the word, nor understand it, but it is documented in Persian dictionaries and Persian literature. For usage, as well as a dictionary entry, please see لغت‌نامهٔ دهخدا. --Dijan 03:44, 8 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

OK thank you for the explanation. I labeled it as archaic due to the fact that it's not in general use and it's not understood by everyone. Optional 04:08, 8 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

I would have labeled it as "rare" and "poetic", instead of "archaic". I understand that certain words are no longer in general use, but that doesn't disqualify them from being included in an all-encompassing dictionary. Likewise, Arabic borrowings with hamze are acceptable alternative spellings in literary Persian (such as ابتداء and ابتدائی), so please do not remove those either. --Dijan 04:18, 8 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Zdravo Dijan! Kako si? Imam pitanja o bosanskom jeziku. How can I say "I still remember XXX". Is it "Još se sjećam XXX(gen)"? Is there a preposition before the genitive of the word, like o? And "I remember everything" is "Sjećam se svega" ? I couldn't find anything about svega. If I want to add "always" to that sentence, where would uvijek be? "Uvijek sjećam se svega", or "Sjećam se svega uvijek"? And lastly, which one is used in Bosnian, sjećati or sećati? Puno hvala! Sinek 17:30, 9 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

I forgot the add one thing, I remember my grandma (who is an ex-Yugoslavian immigrant) singing a Bosnian song, it was something like that: "oː tobom sɑm piːvɑ piːjo piː (or tiː) sidir vo(or va)poː najbolje" Makes any sense? Also I remember she says something like 'pɑhʧɛ replace ' with ˈ and ʧ with t͡ʃ, invalid IPA characters ('ʧ) for dog, instead of pas - and 'krmɑk replace ' with ˈ, invalid IPA characters (') for pig, instead of svinja. Are they obsolete words? Or only Turkic immigrants use them? Sinek 17:40, 9 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Selam Sinek.

Yes, you can say "Još se sjećam XXX(gen)" for "I still remember...". No, you don't need a preposition with the genitive.

Yes, "Sjećam se svega" means "I remember everything". If you want to put emphasis on "everything", just change the word order to "Svega se sjećam". In Bosnia, the Ijekavian forms of the verbs are used as a standard, however there are certain ekavian words used quite often in the daily language (but it varies locally). In this case, it is "sjećati".

If you wanted to say "I always remember everything", it would be "Uvijek se sjećam svega". "Svega" is the genitive form of "sve" (everything).

I'm not sure about the song, but I'll try to find something about it for you.

"Pas" is the nominative form for "dog". However, "pasji", which regionally, and mostly among older generations everywhere else, can also be pronounced as if it was "paśi". My grandma also spoke in this manner. People who speak this way, tend to use "đ" to replace "d(i)j" and "ś" for "sj". Thus you get forms like đevojka, đete, đeca, śutra, and paśi - in contrast to djevojka, dijete, djeca, sjutra, and pasji. No, they are not necessarily obsolete. These forms with "đ" and "ś" are standard in Montenegro, but are rather regional and dated in other standards.

"Krmak" is just the masculine form of the neuter "krme" which is equally used with "svinja" to mean "pig". --Dijan 22:35, 9 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Forgot to mention, the word that she was using for "dog" is pašče (which means "puppy"). "Pahče" is another way of saying it, just like we have bašča and bahča. --Dijan 15:18, 10 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Jesi najbolji! Sutra ja slušaću pjesmu i reći ću ako trebam prijevod :) (And sorry if my Bosnian is completely incomprehensible) Puno, puno, i puno hvala! Sinek 00:43, 10 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

It is totally comprehensible :P --Dijan 02:27, 10 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

• Sorry for chiming in, but regarding sve cf. the meticulously worked out entry at sȁv, in particular sense #3 :D Inflection is irregular and all the forms listed in the declension table ought to be manually added as separate entries. --Ivan Štambuk 07:22, 10 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

• Ivane, I love that you chimed in :) Excellent work on that table! --Dijan 07:32, 10 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

• Really great Ivan, thanks a lot. I didn't know that svega was the genitive of sve, so I searched svega as a seperate entry, that's why I said I couldn't find anything. But really, awesome entry :) And Dijan, that's exactly this song I've been looking for! But the spellings I've tried didn't work on Google :D The melody is a bit different than the one from my childhood :D But I really don't know how I can thank you! It was very special for me, a million thanks! Sinek 13:23, 10 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

• رجا ایدرم Ricâ ederim :D I'm sure you can find different melodies on YouTube. I picked that one because it was by Safet Isović, one of the most famous singers of sevdah, and one of my favorites. It's old style music, but I find it very poetic and romantic. --Dijan 14:34, 10 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

=gasp= speaking of poetic and romantic music, Dijan! Do you think Sinek knows Beni beni? :D I bet some of the lines from that would make good example sentences. Like that one part of Dilruba, how does it go? Maxluq men xaliq ka nazr aya jisko us dekhne vale ne xoda ko dekha, something like that... Dear goodness, the win — Laurent — 21:36, 10 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Which Beni beni is that? :D Sinek 21:38, 10 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

:D <3 — Laurent — 21:53, 10 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Whoaaa, that's actually a poem of Aşık Paşa from Ottoman Divan Poetry. This one's not that hard, but those poems consist many Ottoman Turkish/Persian/Arabic words, even I can say that some of them make more sense to Dijan than me :D Sinek 22:06, 10 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Niyaz uses a lot of old-school stuff that I can never make any sense of :) I've been trying to keep track of which songs are by which authors on the Wikipedia entries for their albums, but I'm not sure about all of them. It's like ugh. Plus they tend to be super hard to find in native scripts online.. Drives me crazy — Laurent — 22:18, 10 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Love it! :) Lyrical music in that sense is rare these days. I love doing research! Which songs do you need Ric? I'll do my best to find the lyrics in native script (if not, I'll do my best to write them for you...I'm sure you can as well) and the author, if I can. --Dijan 01:41, 12 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Well, all what I've found and collected is here. Mostly transliterations and some translations, I think the only one with native script is Nahan. I'm curious to see what the lyrics of Golzar and Ghazal are, but at some time I want to have them all just because I like completion haha :D — Laurent — 11:25, 12 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

مطمئن does not mean "quiet" in Persian. It means trusted and/or sure/confident. For example: من از این بابت مطمئن هستم.

I'm sure/confident about that.

Another example: او آدم مطمئنی است

He is a trusted person. (It does not mean that he is a "quiet" person)!!

This word in Arabic may have the meaning of quiet but not in Persian. So stop reverting my edits, I'm correcting your mistakes :) Optional 03:06, 12 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

You may give me as many examples as you'd like. That doesn't change that fact that in literary Persian it also has the meaning of "quiet", "calm", "peaceful". Thus, لغت‌نامهٔ دهخدا (whom I trust a lot more than I trust you) gives the first definition of the word as آرامنده and the second is ساکن. Again, your personal preference of vocabulary is irrelevant here. --Dijan 08:47, 12 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Entries on Dehkhoda website can be edited by its users. Moreover, Dehkhoda gives an example from Quran (in Arabic) proving that this definition has no usage in Persian.

Also, لیسک is ONLY used for mixing dough and in baking cakes and cookies. It is not a synonym of کف‌گیر and it does not mean spatula. Please avoid getting involved in subjects that you are not ::familiar with or sure about. Before reverting my edits, discuss it in the discussion page or my talk page, or else I'm just going to revert yours. 16:53, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm very familiar with لغت‌نامهٔ دهخدا and that users can edit it. However, user added entries are all marked. Like I said, the image that you placed on the entry is of a rubber spatula. For further information on spatulas, see the Wikipedia page. As for reverting, try me. As long as there is documented usage of the sense in the PERSIAN LANGUAGE, I will include it. --Dijan 21:46, 12 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

As noted before, the example that Dehkhoda gives is from a line in Quran, in Arabic, thus it's not convincing that it has a usage in Persian. Quran is not a documented work in Persian. I included that picture to show how specific I was. لیسک is not just any spatula. It's designed for dough. So I entered the closest definition out there: dough scraper. Even if you do put "spatula" as one of the definitions, you still can't include "کف‌گیر" as a synonym. Optional 21:59, 12 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

I see what you're saying. Nonetheless, لیسک still means rubber spatula. But, I see your point with کف‌گیر.

As for مطمئن, see the second entry for the word and tell me the meaning and derivations listed on there. --Dijan 22:23, 12 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

You may also take a look at Google Books. And no, this is not Arabic poetry, clearly. --Dijan 22:56, 12 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Zdravo Dijan, sorry for bothering you that frequently :D I've been contributing to Bosnian Vikirjecnik for a while, and now I want to add Turkish numerals. Can you please help me to transfer this template to bs.wiki? First input for cardinal form, secondly ordinal form, adverb and adjective. (I don't know in which ways numbers are changed into adverbs and adjectives in Bosnian - if there aren't any, we may remove these parts) At the bottom there are "previous" and "next" as you can guess. Oh and a main part, what would be the title? Broj is OK instead of imenica?

And in Turkish we have a suffix that gives a meaning... hmm... I don't know if there's a way to say that in English. For example iki (two) - ikişer (two per/for each). Is there something like that in Bosnian?

Plus, one more question, numbers after 20 are regular? Dvadeset (i?) jedan, četrdeset (i?) osam...? Thanks a lot in advance! Sinek 16:18, 12 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Anyway, I think I'm done with the template, I'd be glad if you check, though :) ( Everything's OK there?) I'm not sure if the numbers are spelled with or without an "i" (Like šezdeset pet or šezdeset i pet) Sinek 12:59, 31 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

I'm so sorry for the late reply. Yes, it looks really well done :) --Dijan 06:07, 13 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

That's great to hear this, thanks a lot! :) Sinek 15:24, 13 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi, thanks for adding a reference to شیطانه! Does the Dehkhoda Dictionary support all four meanings (devil, she-devil, hag, snake), or just the first two (devil, she-devil)? If Dehkhoda doesn't have the last two senses (hag, snake), we could just remove them and close the RFV. - -sche (discuss) 23:56, 2 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Dehkhoda roughly states the first two meanings. The third one, I'm inclined to keep due to the fact that it's used as such (as far as I know) in original Arabic and it's very likely that it is used in Persian as well with the same meaning. The last meaning, I'm very skeptic about, but I can see how it can be extended from the شیطان (devil, serpent) meaning. I've left a request for check on a native speaker's talk page, Sa'y. --Dijan 00:09, 3 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

You might be interested in this discussion. --Anatoli 23:06, 21 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

Could you please translate some phrases from Category:Translation_requests_(Persian)? Please! --Anatoli 22:46, 5 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I will do my best when I get a chance :) --Dijan 23:17, 5 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks and no rush. I'm asking for my own benefit, as my Persian is not going anywhere but hopefully it's beneficial for others. BTW, I spend too much money on language textbook - the one I've got is pretty crappy, although usable (T.Y. Persian), hoping to get "Colloquial Persian" later - a much better quality. --Anatoli 23:25, 5 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

If you want a really good Persian book, try this one. I loved it! It's the book that was used in my elementary and intermediate classes a few years ago, but it's easy to follow on your own as well. For most of the vocabulary and texts, it also provides the colloquial notes. --Dijan 02:21, 6 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. Does it have audio? I need the audio, otherwise the language is dead for me. Will have a look, anyway. --Anatoli 08:54, 6 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I don't think it has audio :( But it really is a good book. If anything, $20 is an awesome investment! lol --Dijan 09:00, 6 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

BTW, I'm not a big fan of TY books. They tend to appear as if rapidly and carelessly written. --Dijan 09:01, 6 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

PS, I believe we are done with the phrases and questions in the category :) --Dijan 09:05, 6 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

خیلی متشکرم for the advice and translations! --Anatoli 09:08, 6 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

خواهش می‌کنم عزیزم :) --Dijan 09:16, 6 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

What's the Persian for it's raining and how is the verb pronounced. این کلمه را چطور تلفظ می‌کنید؟ I found some translations like "باران می آید" but not sure if the verb form written was standard. What is the verb used (lemma)? Should there be a zero-joiner? --Anatoli 02:28, 11 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello! The form you found is correct, but needs the ZWNJ. باران می‌آید (bârân mi-âyad) is the most common way of saying "It's raining" and it's the present indicative form of the compound verb باران آمدن (bârân âmadan). You can also say باران می‌بارد (bârân mi-bârad), which is the present indicative of the compound verb باران باریدن (bârân bâridan). There is always a ZWNJ between the prefix می (mi-) and the stem of a verb. --Dijan 03:14, 11 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks a lot, Dijan! --Anatoli 03:27, 11 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

So English speaking people sometimes does not see any difference between homonyms and polysemantic words. Even some dictionaries by. Perhaps, you have used one of?

Well, there is. стан#Russian, there are 1,2,3,4. Really (1)(2,3) and (4) are homonyms. It must be I, II.1, II.2, and III.Longbowman 02:01, 19 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I'm sorry, I don't understand your question and I don't speak Russian. --Dijan 02:05, 19 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

стан (stan) is correct the way it is. Definitions 2 and 3 are close, but not the same (2 is literal, as in a campground; 3 is figurative, as in the labour camp, the conservative camp). That still requires a separate itemization, and the only numbering that is permitted here is 1, 2, 3, 4. We do not use Roman numerals, alphanumerics, or other ways of numbering. —Stephen ^(Talk) 07:58, 19 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

was that directed at me or him?Acdcrocks 07:08, 19 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

You didn’t sign your comment there so I’m quite sure Dijan was addressing Dick. —Stephen ^(Talk) 07:51, 19 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hmm I was just curious, thanks for that.Acdcrocks 08:20, 19 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hey Dijan, an Ottoman Turkish grammar book of mine states نك and ك as genitive suffixes, instead of those with three dots above. And plus it also contains instrumental (suffix: له) and one other case, "eşitlik" (equality) which I couldn't find on English Wikipedia. Its suffix is جه according to the book. I'll search more, and some examples from texts when I go back to the dorm, I don't have it with me right now. Just wanted to say :D See you! Sinek 12:45, 8 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Tani bëjmë orgjinë tonë? :D — — 13:31, 8 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

eşitlik sounds like aequalis case. —Stephen ^(Talk) 14:06, 8 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

All the suffixes are for the most part identical to Modern Turkish (depending on which era of Ottoman you're learning about). This is especially true of the New / Late Ottoman period. What's problematic is locating sources which have written changes as well (this also applies to the genitive suffix). It seems, from my various books, that the sounds were present before the Modern Turkish reforms occurred. However, it was in writing that often the spelling did not change (the perfect example is that the Old Ottoman spelling اتمك (etmek) was still found in dictionaries for اكمك (ekmek) - "bread", but all the sources (that I have) state that the pronunciation changed to "ekmek" already. The actual genitive suffix is with the three dots, but it was also written as a plain kef. The only reason I'm including the dotted one in the main template is to show the original sound ŋ (thus the genitive suffix is "-ning"). This sound was present in Old Ottoman Turkish, but by the Middle Ottoman Turkish (roughly between 1500 and 1700), the genitive suffix changed into a simple "nin", but the old spelling was still kept. Actually, most sound changes evident in Modern Turkish happened during this time period. Yes, some books also list the instrumental case, however, some do not. As with Modern Turkish, it's a bit debatable whether "-le" can be considered an instrumental case or just a suffix. --Dijan 03:32, 9 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Can the font of {{ug-noun}} get a little bit bigger or just like the font used for templates {{ar-noun}}, {{ur-noun}}, etc.? I think the small Arabic font is hard to read (to me at least). --Lo Ximiendo 10:33, 24 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

You can do that in your personal monobook (or whatever theme you use) css — — 13:58, 24 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

What's a personal monobook or css? What are the functions? --Lo Ximiendo 09:22, 8 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

Not sure if I got the Persian pronunciation right in polite. I don't have a Persian dictionary still, sorry. I only found "moadab" but it doesn't quite make sense why it is pronounced that way. Please check. --Anatoli ^{(обсудить)} 12:50, 26 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Deh-xoda seems to indicate مؤدب (mo'addab/mo'addeb?) Not really sure, it's a weird kinda poorly translated (to internet coding that is) dictionary. Make of this what you will lol — — 12:59, 26 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. Is ؤ considered standard in Persian? Would they spell it that way in a dictionary? It makes more sense with the hamza above, though. --Anatoli ^{(обсудить)} 13:18, 26 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

I dunno really, I think it might be one of those things that experts on either side bitch at each other about lol — — 13:22, 26 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

It's "mo'addab". Yes, ؤ is standard in Persian. --Dijan 17:47, 26 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hey, I've started a discussion in the Beer Parlor. I'd really like to know the community views on this. Any additional input would be great. Thanks. – Krun 13:46, 11 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi, Dijan; is there a way that we could improve the Azeri noun form section? --Lo Ximiendo 09:23, 8 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Transliteration and a definition template would be nice, too, doesn't it? --Lo Ximiendo 09:50, 8 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Yes, but I'm terrible with templates. I'll do my best. --Dijan 09:51, 8 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

Do you mind checking my Persian translations? I have some doubts about ZWNJ/space and the ezafe. Also, vulgar vs standard. :) --Anatoli ^{(обсудить)} 07:18, 19 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

No problem. --Dijan 08:20, 19 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hi, Dijan :) I haven't edited Wiktionary in a while, I don't know if you remember but I added some words in Persian a while ago. I am just wondering what has been going on with Persian over the last couple of years? Kaixinguo (talk) 21:32, 22 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hello! Actually, I haven't been around much lately either. There haven't been any major changes as far as I know in the last 2? or so years that you've been gone. I think in general, we are utilizing more the localized templates for Persian as well as conjugation templates where appropriate, pronunciations (standard Iranian, colloquial Tehrani, Dari), regional differences, and of course just general clean up of entries. --Dijan (talk) 18:32, 24 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

Lol cough cough. Ok so I admit my templates are a mess. Persian is hard to do well with unmessy templates. :( — — 19:47, 24 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

No worries, friend :) Your templates are great. BTW, I'm quite fascinated by the entries recently made by Forudgah with regards to dialectal Persian as well as Balochi. I've been monitoring it for a few weeks now, and I'm tempted to work on Balochi, however the lack of standardization (not only in dialect, but in script as well), is a major problem. I'm waiting to see how this pans out. --Dijan (talk) 20:03, 24 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I will give editing a try again and this time try to avoid any debates over differences between USA and UK English usage. I will have to re-familiarise myself with the templates- they are a bit baffling when you have forgotten them- and look at the new ones, too. As for dialects, that would be amazing. Kaixinguo (talk) 20:35, 27 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

I was under the impression that with Urdu there's a difference between transliteration and phonetic transcription. So when you have तैबा/توبہ you end up with taubā for Hindi and taubah for Urdu. Then if you wanted a phonetic transcription both would be /'tɔːbaː/ for both. I've hadded an IPA section to clarify that, would that be grounds enough to revert to the sort of transcription outlined above? I don't know if there is a Wiktionary policy as to Urdu transliteration (there is a page on Hindi transliteration but none on Urdu AFAIK), but the transliterations I've seen always retain final "h".

I'm also struggling to understand why we don't have separate articles for तोबा and तौबा. The Spanish words aruñar and arañar have a similar relationship, and when I redirected aruñar to arañar I was told it would be better to create a separate article for it as per WT:REDIR:

"Redirecting between obsolete spellings or regionally different spellings, not least of all from American to British or the other way round, is strongly not permitted."

Doesn't that apply in this case? Saimdusan (talk) 14:51, 23 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

The spelling you are referring to (तोबा) is neither obsolete nor regional (as far as I know). It is erroneous and based on colloquial pronunciation. However, it is quite likely that it is a regional variant (as Hindustani does have a large range of sub-languages and dialects). I don't mind if you include it, just so long as you mark it properly (a regionalism, and possibly even which dialect). It most certainly isn't literary. As for transliteration of certain Hindi and Urdu characters, there are certain exceptions that are followed. For example, on Wiktionary, Hindi has a slightly differing transliteration from Sanskrit, despite the fact that both use the same characters. As for Urdu, it follows Hindi transliteration based somewhat on etymological information and phonetic transcription (therefore Urdu ہ can be shown as either h, ā, or even a (as is found in Sanskrit loanwords like نتیہ). We also have exceptions in other languages. In Persian the same case goes for ه, where it is transliterated as h as well as e. Each language has its own transliteration scheme. It is not based on transliteration of the original script (Urdu, Persian, and Ottoman Turkish most certainly don't follow Arabic transliteration).

One favor I would like to ask of you is that you do not create entries for Urdu unless you are certain of the spelling. --Dijan (talk) 18:22, 23 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

Are you sure? The Oxford Hindi-English dictionary's entry for तैबा is just a note to look at तोबा. तोबा also gives more Google results (36, 200 to तैबा's 16, 000; though when I look at the first pages of each it seems like तैबा mostly gives news articles and तोबा dictionary entries, which is a bit strange, and तोबा also seems to be part of some placenames so that muddles things a bit).

Regarding Urdu spelling, sure of course.Saimdusan (talk) 06:25, 24 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

Actually, you've misspelled the word. तौबा gives 459,000 Google hits, while तोबा gives only 36,400. It's also worth mentioning that Platts' dictionary states that "toba" is "vulgar", while Fallon states that "toba" is "illiterate". --Dijan (talk) 07:04, 24 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

Woops, I don't know how I managed that. But yes, it is "तौबा" that is redirected to "तोबा" in the Oxford dictionary strangely enough. I guess the weight of Platt's and Fallon's dictionaries as well as of Google cancel that out. Thanks for the clarification. Should it the entry for "तोबा" then be "common misspelling of 'तौबा'"? Quoting WT:REDIR again:

Redirects should never be used for incorrect spellings, as the person looking up a word would have little or no indication that they spelled it wrong. This must be made clear on a separate page (see accomodate for example).

I've gone ahead and changed the page for तोबा to follow that format, but I'd like to make sure that that's the right way to go about it (as I'm fairly knew to both editing Wiktionary as well as to learning Hindi-Urdu). Thanks again. Saimdusan (talk) 10:16, 25 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

I think it's fine. I would have simply redirected it. --Dijan (talk) 19:06, 25 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hello Dijan. Could you add the two small samples of non–Latin-script text between the two highlighted sections in this b.g.c. page to the 1995 citation at Citations:diacritical hook (which are currently represented by {{lang|ar|?}}) please? Thanks in advance. — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (U · T · C) ~ 15:44, 23 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for that. — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (U · T · C) ~ 02:02, 25 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

You're very welcome :) --Dijan (talk) 05:35, 25 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hi Dijan,

What's the reading for لثه in Persian? Is it lese? Thanks in advance. --Anatoli ^{(обсудить)} 00:51, 3 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

It's read two ways: lase and lese. --Dijan (talk) 06:59, 3 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! --Anatoli ^{(обсудить)} 07:12, 3 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

Actually, fa:wiki entry for لثه has a rather strange suggestion that it's pronounsed lase لَ ثِ --Anatoli ^{(обсудить)} 07:17, 3 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

Both are correct. Lese follows traditional transition from Arabic لِثَة (liṯa) - litha (the final fatha always pronounced as "e" in Iranian Persian). It is the literary pronunciation. Lase is the common pronunciation. --Dijan (talk) 07:32, 3 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

Thanks and thanks for fixing the Arabic translit, I wasn't paying attention. --Anatoli ^{(обсудить)} 10:42, 3 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hi Dijan, this a common misconception about نسر, and I'm sure about my edits. See also w:ar:نسر#النسر في اللغة. --Z 17:08, 4 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

I understand, however I'm not supportive of removing well established meanings and translations. Normally it's translated as "a large bird of prey" and then the two common ones "eagle" and "vulture" are named in dictionaries. If you can support your removal with valid and verifiable sources, I will agree with you. However, for now, the Wikipedia in Arabic is not a valid source, and neither is the source from which they got their information. --Dijan (talk) 20:35, 4 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

I was just wondering if you knew whether क़रीब क़रीब (qarīb qarīb) was a misspelling or an alternative form of क़रीब-क़रीब (qarīb-qarīb). Because the Oxford dictionary only gives the latter but I've also seen the former, and Oxford's was wrong with regards to तोबा (tobā). Thanks. Saimdusan (talk) 14:10, 6 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

क़रीब-क़रीब (qarīb-qarīb) is correct. --Dijan (talk) 14:34, 6 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hi there, what should {{uz-noun}} support? Should it link to all three scripts, or should that only be done by {{uz-variant}}? Mglovesfun (talk) 16:28, 9 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

I think that {{uz-noun}} was originally meant to support Latin/Roman and Cyrillic. However, I'm not good with template coding, and I couldn't figure out why it wasn't working properly for the Cyrillic entries. I was hoping to make both templates be used as their counterparts are for Azeri. --Dijan (talk) 01:34, 10 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

If you tell me what you want it to do, I can very probably do it. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:38, 10 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

I see you created the ग़लत फ़हमी (ġalat fahmī) article back in 2006. Oxford's dictionary gives ग़लतफ़हमी (ġaltafahmī), and it also gets more Google hits than "ग़लत फ़हमी (ġalat fahmī)". Is ग़लत फ़हमी (ġalat fahmī) an alternative variant, a misspelling, or the standard/correct variant? शुक्रिया! Saimdusan (talk) 20:34, 13 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

There is no standard in Hindi. — — 20:57, 13 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

One of its meanings is Arab (see w:fa:تازی there is also an extensive English quotation from EI at the end). And عربستان سعودی is more related to عربستان, I mean we shouldn't list everything which has "عرب" in that page (عرب), should we? --Z 20:36, 15 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

The purpose of related section is to list words that are related to each other by root or etymology, not words that might be synonyms or have related meanings. So, to answer your question, yes, every word that contains عرب should be listed there, either under "Related terms" or under "Derived terms", if and when appropriate. As for, عربستان سعودی, it should be listed under "Derived terms" of عربستان. --Dijan (talk) 20:42, 15 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

Ok. Cheers --Z 20:51, 15 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

Would you mind terribly if I moved the contents of the article आम्म (āmm) to आम (ām), keeping आम्म (āmm) as a redirect? 'आम्म (āmm)' is the direct transliteration in Hindi of the original Arabic word عام (ʕām), but the spelling changed to आम (ām) when it came into Hindi (e.g. आम आदमी (ām ādmī), meaning 'the common man'. Here are links to two online Hindi-English ditionaries, both of which recognize 'आम', as well as it's Arabic-contributed meaning: , . Neither of these same dictionaries recognize the term 'आम्म' , . 11achitturi (talk) 04:15, 24 May 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hi Dijan, do you have any source for the etymology section? I think this is from هندو hindu + ستان. By the way, old meaning of هندو hindu was anyone who is from India or Indian not Hindu. --Z 11:09, 2 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Actually, old meaning would have been Hindu, while the more modern meaning is Indian. The term comes from Sanskrit हिन्दुस्थान (hindusthāna) ("hindusthāna" - country of the Hindus). --Dijan (talk) 11:48, 2 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

They are cognate to each other I think, regarding the meanings, in modern Persian هندی hendi is Indian and هندو hendu means Hindu (I'm sure) --Z 13:08, 30 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

I'm sorry. I just noticed I wrote that backwards. I meant to say the term is from Persian (as it is shown now in the etymology). And that this particular form हिन्दु (hindu) hindu was borrowed even into Sanskrit from Persian هندو (Monier-Williams, p. 1298). स्थान (sthāna) sthāna is actually the cognate part with Persian ستان (stân). هندی hendi also means Indian (from هند hend - India). --Dijan (talk) 16:10, 30 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Dijan, someone expressed that Sanskrit entries such as अग्नि should be moved to अग्निः (with visarga). I notice that the nominative singular is अग्निः. Is there a reason that the entry should be located at अग्नि instead of अग्निः? —Stephen ^(Talk) 15:43, 18 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hi Stephen. I'm not sure where the conversation about this is right now. I remember it had something to do with the way traditional dictionaries list Sanskrit lemmas (usually words are listed uninflected or undeclined or bare - which usually is not the nominative). I believe you should contact Ivan about this. He is more familiar with Sanskrit than I. --Dijan (talk) 22:49, 18 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, I’ll ask him. —Stephen ^(Talk) 22:58, 18 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Dear Dijan,
I'm Nemo from Betawiki/translatewiki.net and I'm writing to you because I'm collecting some information about the history of the project and the people and facts who made the difference in it. You are user number 42, so you're probably among those; maybe you even remember that it used to be named Nuka-Wiki (from 2005 on).
It would be wonderful if you could tell me something about how you first reached the wiki (who/what told you about it and how), why you decided to register and contribute, what it meant to you, what made you come back (or not) in the following years, if you spread the word about it, what have been in your opinion the most important facts or discussions in these years, etc.: just anything you want and as much as you can or want.
You can reply on my talk (I'm watching it), or email me, or just use this page to add comments, missing points and/or links to other resources, summaries, blogposts, articles, wiki or mailing lists discussions, as you want. Thank you very much for you help!
Regards, Nemo 11:11, 7 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hi, most entries Category:en:Chemical elements miss Persian translations and Tajik are all in Roman letters, not Cyrillic (Uzbek, on the other hand, are in Cyrillic). I've been adding/fixing some but there are a lot of them. Will ask User:ZxxZxxZ as well. --Anatoli ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 23:25, 26 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

Dijan, can you transcribe the text at s:Page:At the feet of the master.djvu/13? This is part of a text addition at Wikisource, and we don't have anyone there fluent in the script. I could muddle my way through it, but am not very familiar or confident with Devanagari script. The text needs simply to be typed in Devanagari from the source image, and does not need to be converted into a Romanized transcription. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:29, 29 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

असतो मा सद्गमय

तमसो मा ज्योतिर्गमय

मृत्योर्माऽमृतङ्गमय

Done. --Dijan (talk) 02:41, 29 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! --EncycloPetey (talk) 06:11, 29 September 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hi Dijan

Could you look here?-Thanks--George^Animal. 13:44, 10 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

Done. --Dijan (talk) 18:34, 10 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

You created this page as грабље, but Zabadu (talk • contribs) changed it to грабуље — can you check that this is correct, and if so, that the formatting etc is all correct now? Thanks —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 16:23, 17 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

I've never heard "grabulje" before. After doing a search, it seems that both are in use (and yes, in Serbian). Zabadu (talk • contribs) needs to stop marking entries as Serbian unless they are exclusively Serbian. --Dijan (talk) 16:38, 17 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

It looks like a massive mess to me, what with all the moving back and forth... if you could please talk to him about it (especially creating alt-form pages instead of redirects), perhaps that would help. (I am not qualified to do it myself, I'm afraid.) —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 16:43, 17 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

Strange,your native language is Serbian but you never heard of grabulje?hmm?If you don't believe me you can check Wikipedia in Serbian or Google Translate.

As told to you before by someone, just because you speak a language, it does not mean that you have heard every single word, nor every variation of a word, used in it. And for future case arguments, please, come up with better sources than Wikipedia in Serbian and Google Translate. --Dijan (talk) 07:30, 18 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

Haha what other sources do you need?Both grablje(in Croatia) and grabulje (in Serbia) are used in Serbo-croatian.I don't think i did anything wrong.And funny how somenone who's editing Wiktionary ( a sister project of Wikipedia) needs a better source than WIKIPEDIA.lol.

Pa zašto onda ne ukloniš reč grabulje ako misliš da lažem?Naravno da nećeš jer sam u pravu jer se na srpskom kaže grabulje to svako ko govori srpski zna.Sad ponovo izmišljaš i dodaješ mađarsku reč keczele iako ona ne postoji.Ajde sada potvrdi tu reč,ajde stavi izvor ili referencu ako imaš.

Pregledajući tvoje doprinose u zadnjih nekoliko sedmica samo sam vidio kako brišeš i pišeš onako kako tebi paše, i to bez ikakvih dokaza i bez izvora. Molim te da ne brišeš tuđi rad. Ti izgleda govoriš sad i mađarski kao maternji jezik. Što se tiče kecelja, od latinske riječi casula je (isti izvor riječi košulja), preko mađarskog. U mađarskom postoji keczele (takođe postoji köczöle). Ima nekoliko mađarskih rječnika na Google Books. --Dijan (talk) 10:30, 20 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Možda sam izbrisao par stvari sumnjivog porekla ali ništa netačno nisam napisao.Svi članci koje sam napravio ili popravio su tačni,to možeš da proveriš.Ako poznaješ mađarski zašto onda ne dodaš tu reč i napraviš unos ua nju?Zašto onda Google prevodilac ne poznaje tu reč?To je prilično dobar prevodilac sa vrlo malo grešaka.

Zabadu (talk)

Google Translate nije dobar prevodilac niti se može koristiti kao dokazna referenca. A ja niti imam vremena da dodam svaku riječ koju navedem u etimologijama, niti je obavezno da ja to uradim. Ponekad i zaboravim, a ponekad i namjerno ostavim tako jer ne poznajem vrlo dobro gramatiku svih jezika čije rijči navodim pa ostavim da bi neko drugi to uradio. Zato Wiktionary i jeste zajednički projekat a ne samo moj. --Dijan (talk) 10:54, 20 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Pokaži mi link tog mađarskog rečnika gde je ta reč zapisana,gde si je ti video,zamolio bih te.Za latinski u popunosti verujem.Ja ipak mislim da je taj prevodilac vrlo dobar.Ne što se tiče tekstova i prevoda rečenica ali sadrži dobre prevode pojedinačnih reči.

Zabadu (talk)

Kao što rekoh, postoji ih nekoliko. Jedan je Magyar tájszótár (Magyar Tudományos Akadémia) (1838) a i navodi se i u Magyar szótár (2002) kao kecele. --Dijan (talk) 11:47, 20 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

Zahvaljujem Zabadu (talk)

I molim te reci mi ko smišlja glupave primere upotrebe reči poput ovih:

Napaljeni skote, misliš pogrešnom glavom! Sjedio sam ispred njega drkajući mu ga objema rukama Želim da ga jebem u njegovo dlakavo dupe.

Zabadu (talk)

Da li možeš da mi kažeš šta znači kad na ovom sajtu http://hjp.novi-liber.hr piše poreklo reči " od starijega"? Od čega starijega?Staroslovenskog ne razumem?Ne mogu da pročitam uputstva nemam priključak.Hvala

24.135.79.175 17:15, 16 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Koja je riječ u pitanju? Ja bih rekao da znači da je riječ u pitanju od starijeg oblika. --Dijan (talk) 06:05, 18 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Pa šta znači to od "starijeg oblika"?Takođe i pored želje da se sve srpske reči zabeleže i obeleže reči poput hljeb u hrvatskom ne postoje.Činjenica.Ne razumem zašto sam napadnuti intrigirati se kaže i na srpskom i na hrvatskom kako to da to ne znaš?

24.135.79.175 07:57, 18 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Mislim da "od starijeg oblika" je samo jasno i razumljivo. Riječ "hljeb" postoji i u hrvatskom jeziku ma da se "kruh" koristi češće. A što se tiče "intrigirati", ja nikad nisam rekao da ja to ne znam da se koristi i u srpskom jeziku. Zbog tog razloga, nisam promijenio tvoje isprave. Možeš slobodno da obilježavaš samo ako se riječi koriste u jednom a ne i u drugom, tako da nije potrebno niti korisno da se sve zajedničke riječi obilježavaju. --Dijan (talk) 19:49, 18 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

After all this Serbo-Croatian nationalistic annoyance, I am sorry to bother you again... but I need some help. Can you please reason with the anon at User talk:Metaknowledge#Intrigirati? Thank you —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 01:18, 18 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

I'll look over his edits. --Dijan (talk) 06:13, 18 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Thank you, and I apologise for asking you to comment. That was rather rude of me. But yes, even if the content of his edits are right he clearly does not understand how {{context}} works. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 15:50, 18 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Please take a look. Thanks! —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 00:15, 16 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi Dijan, I just sent you an email via EmailUser with regards to some requests on bs.wikt. Could you take a look? Thanks. --Bencmq (talk) 07:29, 9 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

I guess there are a few things I'd like, if you have time to do them. I've been working on Mauritian Creole, and came upon a few words marked in a dictionary as being from Hindi but without the etymon given, and I can't figure 'em out. Could you please take a look? The remaining pages are douk, jos, and nisa. Secondly, I'm wondering if you can maybe check and/or transliterate some of the translations at biryani. Finally, could you tell me if Azeri in Cyrillic differs at all from Kyrgyz in how we transliterate it? I'd like to set up automatic transliteration for Azeri as well. Thank you! —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 02:07, 17 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hindi stuff, done. Secondly, Azeri Cyrillic is different from Kyrgyz. It not only has some additional letters, but it is also transliterated differently. --Dijan (talk) 04:50, 17 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for cleaning up the other ones as well. But what about jos? Can you give me a link or tell me the differences so I can make WT:Azeri transliteration? —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 04:56, 17 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

There were a couple of Azeri Cyrillic alphabets, it's better to use the latest. Please check w:Azerbaijani_alphabet. Azeri Cyrillic is gone. BTW, we don't have an Ossetian table. Hippietrail makes entries in it, so he might need it. --Anatoli ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 05:33, 17 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Actually, we do have an Ossetian table. I also made a module, but it's not in use yet, because there are no Ossetian templates. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 05:40, 17 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Azeri alphabets

One thing to note is that in the Arabic script, the initial form of vowels (except a) always contains an alif (so, öpüş = өпүш = اؤپۆش) and initial, a = آ.

Azeri Cyrillic is no longer in use, but it was in use until 1991 and there is extensive literature in it. There is no reason not to include it. --Dijan (talk) 05:50, 17 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

I don't really know how to deal with the Arabic script, but I'll put Cyrillic Azeri on my to-do list. Thank you very much! —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 05:54, 17 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Thank you, both. Strange that I missed WT:OS TR, it was on my watchlist. --Anatoli ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 06:12, 17 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

As for Mauritian Creole jos, I cannot be certain. It's possible that it comes from ख़ुश (xuś), but again, I'm not sure. I'm not familiar with Mauritian Creole phonology nor history. --Dijan (talk) 17:43, 17 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Phonologically speaking, I know that Hindi becomes Mauritian , but the rest is a little more uncertain phonologically. Is that a at the beginning? It looks so close, though, that I trust it enough to put it in. Thanks again! —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 01:23, 18 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Yes, that's an . --Dijan (talk) 03:27, 18 April 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

In this category there are some translations into languages you speak or understand - Persian, Tajik, Hindi. If you're interested, those translations need transliteration. Let me know if you wish to add another language, which is not listed. --Anatoli ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 04:52, 13 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hey Dijan, would you please look it up in your Ottoman Turkish sources (I couldn't find anything in my online sources)? See siktir#Descendants, these must be from Ottoman Turkish (the Persian one is from Azeri though). --Z 16:52, 18 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

There is no doubt that they date from the Ottoman period. However, it's really difficult to find Ottoman vulgar interjections, but I was able to find the actual verb سكدرمك (sikdirmek) in Redhouse (1884) and in several others. --Dijan (talk) 19:51, 18 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

I found the Ottoman Turkish spelling سيكدير (sikdir) in Ačaṙean 1902, page 322. --Vahag (talk) 09:28, 13 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

Do you think Dari can be merged with Persian? See Wiktionary:Requests_for_moves,_mergers_and_splits#Persian, Dari, etc. {{context|Dari|lang=fa}} can still be used. CC ZxxZxxZ (talk • contribs). --Anatoli ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 04:56, 4 December 2013 (UTC)Reply

That has been the practice on Wiktionary. Dari should be under the Persian heading with {{context|Dari|lang=fa}} label. That is what we do already. Take a look at فاکولته, for example. Regarding the transliteration of long vowels, ZxxZxxZ (talk • contribs) has been trying to implement a classical Persian transliteration (which is pretty much used for Dari by scholars) as a standard for all Persian entries. So far, it's been a slow and selective process. I'm not opposed to it and it can easily be indicated as the standard Wiktionary practice in the Appendix:Persian transliteration. --Dijan (talk) 06:35, 5 December 2013 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. Do you mind posting your answer on Wiktionary:Requests_for_moves,_mergers_and_splits#Persian, Dari, etc and perhaps address Persian/Dari vowel differences raised? Where can I look at the classical transliteration? --Anatoli ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 00:18, 6 December 2013 (UTC)Reply

By the way, if you happen to know anything about Parsi or Parsi-Dari (and about their relationship to Farsi and Dari), your input on that subject would also be appreciated over in the same section. :) - -sche (discuss) 00:53, 6 December 2013 (UTC)Reply

I've placed a copy of this thread over on RFM: . Cheers, - -sche (discuss) 22:38, 8 December 2013 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! Sorry, I've been a little preoccupied lately outside of Wiktionary. --Dijan (talk) 02:20, 9 December 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi Dijan. Do you have any good sources for the origin of this one, which I presume was borrowed from ota? One of the citations gives the modern Turkish form, but I was wary of just transcribing that into Arabic text without knowing better. Ƿidsiþ 13:46, 19 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

It's in Redhouse's dictionary from 1880 (p. 772). It's an Arabic word, written as محصل (muhassil) in Ottoman Turkish. --Dijan (talk) 13:59, 19 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

Makes sense! Thanks. Ƿidsiþ 14:02, 19 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

To avoid mistakes, we generally don't just delete language sections. If you think the entry is wrong, nominate it for WT:RFD or WT:RFV. --WikiTiki89 19:55, 26 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

Clearly you did not read the Urdu entry nor look at the history of the page. The Urdu entry does not belong there because it was copied along with the Persian entry from شب and has nothing to do with شو (śo). --Dijan (talk) 19:57, 26 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

Ok, no problem. Next time an edit summary would be helpful though. --WikiTiki89 20:05, 26 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

I haven't had a chance to enter an edit summary before my edit was policed. --Dijan (talk) 20:09, 26 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

You can't retroactively enter an edit summary; it has to be done before you save the edit. --WikiTiki89 20:11, 26 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

I'm quite aware of that. I meant to respond on your page. --Dijan (talk) 20:14, 26 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

Ok, but I was referring to the original edit that removed the Urdu entry. It should have had an edit summary. It's ok if you forgot, but it would have saved some of this confusion. --WikiTiki89 20:24, 26 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Do you plan on closing bs:Vikirječnik:Administratori#Requests for removal of Adminship, since it has been open a year? I thought that I would check with you before the normal m:AAR procedures take place there. --Rschen7754 02:19, 30 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

Ima li izvora za etimologije reči "leš" i/ili "ljuska"? Ako je moguće cenio bih link (ako je sajt) ili impresum (ako je u pitanju knjiga). Hvala unapred. — This unsigned comment was added by 109.245.158.176 (talk).

Leš ili Леш, i Ljuska. --Dijan (talk) 17:07, 28 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

But what is the source of this your edit? Note Persian نسا (nasā, “the flesh and bones of any dead animal”), the true descendant of MPers. nsʾy (nasā). --Vahag (talk) 21:02, 28 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

Platts' dictionary --Dijan (talk) 06:13, 29 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

Do you mind if I remove that etymology? It doesn't look right. None of my modern sources trace the etymology of Persian لاش (lāš), but if it was indeed from MPers nsʾy (nasā), Mackenzie would have listed it as the descendant of the latter, not نسا (nasā). See page 58 of his dictionary. --Vahag (talk) 08:16, 29 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

Help yourself. --Dijan (talk) 15:18, 29 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

I entered the basic information of the Urdu word for tunnel, سرنگ. Any thoughts about that? --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 19:56, 11 June 2014 (UTC)Reply

It's fine. I added the etym. --Dijan (talk) 20:20, 11 June 2014 (UTC)Reply

TY, I have this thing about looking for yellow links and filling them in. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 23:12, 11 June 2014 (UTC)Reply

I also came across Urdu تل (sesame). --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 19:53, 20 June 2014 (UTC)Reply

Fixed. --Dijan (talk) 07:19, 23 June 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hi Dijan!

I left out Northern and Central Quechuan varieties simply because I'm unfamiliar with them, and for now I wanted to work on getting a basic lexicon set up. I think it would be premature to separate the two at this point in time; firstly because there are so few entries for any variety of Quechua, and secondly because it would require us to come up with a way to organize (and name) the dialects under both Quechua I and Quechua II. Until we build up a bigger inventory, I think it would be sufficient to include variant spelling and usage notes under a single heading of "Quechua." What do you think? -Sumiaz (talk) 22:23, 19 June 2014 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the response! I'm fine with a single header. The problem that I was pointing out is that currently the only focus is on Southern Quechua, which makes it seem as if that is the standard for all of Quechua, which isn't true. There are a lot of things that need to be pointed out (lemma form of the verbs is different in standard Northern Quechua, the spelling, etc). Hopefully we can attract some native Quechua speakers to help out. --Dijan (talk) 06:23, 23 June 2014 (UTC)Reply

Why exactly would it be wrong to add Slovene prijatelj as a modern decendant of OCS приꙗтєль to प्रिय's etymological info whereas next to the Old English frēond, frēo there is the English friend, free? Do you doubt the relation? Then you might as well take a look at this. Besides, it might just be best to link it to the Proto-Slavic root prijateljь and the Proto-Germanic frijōndz and frijaz roots while we're at it. You must admit it would be more systematic and logical. Be that as it may, I still don't see a logical reason to exclude prijatelj. --Giacomo Volli (talk) 15:38, 7 November 2014 (UTC)Reply

I do not doubt the relation of Slovene to Old Church Slavonic, or the relation of Old Church Slavonic etymology to Sanskrit. That was not the reasoning for my undoing of your edit. We prefer to not list modern language cognates in etymologies of ancient languages. You are more than welcome to list Slovene and mention it as a descendant of Old Church Slavonic, but that should be done in the entry of Old Church Slavonic, not Sanskrit. Please take a moment to review Wiktionary policies and guidelines. I recommend for this discussion that you look at Etymologies, Cognates section. --Dijan (talk) 16:16, 7 November 2014 (UTC)Reply

I thought it might be something like that, that's why I didn't re-edit it before asking. Nevertheless it seems a bit inconsistent with what you just said to find a modern English cognate in the page. But never mind... --Giacomo Volli (talk) 18:48, 19 November 2014 (UTC)Reply

Modern English simply serves as a general cognate reference, and it is an exception (as stated in #4 on the list on the Cognates link I provided above) since this is the English Wiktionary. --Dijan (talk) 20:43, 20 November 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hello Dijan, I don't know how much you are using Urdu anymore, but there is a new Nastaliq font that I read about today, I thought it might be of interest to you (just as a warning, when I open the link my browser almost crashes). link. Kaixinguo (talk) 21:41, 14 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

I'm not a fan of using Nataliq on Wiktionary at all. It does not display properly unless we enormously increase the font size (we have tried this before with Nastaliq) which then ruins the rest of the page, especially if we have Persian or other Arabic-script languages on the same page. --Dijan (talk) 18:05, 15 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

Use drop-down boxes like they started doing for Chinese xlits. — — 23:53, 15 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

Oh, I didn't realise you had already tried that, sorry. I think one day it would be nice if there were examples of different typesetting and handwriting on Wiktionary, though. Kaixinguo (talk) 13:17, 16 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hi! Sorry to bother you again if you already got my ping the other day, but someone mentioned {{ping}} wasn't working right, so I wanted to ask if you could look over Citations:kol çekmek and Citations:düşerge and determine if they actually verify that kol çekmek and düşerge mean what our entries say they mean. In the past, we've had problems with Turkish language purists refusing to accept the validity of citations of words they don't deem Turkish enough, but I don't speak Turkish well enough to tell if that's what's going on here or if there's actually a problem with the citations. I've asked User:Sinek, too, but he seems to be inactive. - -sche (discuss) 20:54, 1 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

If you could also look over Citations:çimerlik and Citations:haydamak, I'd appreciate it. :) - -sche (discuss) 22:01, 1 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

The citations seem legitimate on first look regarding düşerge. However, if you closely examine them or do a little research, you will notice that every single one of them is a Turkish rendition of the Azeri language (literature and poetry) that was not translated into Turkish (except the one that translated the word into "kamp" next to it.) The Azeri spelling is "düşərgə", and it means campsite or camping grounds. I will go ahead and move the entry to the proper spelling and remove the citations. I will research the rest of them sometime this week, unless someone beats me to it. --Dijan (talk) 04:19, 2 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

Aha! Thank you. - -sche (discuss) 05:17, 2 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hello Dijan :) Its glad you are working for Pashto :) I am sure you mean well but the reason I deleted those words is in reference to the joint paper by Pashto Academy and Kabul University in the 2014 research paper that provides a list of agreed vocabulary. The Raverty Dictionary you have referred was written in the 1800s which contains many mistakes; this lead his estate and the Pashto Academy to publish a new dictionary. Adjutor101 (talk) 04:06, 7 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

Please read my comment on your talk page. --Dijan (talk) 04:07, 7 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

Thank you so much. It makes my work easier :) Adjutor101 (talk) 04:58, 7 May 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi Dijan. You revert my edits on zaman. I write two refernces that this word borrowed from Arabic ː

1. Azerbaijani Explanatory Dictionary
2. Arabic Etymological Dictionary by Andras Rajki

If you have any question please ask me. --Aabdullayev851 (talk) 05:41, 26 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Your edits have been reverted in regards to Turkish for several valid reasons. Neither of your sources mention Turkish language. Your first source is an online Azeri dictionary, not Turkish. Your second source is a Word doc of some Arabic dictionary. Again, it does not mention Turkish language. Please take your time to actually review both Arabic and Persian terms. Do not revert my edits back. If you have more reliable sources, and valid sources which actually discuss Turkish language, please leave a comment on my page. Thanks. --Dijan (talk) 07:49, 26 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Dijan I think you know that Turkish and Azerbaijani language are very similar. And in Turkish Wiktionary, there is also written Arabic. I try find sources for Turkish language. If I could, I will let you know. --Aabdullayev851 (talk) 08:24, 26 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Ok, I find source. zaman meaning in TDK dictionary. TDK - Türk Dil Kurumu (Turkish Language Association) is the official regulatory body of the Turkish language. Can you change your last edit now? --Aabdullayev851 (talk) 08:30, 26 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Dijan, Arabic Etymological Dictionary also mention Turkish language, please look again. --Aabdullayev851 (talk) 08:49, 26 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

There is a Persian word زمان (zamân) and an Arabic word زَمَن (zaman) with roughly the same meanings. In this case, the direct source is more likely Persian. However, the Persian and Arabic words are probably related somehow, but the details are unclear. --WikiTiki89 17:45, 28 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I'm looking for the etymology of Romani word "mu(r)darel", 'to kill', and the only indication I could find in a Gipsy-Hungarian dictionary is that it is cognate with Hindi word "murdā", 'dead'. But I couldn't find a Hindi word like that in any other source, only "murdan" in Wiktionary, but it doesn't seem to be a verb. Can you help me, please? --El Mexicano (talk) 20:28, 2 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

See Persian مردن (mordan, “to die”). By the way, the Hindi (or Hindustani?) word "murdā" looks to be a loanword from Persian مرده (morde / murda, “dead”). --Z 16:28, 3 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. Finally I found it in a Hindi–English online dictionary on a project site of Chicago University; and indeed, it's a loanword from Persian. --El Mexicano (talk) 09:30, 14 May 2016 (UTC)Reply

Your place is empty! Are you online? Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 17:08, 17 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Haha! Yes, it's been awhile. I'm online. --Dijan (talk) 17:28, 17 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hope you are well. Some things happened with Persian on Wiktionary, but there is no active editor now (except for English-Persian translations by Anatoli) so it's all a moot point. If you have a moment, could you hide this revision of my user page please: ? I made it for myself only (but it wasn't finished), and now a user seems to be referring to it when I think that's a bad idea. Thank you. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 17:45, 17 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

@BukhariSaeed and @AryamanA have been working really hard on Hindi and Urdu, there seem to be developments that I'm sure would interest you. And @Victar works on the early Iranian languages. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 17:59, 17 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Dijan Actually, now User:Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV has hidden it, so please ignore the request above. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 18:30, 17 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

It's very slow work, but Hindi has nearly 10,000 lemmas now. Urdu has been left behind unfortunately (3,000 lemmas), so I'm trying to focus on it a bit more. I'm not very good with the script though. (Thanks for supporting me in the admin vote btw) —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 18:56, 17 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi, just wondering, are the Rajasthani terms you added representative of Marwari? I'm thinking about getting rid of the code for Rajasthani because it's inaccurate to treat it as a single language. Also, I've noticed that Rajasthani is often used as an alternative name for Marwari. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 00:48, 18 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

It's Tajik, without i at the end.

Hope you enjoyed your Wiktionary break!!

Rolando 1208 (talk) 13:27, 20 October 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I have removed your admin rights due to our policy on admin inactivity, as you have not used any admin tools in the past five years. This removal is without prejudice and you can request your admin rights to be restored at any time. — SURJECTION ^{/ T / C / L /} 20:10, 21 July 2023 (UTC)Reply