Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word
User talk:Dine2016. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word
User talk:Dine2016, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say
User talk:Dine2016 in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word
User talk:Dine2016 you have here. The definition of the word
User talk:Dine2016 will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition of
User talk:Dine2016, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
Heya Dine2016, I think your comment there makes sense and is appropriate. Using both labels is something I also agree with, not least as it helps to ensure a minimum of ambiguity or confusion regarding what exactly is being described. Cheers, ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 05:35, 26 January 2020 (UTC)Reply
- @Eirikr: Thanks. (I wanted to make sure my understanding of the difference of "inflecting" and "inflectional" was correct.)
- EDICT allows multiple POS labels on the same sense so the 国文法-形態論 mismatch can be easily solved. And on Wiktionary we can clarify the difference in Usage notes sections. But what about the headers? Should て be a particle or a suffix? If we're going to cover premodern Japanese under the JA L2 header, then I prefer basing our work on 国文法, which describes Classical Japanese and Modern Japanese consistently and we can use monolingual JA dictionaries as our framework. --Dine2016 (talk) 08:53, 26 January 2020 (UTC)Reply
- Re: て (te), where it attaches to verbs as the conjunctive ending, it should be listed as a suffix. Where it is used as a quotative, usually but not always geminate as って (tte), it should be listed as a particle.
- As a verb suffix, I suppose an argument could be made that this is also inflecting for classical and older Japanese, since て (te) is specifically the conjunctive form (technically, the 連用形) of completion suffix / auxiliary つ (tsu). But in modern contexts, I believe this て (te) is described as its own thing, and not a form of つ (tsu).
- Re: inflecting vs. inflectional, my understanding agrees (I think) with your EDICT comment. A suffix is inflectional if it is used to express an inflection of a word. A suffix is inflecting if it also inflects. So a suffix can be both inflectional and inflecting, or just one or the other.
- From that, I'd say that す (su) as the classical transitive / causative suffix is both inflectional -- expressing the transitive or causative inflection of the verb to which it attaches -- and inflecting -- since it inflects into forms like し (shi), さ (sa), せ (se), etc., with other inflectional suffixes possibly attaching.
- HTH, ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 17:36, 27 January 2020 (UTC)Reply
I think it's okay to call it MSC. It's just a more formal register. — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 20:05, 9 February 2020 (UTC)Reply
I don't intend to stop you from leaving, but I want you to know that I liked your ideas, even if I didn't comment on them. —Suzukaze-c◇◇ 17:40, 27 February 2020 (UTC)Reply