Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word
User talk:Grolltech. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word
User talk:Grolltech, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say
User talk:Grolltech in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word
User talk:Grolltech you have here. The definition of the word
User talk:Grolltech will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition of
User talk:Grolltech, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
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!
Before you "correct" Greek transliterations, please look at WT:AGRC. Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 07:32, 14 March 2013 (UTC)Reply
- Sorry, got that a little switched around: You can check WT:AEL for modern Greek transliteration, but for all I know your correction could be ok. It's using the same transliteration on the Ancient Greek that's a problem- more specifically, the "ŷ" Chuck Entz (talk) 07:41, 14 March 2013 (UTC)Reply
- Hi Chuck, thanks for your message. It was perfectly timed, as I had just come across WT:AGRC, and had just finished absorbing those details (e.g., use the "scientific" translit scheme for Ancient Greek, very limited diacritics in the translit, etc.), when your message popped up. I will go back and "correct my corrections" pronto (I made 2 or 3 such changes).
- I must admit that was more than a little shocked when I saw the overly simplistic romanization rules on WT:AGRC (About Ancient Greek). I was then very relieved to find the WT:GRC TR (Ancient Greek romanization and pronunciation) page, which had a lot more of what I had expected to find.
- Most importantly, the latter page opens with the statement, "This page is an extension of Wiktionary:About Ancient Greek." Fair enough. However, there is no link to, nor even a mention of, WT:GRC TR on WT:AGRC! Surely that would be an oversight?
- Given my opening track record yesterday, I'm sure as hell not going to make any changes on those pages! But IMHO, I think the "mini-transliteration" table on WT:AGRC, being as incomplete as it is, should be removed from that page entirely and replaced with a link to the detailed "extension" page. Thoughts? Thanks again, Grolltech (talk) 10:33, 14 March 2013 (UTC)Reply
Oxymoron is a Late Latin form, which is how it came into English. Classical Latin did not exist in the fifth century. The OED gives: "< post-classical Latin oxymoron ‘figure of speech in which a pair of opposed or markedly contradictory terms are placed in conjunction for emphasis’ (5th cent.; also oxymorum)". Ƿidsiþ 06:52, 18 April 2013 (UTC)Reply
The reason no one has noticed about this template is that it's only used in the one entry. The user who created it is notorious for creating unnecessary junk. I just removed it, along with most of the antonyms, which seem to be antonyms for stupid, which isn't the same thing. Chuck Entz (talk) 14:44, 21 September 2014 (UTC)Reply
- Thanks, Chuck Entz, I just did the same for synonyms. Grolltech (talk) 19:03, 21 September 2014 (UTC)Reply
Since you seem to be interested in good use of language, if not indeed in a wholesale gunpoint Rectification of Names, couldst join my crusade to save "oxymoron"?
An oxymoron is not a contradiction. The word exists exactly to convey the meaning a non-contradiction made out of contradictory elements.
Cheers,
David Lloyd-Jones (talk) 02:16, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply