User talk:Hekaheka/Archive

 This page contains archived discussions from my talk page.

I'm going to put the "ship" words back. Two reasons:

• translations are often asymmetric, and it is better to give the user more options; they should certainly be looking at the entries to see a more precise definition;
• but more importantly, "boat" does not mean "small". For example, in the US Navy, a submarine is always a boat. (An Ohio-class boat is 170 meters long ... they are built by a division of General Dynamics called Electric Boat ;-)

Robert Ullmann 21:46, 25 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Finish inflection templates really need to start with "fi-" to follow conventions here. Do those codings you are using for the template names mean anything to anyone besides you? If they are your personal mnemonics, then please create them only as redirects to the properly named template. --Connel MacKenzie 21:13, 20 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Wait a sec, man! I'm making this easier for everyone. Hekaheka 21:16, 20 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

You may have misunderstood, by how I said it, so please allow me to try again...

Thank you for adding Finish inflection templates to en.wiktionary.org. Despite not speaking Finish, the majority of readers here will be quite fascinated by the various inflected forms in that language.

Could you please take a moment to follow the en.wikt: standard naming conventions for language inflection templates. Template descriptions start at WT:I2T, with much more detailed pages linked from there.

Thanks in advance, --Connel MacKenzie 21:19, 20 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Could you specify, which template name is wrong? Hekaheka 21:22, 20 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

The Finish templates at Special:Prefixindex/Template:Fi are all named wrong. For starters, all templates in this form should start in lower case. Secondly, the language code prefix, followed by a hyphen, followed by the part-of-speech (optionally followed by a subgrouping) is the form they need to take. --Connel MacKenzie 21:28, 20 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

So, for example, you could have Template:fi-declension-1 for the first declension, or if really needed, noun, adjective and other, for declension one as Template:fi-noun-1, Template:fi-adj-1, etc. --Connel MacKenzie 21:31, 20 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Oh shit, this is much worse than I thought. I have just followed the way I saw the previous editors had done. I have created two completely new templates and corrected mistakes in a few existing ones. I'm currently combining some templates in order to reduce the total number of them. Currently there is some unnecessary redundancy.

In Finnish the declensions are the same for nouns, adjectives, pronouns and numerals -> no need to separate in that sense. Altogether, there are 85 declensions, which means that some 30...35 are still missing. Changing all the template names would be quite a project now, because so many pages link to them, but I take your advise. An additional difficulty is that the Wiki numbering currently in use differs from the accepted numbering which the linguists are using. If I make any new declensions, I'll name the template as "Template:fi-declension-#". Does that sound like ok?Hekaheka 21:46, 20 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

That sounds good. If you'd like, I can run pywikipediabot's replace.py on each of the templates, after the are simply moved to the correct name. But I don't know Finish at all, so I'm not about to do that myself, without help from someone who knows the language! --Connel MacKenzie 22:49, 20 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

I studied this topic a little bit. It seems that all templates which are of the form "Fi"+(two-digit number)+(a,b or nothing) refer to Finnish nominal (covers nouns, adjectives, pronouns and numerals) templates. If one can systematically carry out an operation where they would be renamed to fi-nominal-declension-01a or fi-nominal-01a, no harm would probably be done. Then there is one test template by the user Hyark with the name Template:fi-noun-01, but it only works for part of the words in declension #1, is not referred to from anywhere and is a trial anyway. Naturally both templation names, and references to them would have to be changed.

To my understanding the change could be made now, and I could continue from that. The cleaning of the whole of the nominal declension tables is going to take weeks with the time resource that I can put into this project. Simple renaming is not sufficient, because there is redundancy, errors and uncovered variation. For example templates "Fi04a" and "Fi04b" were overlapping with "Fi02a" and "Fi02b". I have combined these four to one single template currently named "Fi02a". The subdivision of templates into separate a- and b-types is unnecessary, because one can take the alternating of -a/-ä -endings into account in the template format.

There are at least two further aspects, which may deserve attention at this point:

1. As I mentioned yesterday, there are 85 nominal declensions in the Finnish language. A Finnish-Finnish dictionary "Nykysuomen sanakirja" (NSK in the continuation) is regarded as authoritative source for correct Finnish. I think it would make sense to give to the declensions same numbers which they have in NSK. Currently this is the case only for the first three, which I completed yesterday. Does that sound like a good solution to you?

2. In addition to nominal declensions, there are 45 verb declension types. In NSK their numbering starts from one, but currently in Wiktionary they are listed right after the nominal declensions, and the numbering starts from 53, which overlaps with the numbering needs of nominals. The solution here might be to divide the page http://en.wiktionary.orghttps://dictious.com/en/Wiktionary:Finnish_inflection_types into two subsets (?). Good news is that one can master all of them with one inflection table, which has 19 variables (the bad news). This table exists as Template:FiVerbDeclensions, but it should probably be renamed as well in order to make it match with Wiki conventions. The table also leaves all but the first infinitive and all participes uncovered, but that may wait.

Hekaheka 11:10, 21 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

If you add translations that are words that are not unique to Finnish, please redirect to the finnish section, e.g. on mass: ]. Thank you. Alternatively, you can use {{t}}: {{t|fi|massa}}, it adds the link automagically. henne 12:09, 6 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for the advice, I'll remember that. Hekaheka 12:20, 6 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Taidat olla oikeassa, mutta lienee selvää että sanassa on pyritty säilyttämään samankaltainen riimittely.--Jyril 10:04, 12 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Terve, ja kiitos kommenteista. Taivutusmallinteiden sijoittelu on tosiaan varsin ongelmallista, ne kun vievät kovin paljon tilaa. Tarkoitus olisi päivittää kaikki väärässä paikassa olevat taulukot, jolloin mainitsemasi ongelma korjaantuu (eräs tapa on lisätä <br clear="all"/> ennen artikkeleita erottavaa väliviivaa). Toinen ongelma on se, että taulukko peittää {{top#}}-templateilla tehdyt listat. Senkin voi korjata. Taulukoiden hyödyllisyydestä voi tosin olla montaa mieltä, mutta mielestäni varsinkin kun sanassa esiintyy astevaihtelua, sen taivuttaminen voi olla ulkomaalaiselle kohtuuttoman vaikeaa.

Pohdin sellaistakin vaihtoehtoa, että taulukon lisäisi part-of-speechin jälkeen ja oletusarvoisesti pitäisi sen piilossa. Ongelmana on se, että käyttäjät jotka eivät jostain syystä käytä Javascriptiä, näkevät taulukon koko ajan.

Tässä kömpelö esimerkki:

testi

inflection Template:Fi05

Templatien numeroinnissa olen yrittänyt seurata Wikisanakirjaa, jonka numerointi ilmeisesti perustuu Nykysuomen sanakirjaan. Mahdolliset poikkeavuudet NSK:n käytännöstä tulisi korjata, samoin kuin mahdollisesti epästandardit templatien nimet. 'a' ja 'b' -templatit voi muuten yhdistää, joten templatien määrää voidaan vähentää.

Suomi-foorumia ei liene Wiktionaryssa ole, voisikohan sellaisen perustaa esim. Wiktionary:Beer parlour'n alle. Taivutustemplaateista ja taivuttelusta yleensä voi keskustella Wiktionary talk:Finnish inflection types-sivulla.--Jyril 19:26, 12 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hei, tuota...taisin olla aika väsynyt lisätessäni abessiivin ja instruktiivin, kun näin jälkeenpäin ajattelee. Abessiivi ja instruktiivi voisivat kyllä teoriassa olla olemassa, vaikkakaan niitä ei käytetä. Mutta totta, ehkä ihan paras jättää se pois :P -- 08:42, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Jaahas, ei ottanut käyttäjänimeä, vaikka sen laitoin :D terv.: User:Frous

Hei, voitko laittaa Related words -alaotsikon alle pelkästään käsiteltävään sanaan etymologisesti liittyviä sanoja, jotka eivät periydy ko. sanasta (esim. artikkelissa "autoilija" "autoilu" ). Jos sanat liittyvät muulla tavalla toisiinsa, pistä ne See also -osioon. Lisätietoa löytyy EPE:stä.

Jos näin on, niin tehdään. Täytyy lukea ohjeet uudestaan. Olin itse ymmärtänyt asian englanninkielisiä artikkeleja katselemalla siten, että:

Synonyms= samaa tarkoittavat sanat. Esim puku->asu Derived terms= sanat, joilla on etymologinen yhteys. Esim puku->pukea Related terms= asiayhteyden kautta hakusanaan liittyvät sanat. Esim puku->frakki See also= Muuta mielenkiintoista asiaan ehkä vähän etäisestikin liittyvää. Esim puku->naamioituminen. Päästäisten kohdalla kysymys on sikäli helppo, että ne voitaisiin yhtä hyvin sijoittaa otsikon Derived terms alle, mutta lepakoiden kohdalla joudutaan jo miettimään, koska osa lepakoista on nimeltään siippoja ja osa yökköjä. Tuntuisi luontevalta, että koko suvun voisi listata jonkin otsikon alle.Hekaheka 20:50, 14 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Epämääräinen artikkeli tuskin sopii lajinimen eteen, ks. esim. idänpäästäinen.

Tämä riippunee myös siitä ajatellaanko vain lajia, vai myös yksittäistä idänpäästäistä.Hekaheka 20:50, 14 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Totta kyllä. Itse välttäisin artikkelin käyttöä lukuun ottamatta tapauksia, joissa käännökseksi pitää kirjoittaa kokonainen lause.--Jyril 22:03, 14 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

En usko, että kannattaa mainita mitkä eläimet elävät Suomessa. Periaatteessa kaikki artikkelin tieto pitäisi jollakin tavalla liittyä kielitieteellisesti itse sanaan.

Mietin itsekin, minkä otsikon siihen kohtaan panisin, jos mitään. Syy sille, että lopulta mainitsin otusten elävän Suomessa on, että niille on olemassa käytössä oleva ja yleisistä lähteistä todennettavissa oleva suomenkielinen nimi. Muillakin lajeilla voi toki olla alan harrastajapiireissä käytössä suomenkielisiä nimiä, mutta niitä ei löydy esimerkiksi tietosanakirjoista. Tätä kautta kotipaikka-asialla voi olla myös kielitieteellinen merkityksensä.Hekaheka 20:50, 14 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Jos sinulla on lähde, niin olisi hyvä, jos lisäisit sen artikkeliin References-alaotsikon alle. Itse olen lätkinyt {{wikipedia|lang=fi}} templaatteja kun termi löytyy suomenkielisestä Wikipediasta.

Samaan asiayhteyteen liittyvät termit voidaan listata samaan kategoriaan. Esimerkiksi lepakot voidaan listata topic-luokkaan Category:fi:Bats. Luokkien yhtenäisyys pitää kuitenkin säilyttää, eli myös luokka Category:Bats pitää luoda. Luokka Category:Finnish nouns on kätevä varsinkin jos artikkeleita pitää käydä läpi automaattisesti, mutta topic-luokat ovat paljon hyödyllisempiä navigoinnin kannalta.--Jyril 22:03, 14 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Yhdyssanojen etymologioiden kirjoittamisen helpottamiseksi tein templaatin Template:etycomp, jonka avulla etymologiaosan ulkoasu voidaan yhdenmukaistaa. Se, että templaatti hyväksyy toistaiseksi vain kaksi sanaa ei pitäisi olla ongelma, sillä useimmat monta sanaa sisältävät yhdyssanat koostuvat kahdesta semanttisesta osasta, vrt. + tunti ] + mittari ].

OK. täytyypä tutustua. Hekaheka 20:50, 14 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

--Jyril 20:08, 14 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Kiitoksia!

Moniin näistä taivutusluokista tarvittaneen NSK:ta, arvaamalla menee kyllä pieleen.

Wikisanakirjassa luokka 4 poikkeaa 2:sta siinä, että monikon partitiivilla on ylimääräinen muoto laatikkoihin. Mitenkäs NSK:ssa, eikö tuota muotoa pidä enää käyttää?

Alan pikku hiljaa tulla vakuuttuneeksi siitä, ettei taivutustaulukoita kannata lisätä joka artikkeliin erikseen. Tällä sivulla on joitakin tapoja, miten taivutusluokat voitaisiin esitellä sanan yhteydessä. Eli esitellään pelkästään sanan kanta + taivutustyyppi.

NSK:n taivutusluokkia on niin monta, että Wiktionary:Finnish inflection types -sivusta tulee liian suuri. Nominien taivutukset voitaisiin esitellä sivuilla Wiktionary:Finnish declension types/nouns/1 ... /85 ja verbit sivuilla Wiktionary:Finnish declension types/verbs/1 ... /45 tjsp. Ja jos käytetään alisivuja niin silloinhan verbeillekin voidaan lisätä harvinaisetkin taivutukset ja nominaalimuodot, tilaa riittää.--Jyril 21:55, 18 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Could you take a look at this entry? It says "round", but doesn't explain which meanings of round are intended. Thanks. --EncycloPetey 06:32, 24 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Pyöreä can probably always be translated as round. I'll check the correctness of this opinion when I return home from my traveling. I already checked the translations section of round, adding alternative translations where appropriate. Hekaheka 08:34, 24 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

What EncycloPetey means here is that it is not clear which of the seven (as we currently have) meanings of the adjective "round" the Finnish word "pyöreä" refers to. Does it mean circular, spherical, plump, rounded off, etc, or several of these, all of them?

Where there is ambiguity, translations should always be followed by a gloss. So, for example (and I don't know - this is for you to say) if "pyöreä" means "round" as in "spherical", you should write:

• round (spherical)

and if it means "round" in several meanings, give these on several lines, wikifying only the first instance of the word:

• round (spherical)
• round (lacking sharp corners)
• round (of a number)

Thanks. — Paul G 15:28, 24 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Well, the Wiki-document "entry layout explained" says this: Translations are to be given for English words only. In entries for foreign words, only the English translation is given, instead of a definition. In case of the adjective pyöreä it can always be translated into English as "round" (I'll double-check this as soon as I get back home and get the opportunity to consult my "Nykysuomen sanakirja"). I have interpreted this so, that as long as there is no ambiguity in translating a foreign word into English, explanations are not required and not even desirable. If I have misunderstood, I'll be happy to change my ways.

With my previous comment I meant that I have added pyöreä to those definitions of "round" (at least seven out of eight), which can be translated as pyöreä into Finnish, and also translated every other sense that the word "round" has. It is true that pyöreä is an imprecise word, but so is the adjective "round", too, and almost exactly in the same way. If one wants to find the Finnish equivalent for an adjective which is more precise about the kind of roundness in question - such as spherical - I have understood that one is supposed to look at the English entry "spherical" for translations. An additional practical problem is that the English definitions are constantly edited, and keeping track of them is next to impossible.

Hekaheka 17:21, 24 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for adding some derived terms. Please note that derived terms and other lists (related terms, synonyms, etc) should be given in alphabetical order. This makes them easier for a user to search through for the term they want, also avoids accidental duplicates and makes it easier for contributors to see which terms, if any, have been omitted. — Paul G 15:22, 24 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Ok, thanks for advice. Hekaheka 17:25, 24 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

I happpened to look at some of your recent edits and noticed that you seemed be removing Finnish translations of certain English words. Can I ask why you have been doing that?

It is probably because they have been wrong or misleading. Could you specify which words you refer to? I'm ready to discuss my edits one by one, and to correct any unintentional mistakes.

Hekaheka 07:09, 26 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

I'm another who deeply regrets your removal of Finnish Translations for hare, which were quite elaborated. It's you who are misleading. You deliberately mistake arctic hare (Lepus arcticus) instead of mountain hare (Lepus timidus) for metsäjänis. With arctic hare, you mistake Lepus timidus for Lepus arcticus. I would not say but almost know why you are as mad as a March hare about arctic hare. Note the Old World Scandinavian and Baltic languages normally have nothing to do with the American w:Arctic hare but w:Mountain hare and w:European hare. Please advice me if these three Wikipedian articles are not enough for this discussion.

Otherwise, may I cordially ask you to restore and report here whatever you have mistaken, deliberately or not? Seriously yours --KYPark 14:29, 28 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

No, sir, I still think I was right in shortening the list of translations. This was the Finnish translation before my editing:

jänis (1), metsäjänis (1, Lepus timidus), rusakko (1, Lepus europaeus / Lepus capensis)´´

And this the English definition of "hare":

Any of several plant-eating animals of the family Leporidae, especially of the genus Lepus, being usually somewhat larger than a rabbit and with longer ears.

The definition clearly indicates that "hare" is a generic word referring to a group of species that have common characteristics, and are therefore called "hares". The Finnish equivalent for "hare" is thus "jänis", which is also a generic word. One must remember that Wiktionary is not an encyclopedia, and I think translations should be direct equivalents and not lists of connected words. I have made a new entry for "metsäjänis" plus edited "jänis" and "rusakko" to handle the variety of species.

Another issue is which hare is which in different languages. When I made the connections rusakko = brown hare = Lepus europaeus and metsäjänis = arctic hare = Lepus timidus I used a Finnish zoology book as reference. It seems obvious that either Wikipedia or that book is wrong. I will study additional sources to find out, which is correct, and edit the entries "metsäjänis" and "rusakko" as well as their English equivalents accordingly - or Wikipedia, if that were the case. Will that be enough to take back the "March hare" label from my forehead?

Hekaheka 19:11, 28 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

All right, I have now traced the source of the problem. Arctic hare and mountain hare have earlier been considered to be same species, hence the error in the zoology book, which I referred to above. According to current usage, arctic hare is called "napajänis" in Finnish. I have made appropriate corrections to the entries hare, arctic hare, European hare N, brown hare, eastern jackrabbit N, mountain hare N, jänis, metsäjänis, rusakko and napajänis N. However, I stubbornly insist that the translation of "hare" into Finnish is "jänis" but not "rusakko" nor "metsäjänis". Hekaheka 20:58, 28 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

I feel like accepting your insistence that hare simply be jänis, now that you have woven a much more coherent web around them. You go ahead while I would say this.

Surely, both are supposed to be generic enough and neatly equivalent. But such is the case at the cost of "ambiguity in generality" in general. The hare is a wild creature in nature. It is too shy, hence the name Lepus timidus, to be made mild or domesticated in contrast to the rabbit, or more precisely coney that is exceptionally widely cognate. In this regard, it may be said to be wilder than the wild boar, or:

• Estonian metssiga, from mets + siga "pig"
• Finnish metsäsika, from metsä + sika "pig" (assumed instead of villisika)
• Latvian mežacūka, from meža + cūka "pig"
• Sami meahccespiidni, from meahcce + spiidni "pig"

The hare is most likely to mean "grey," hence no sense of wildness in itself. So it might better be called "wild hare," "mountain hare," or "metsäjänis." Actually, take the following Far East compounded terms for example:

• Chinese: 野兔 (yětù), literally "wild hare"
• Japanese: 野兎 (のうさぎ, no-usagi), literally "wild hare"
• Korean: 산토끼 (san-tokki), literally "mountain hare"

We are not quite sure whether mountain hare or metsäjänis is an everybody's everyday word or scientific jargon. All I'm saying is that it may be not too bad a POV to put English hare into Finnish jänis AND metsäjänis that may sound preciser like CJK. In addition, it may interest you that the above-mentioned common Baltic prefix me* meaning "wild" or "mountain" sounds like the Korean equivalent met as of 멧돼지 (met-doeji).

Lastly, my sincere apologies to compare you to a March hare. I would suspect your sincerity no more. --KYPark 08:07, 1 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

I thought about the same problem as well, realising that normally people would not say "metsäjänis" or "mountain hare" but simply "jänis" and "hare". But, when an Englishman says "hare", he is most likely not speaking of Lepus timidus, because they are rare in the regions where English is spoken as native language. Most likely he is speaking of a specimen of some other species, although he may not even know the full name of it. In Finland on the other hand, there are only two native species of hare, called in Finnish officially "metsäjänis" and "rusakko". When a Finn says "jänis", he uses the word most likely as a short form of "metsäjänis" and he actually does speak of Lepus timidus. Therefore, I have included "mountain hare" as a possible translation for "jänis". This is one of the features that make working with Wiktionary so interesting - the translations are not always reciprocal. "Metsäjänis" and "mountain hare" are the same thing, but "hare" means rather seldom same as "metsäjänis", even though "jänis" means very often the same as "mountain hare". Hekaheka 11:54, 1 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

rabbit

1398, "young of the cony," from Fr. dialect (cf. Walloon robète), dim. of Flem. or M.Du. robbe "rabbit," of unknown origin. The adult was a cony (q.v.) until 18c.

"Zoologically speaking, there are no native rabbits in the United States; they are all hares. But the early colonists, for some unknown reason, dropped the word hare out of their vocabulary, and it is rarely heard in American speech to this day. When it appears it is almost always applied to the so-called Belgian hare, which, curiously enough, is not a hare at all, but a true rabbit."

The above quote from etymonline may help. The two English words, hare and rabbit, should cover all the family Leporidae, regardless of the local availability of any species and native speakers' mistakes. Zoologically, there seems to be a consensus division. Meanings are simply differences. Hares are different from rabbits that burrow. So the division is straightforward. Then, the exact meaning of "hare" in context should be translated into "jänis" at one time AND/OR "metsäjänis" at another; AND if any difference, and OR if no difference between the synonyms. Preciseness (say, jänis and metsäjänis, as I suggest) and conciseness (say, jänis only, as you insist) are the two main linguistic virtues that ever tend to conflict. --KYPark 14:58, 1 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

I think I found a reasonable compromise. Check hare -> Translations -> *Finnish. Hekaheka 16:50, 1 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

What a compromise! I appreciate your generosity above all. May I visit this page from time to time to ask you some Finnish questions? --KYPark 11:57, 2 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Yes, of course. I will be glad to share whatever knowledge I may have. Discussions like this serve as little steps to take Wikipedia project towards its ultimate goal. Hekaheka 15:11, 2 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Viitsisitkö käyttää Template:fi-noun, Template:fi-adj, Template:fi-verb tai Template:fi-adv -templaatteja? Jos et halua arvailla sanojen juuria tai taivutusluokkia, niin riittää kirjoitaa esim. {{fi-noun}} ===Noun===-alaotsikon alle '''sana''':n paikalle. Säästyt nimittäin Category:Finnish nouns- ja muiden sanaluokkakategorioiden lisäämiseltä eikä minun tarvitse poistaa niitä templaatteja lisätessäni. Numeroilla ei ole vielä templaattia. Mitenkäs muuten numerot kannattaisi otsikoida? Ennen kaikki numerot olivat joko kardinaalilukuja (Cardinal number) tai järjestyslukuja (Ordinal number). Nyt jotkin numerot on otsikoitu pelkästään numeroina (Number) tai numeraaleina (Numeral). Jonkinlainen johdonmukaisuus pitäisi säilyttää.--Jyril 15:08, 26 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Tässä joutuu ottamaan vähän takaisin. Katsoin käytössäni olevista sanakirjoista, ja näyttää siltä, että englannissa ei ole sanaluokkaa numeraalit. Kardinaaliluvut luokitellaan substantiiveiksi ja ordinaaliluvut adjektiiveiksi. Suomenkielisissä hakusanoissa voisi kai kuitenkin käyttää sanaluokkaa numeraali, koska meillä se eritellään. Hekaheka 19:43, 4 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Jep, näppärä templaatti. Olenkin käyttänyt sitä jo pari päivää. Minun mielestäni numeron otsikko on Numeral, koska se on saman kategorian sana (part of speech) kuin Noun, Adjective, Pronoun jne.

Hekaheka 19:27, 28 February 2007 (UTC)Reply

Terve! Nuo aikaisemmin täällä käytetyt taivutusluokat ovat ilmeisesti peräisin täältä. Tuota sanalistaa voisi käyttää taivutusluokkien määrittämisessä, kunhan vaan pitää huolen, että numeroinnit menevät kohdalleen.

Jos tiedät, miten Nykysuomen sanakirja määrittelee eri taivutusluokat, niin voisitko lisätä ne Wiktionary:Finnish inflection types/nouns -sivun alisivuille? Varsinkin joidenkin a-loppuisten sanojen oikeiden taivutusluokkien löytäminen on päättelemällä hankalaa, sillä ne poikkeavat pelkästään joidenkin rinnakkaisten muotojen perusteella.--Jyril 00:35, 4 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Enpäs kyllä tiedä. NSK on rakennettu siten, että substantiivin yhteydessä on yläviitteellä merkitty taivutusluokka, jota vastaavan taivutuksen voi hakea taulukosta, mutta välissä olevaa teoriaa ei ole selitetty. Voi toki olla, että sellaista ei ole kovin yksikäsitteisenä olemassakaan, koska taivuttaminen ei ole aina loogista. Esimerkiksi "kuusi" taipuu kahdella eri tavalla merkityksestä riippuen, ja on paljon sanapareja, joissa vain alkukirjain on erilainen, mutta se muuttaa taivutuksen. Esimerkkinä vaikkapa "kuusi" ja "huusi".

Löytämälläsi lähteellä on NSK:hon verrattuna muutamia hyviä puolia. Ensinnä se löytyy netistä (auttaa Wiktionary -työskentelyä), toiseksi se on julkaistu GNU Free Documentation License -systeemillä, joten ei tule edes teoriassa tekijänoikeusongelmia ja kolmanneksi se on ilmeisesti kehittyneempi malli, koska siinä on vähemmän taivutusluokkia. Tarvitaanko NSK-luokitusta siis enää tässä projektissa mihinkään? Vai oletko edennyt NSK-suunnassa niin pitkälle, että peruuttaminen on hankalaa? Hekaheka 18:48, 4 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Kuusi ja kuusi ovat homonyymejä, eli kaksi aivan eri sanaa ;). Niillä on eri etymologiat, mistä johtuen niiden taivutukset ovat erilaisia. Mitä tulee numerointiin, en kyllä enää peruuttaisi. Epäselvissä tapauksissa voisi kylläkin käyttää yhtä luokkaa, esim. paperi/banaali -> 5, matala/asema -> 12 jne. (mikäli Joukahaista on uskominen, ainoa ero 11:n ja 12:n välillä on tavujen määrässä). Joka tapauksessa lähes kaikki sanat kuuluvat muutamaan luokkaan (1, 2, 4, 5/6, 10, 11/12/13, 63, 64, 65), niistäkin useimmat ovat ilmiselviä. Numeroiden paljous johtuu osittain hyvin vaihtelevasti taipuvista -i : -en -sanoista, joita ei ole montaa, mutta joille on annettu luokat 32-51. Useimmissa niistä on korkeintaan muutama sana. Jos em. epäselvät tapaukset ovat harvinaisia/ainutlaatuisia, ei niiden pitäisi tuottaa mitään ongelmia. Todennäköisimmin virheitä tulee siinä, että sana liitetään liian rajoittavaan luokkaan (esim. tuomari -> 4, vaikka se kuuluisi 5:een), jolloin "vakavaa vahinkoa" ei synny.--Jyril 20:06, 4 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Jos tarkistettavia sanoja ei tule aivan mahdottomasti, niin voin pyynnöstäsi katsoa taivutusluokan, koska minulla on NSK hyllyssä. Hekaheka 20:14, 4 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Olen muodostanut päätöspuun nominien taivutusten mukaan. Tärkeimmät ongelmakohdat ovat a- (12-17) ja i-loppuisten (5-6) sanojen kohdalla (en ole myöskään keksinyt, miten lahti poikkeaa 8:sta, sekä mitä eroa on lohella ja tuohella, sekä -mi loppuisilla sanoilla). Ilmeisesti 23-25, 27-29, 66-70 luokat poikkeavat toisistaan vain vokaalien perusteella, koska ne on yhdistetty KOTUS-luokituksessa (kauris/kaunis/koiras -sanoissa täytyy olla joitain muitakin eroja). Jos NSK:ssa ei ole annettu esimerkkejä, niin voitko etsiä samoin taipuvia sanoja, niin voisi yrittää päätellä, miten luokat on eroteltu toisistaan. Verbejä en ole vielä ehtinyt vilkaisemaan. Niistäkin suurin osa taipuu hyvin samalla tavalla.--Jyril 20:40, 4 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Lahti merkityksessä meren tai järven lahti on luokkaa 8*, eli poikkeaa peruskaavasta vain t/d -astevaihtelun osalta. Lahti merkityksessä teurastus kuuluu luokkaan 4*, jälleen t/d -astevaihtelu. Sanoja mainitsemiisi luokkiin väliltä hal-har(asteriski ilmaisee astevaihtelun):

5: hankari, hanhikki*, hamsteri, hamari, halstari

6: hangaari, hampuusi, halunkki*, hasardi, harpisti, harmoni

12: harava, hapera, hankala

13: harhautuma, hankauma, hankava, haluisa, hallava, halkeama, harteva, harmahtava, harjoitelma

14: harhailija, hankkija, hallitsija, hamina, haltia, haltija, halkaisija, harrastelija

15: harakka*, haplologia, hankinta*, hanakka*, haljakka*, hallinta*, harsinta*, hartia, harmonia, harmonikka*

16: hankaaja, hangoittelija, halkoja, halava, harrastaja, harmaja

17:

Apaja on 16 ja herttua 20. Hekaheka 21:36, 4 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Äkkiseltään näyttää, että

• 5: -eiden/-eitten/-ien
• 6: -ien/-eiden/-eitten *-sanat on siirretty luokkaan 5
• 12: koira mutta 3+ t--Jyril 23:25, 15 March 2007 (UTC)avua Reply
• 13: -va, -sa -adjektiivit, -ma ?
• 14: kulkijan taivutus -oiden/-oitten/-ain
• 15: karahkan tavutus
• 16: -a : -ata

Joku logiikka tuossa on... Jos haluaa pelata varman päälle, niin voisi tehdä niin, että listaa epävarmat tapaukset johonkin sellaiseen taivutustyyppiin, joka on varmasti oikein. Nämähän ovat muutenkin tulkinnanvaraisia, ja jotkin taivutusmuodot ovat kadonneet käytöstä. Liian varovainen ei kannata olla, mutta täytyy varmistaa ettei tule valittua taivutusmuotoja, joita ei varmasti koskaan ole ollut käytössä.--Jyril 22:09, 4 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Jaa, Joukahaisesta löytyy ainakin herttuan, perunan ja apajan taivutukset. Niillä on joitain erikoisempia taivutusmuotoja, esim. herttuiden, peruniin, apajata.--Jyril 20:58, 4 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

May I invite you to Talk:világ under the above Section title? You may extend this invitation to anyone you like, perhaps including User:Jyril, for example. --KYPark 00:50, 10 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

You may better talk at Talk:valkea than Talk:világ. --KYPark 06:43, 10 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

I have replaced my yesterday's reply with a new one at Talk:valkea. --KYPark 03:07, 11 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

Joo, itsekin ajattelin samaa. Kuitenkin olisi jotenkin hyvä näyttää, missä kohtaa astevaihtelu tapahtuu. Templaatin parametrin arvoksi ei näköjään voi lisätä tekstiä, jossa on HTML:ää, joten tekstin väriä ei voi vaihtaa. Idea tässä oli se, että käyttäjä näkee taivutuksen muudossa . En tiedä, selventääkö vai sotkeeko se asiaa. Ehkä astevaihtelua ei kannata erikseen merkitä. Sen sijaan sijapäätteet olisi hyvä merkitä selkeästi. Alaotsikoiden muuttaminen vaatii templaattien koodin säätämistä, mutta se on suht' helppoa koska linkki näkyy vain siinä tapauksessa, että taivutustyyppi on annettu. --Jyril 23:25, 15 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

We already have Northern Sami - which is correct, or should we have both? SemperBlotto 16:55, 9 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

To be honest, I don't know, which is more correct. I have seen in English texts North Sami, North Sámi, Northern Sami, North Saami, Ruija and a number of other terms that all refer to same language. The smaller a language is, the more names it seems to have! Because Wikipedia is settled for Northern Sami, let's keep that as truth at least for time being. I'll change North Sami as "Alternative spelling" -page for Northern Sami. OK? Hekaheka 17:09, 9 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Jj-joo. Mul on ei niin vähänkään paha tapa toimia hetken aivoituksesta. Äkkiseltään ajatellen eihän noita sittenkään oo "järkevinä" johdoksina ku -himoinen, -kohtainen, -osainen, -sivuinen ja mitä vielä niitä on. Pahoittelen, yritän jatkos hetkeks pysähtyä kelaamaan ennen ku ohjaan sivuja muualle. (kiitos kärsivällisyydestä;) -- Frous 11:19, 26 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Sadly, I do not speak Finnish, so if Frous has already told you this: an anonymous editor has changed the target of the redirect himoinen, can you verify whether this is vandalism or not? More importantly, I believe that redirects are discouraged here. Is there a special reason for this one? — Beobach972 03:53, 11 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Terve. Joo, ihan järkevä ajatus, kannatan. Selventää kyl taivutusta, ku esimerkkiverbistä konkretisoituu paremmin taivutusmuotojen konsonanttivaihtelut suhteessa infinitiiviin. -- Frous 10:31, 14 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Njaa...se on kai vähän miten asiaa ajattelee, mutta itse olen ainakin käsittänyt täällä olevan käytännön sellaiseksi, että jos sanoilla on eri etymologiat, niin ne tulee laittaa erikseen. Ja substantiivin taivutusmuoto on eri asia kuin substantiivista johdettu verbi, eli kaksi eri etymologiaa. -- Frous 12:11, 14 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Ai, kiitos paljon :) -- Frous 11:11, 15 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

I don't suppose you could check this edit for me? It seems suspicious to me, but I don't know any Finnish.

Thanks in advance!

—Ruakh_TALK 19:52, 15 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

I'm not overly familiar with gay slang, but it looked suspicious enough, and I reverted it to the previous version. In fact, I'm quite sure that it wasn't an accurate expression, even if the Finnish word for "brother" has something to do with anal sex. I would imagine that something like "brotherly love" might come into question. Hekaheka 22:42, 15 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the note, I'll do that in future. Thryduulf 09:32, 21 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

If you refresh the page, you'll see that malta and romania are red lnks too. They were redirects. --EncycloPetey 07:37, 29 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Jjeps. Kiitos tiedosta. -- Frous 20:06, 2 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Dear Hekaheka,

Thank you very much for your fine contributions to the Finnish and Estonian name lists in the Name Appendix. Please do go on.

Best regards, Alasdair (Sanne van den Eijnde, [email protected])

hey! thanks for that etymology site I was looking for some :D Mallerd 14:16, 23 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

The templating with italbrac or context is important for the consistant display style and user ability to set preferences on it. In undoing it you are creating an inconsistent style. The "of a ..." phrase is a context, not part of the definition sentence of phrase itself. Robert Ullmann 15:27, 8 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

It seems that I may have misunderstood what context -template does. I believed it is equal to categorizing, because writing {{context|nautical|lang=fi}} in the beginning of a line adds the term into fi:Nautical -category. I just thought it would not make sense to create, for example, a fi:Of a difficult situation or state of affairs -category. Did I worry in vain? Or would it be correct in this case to use italbrac instead of context? Hekaheka 22:25, 8 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

It does both; if a parameter is a context label template (e.g. {{nautical}}), it will categorize (if and as appropriate). Other phrases do not create attempts at categorization, they are just formatted consistently. The functions have to be somewhat combined to do that formatting: using {{context|nautical}} {{italbrac|of a difficult situation}} produces (nautical) (of a difficult situation) which is not what is desired, we want (nautical, of a difficult situation) Robert Ullmann 13:42, 19 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

FYI: in English it is Croatian. Robert Ullmann 13:33, 19 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Please create separate entries and add {{delete}} to that combined one. --Connel MacKenzie 15:19, 2 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Yep. It was an error in the first place. My intention was to write an article on ennakko, which is now complete. Hekaheka 15:25, 2 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

OK, thank you...now zapped. --Connel MacKenzie 15:55, 2 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hi Hekaheka. I keep seeing people saying that we need more admins. Would you mind if I nominated you to be an admin? Dmcdevit·t 06:28, 5 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Admins have the ability to rollback edits with a single click, delete pages, protect pages, block users, patrol edits, import edits, and a few other smaller things. Note that I don't think it matters whether you work with english articles at all, to be an administrator. Perhaps Help:Sysop tools will be helpful (w:Wikipedia:Administrators is a bit longer). w:Wikipedia:Advice for new administrators and w:Wikipedia:Administrators' how-to guide might also be useful reading, if you're interested. Dmcdevit·t 13:01, 6 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hi, you should become an admin. I'm surprised you're not yet. Do you want me to nominate you? --Anatoli 22:26, 14 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Well, there have been suggestions to this end before. My comment remains the same: I have sufficient rights to do the editing that I want, and I do not see what additional value my adminship would bring to the project. I guess it would bring some additional responsibility as well? --Hekaheka 02:29, 15 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

It's up to you, of course. You seem to be a responsible person, besides you know what is right and acceptable here. You don't really need to do extra work but if you see a wrong entry, you can delete it, you can block vandals, you can protect pages, otherwise you're just the editor as usual. --Anatoli 02:55, 15 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

You need not take on more responsibility than you choose, except not to misuse the tools. It is occasionally efficient to roll back a vandal's contribution and block the apparent (usually obvious and hard-to-dispute) vandal. Protecting a page is another admin tool that can help. You are well-positioned to do this kind of thing for Finnish entries as well as English entries. For entries of either type you might be the first one to see a problem. As admin you can more efficiently correct it. DCDuring TALK 03:07, 15 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

The hours are great, but the pay sucks. Maybe we can give you some barnstars if you accept nomination. :D ~ heyzeuss 09:29, 15 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Is considered a standard, language specific header (see WT:POS). It is certainly needed for a number of languages other than English. As you probably know, English supposedly only has prepositions, the few exceptions are just considered irregular constructions, perfectly proper grammar nonwithstanding.

AutoFormat was mistakenly tagging this header right at the beginning, but would now remove the tag. aikana had never been tagged before (presumably you'd seen the tag elsewhere?) Robert Ullmann 11:36, 9 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Terve. Eikös epäreilu ole todennäköisempi sanan alkuperä? Eihän kukaan käytä yleisesti sanaa epäoikeudenmukainen puhekielessä.--Jyril 16:44, 9 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Jeps. Muutin. Hekaheka 19:56, 9 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Ei ole KOTUSin mukaan oikein, hygieeninen-sanassa on pitkä e. Artikkeli epähygieeninen oli jo olemassa, joten yhdistin ne. Kannattaa käyttää KOTUS-sanalistaa, niin ei tule niin helposti virheitä. Se on myös kätevä derived/related terms jne. lisäämisessä.--Jyril 22:24, 10 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Ok, kiitos. Enpä olisi tuota osannut epäillä, mutta niinhän tuo näyttää olevan. Hekaheka 22:27, 10 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

walesin kieli If you check Nykysuomen sanakirja, you will find that wales, walesinkieli, kymri and kymrinkieli are synonyms. Hekaheka 15:51, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi! "Nykysysuomen sanakirja" is a very old book. Today, I think, "wales" is a dialect of English in Wales. The Cymraeg is in English the Welsh and in Finnish "kymri" or "kymrin kieli".

Pse, see gaeli and fi:skotti

J.haukela, alias--84.250.83.193 05:18, 14 September 2007 (UTC) --84.250.83.193 17:08, 14 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hekaheka, I can use your help. I want to make a Wikipedia account. At my job, the IP is blocked and I can't make an account there, and my computer's down at home, as it has been for a couple of weeks. Is there anyway I can get an account there? Bakura 05:29, 26 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Frankly, I don't know what I could possibly do. In order to work with/edit Wikipedia and/or Wiktionary, the only thing you need is an internet connection, and that I cannot get for you. Hekaheka 09:12, 26 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Let me know if I can help a bit with economics terms. I've got a lot of not-too-current economics books, Pearce's "MIT Dictionary of Modern Economics", some of the New Palgrave volumes. My intuitive sense of the terms can be a little hazy, if not wrong, as I was in the RfV page about "classical". "Marshallian" would be "neo-classical". "Classical" really does get back to Smith, Ricardo, Say, et al. I'm not wedded to any particular means of including economic terminology in Wiktionary, nor to any large-scale insertion of economic jargon into W. DCDuring 23:16, 11 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hi. I notice you add a lot of Finnish translations. Could you starting using the {{t}} template when you do so from now on please? Doing so links to the specific language section of the word, and includes a link to the entry for that word on its language’s Wiktionary (so {{t}} should also be used for words which are homographic translations). Thanks. † ﴾^(u):Raifʻhār ^(t):Doremítzwr﴿ 13:33, 16 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Suomea kai sekin on, joten voisitko käyttää {{fi-noun}} etc. templaatteja? (Helsinki slang):in voi työntää {{context}}:iin jolloin siitä tulee standardin mukainen. Jotkut sanat, kuten duunari ja jeesata ovat jo niin yleiskieltä, että pelkkä "slang" tai peräti "colloquial" pitäisi riittää.--Jyril 19:00, 16 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Mietin tätä itsekin, mutta slangi ei taivu kaikissa sijamuodoissa säännöllisesti, ja siksi päädyin tuohon simppeliin merkintään, jota muuten näkee melko paljon englanninkieliselläkin puolella. Varsinkin verbien taivutus on erilaista kuin yleiskielessä, infinitiivistä alkaen. Totta on myös, että monet slangisanat ovat levinneet yleiskieleen, mutta se ei tee niistä ei-slangisanoja. Ei minulla ole oikein kunnon ratkaisua sillekään. Context-templaatti antaa mahdollisuuden laittaa näppärästi molemmat määritykset samaan pakettiin, mutta meneekö liian raskaaksi? Hekaheka 19:07, 16 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

No joo, ehkä taivutustemplaatit ei tässä kohtaa toimi (ainakin ne sanat jotka on mainittu KOTUSin listassa voisi kuitenkin taivuttaa)... Sen sijaan kannattanee käyttää kätevää {{infl}}-templaattia (syntaksi {{infl|fi|}}) jotta nämä sanat löytyvät oikeista kategorioista.--Jyril 21:35, 16 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

I just noticed that you are not a sysop, yet. Do you mind if I nominate you now? --Connel MacKenzie 05:14, 20 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for asking. I take that as a sort of recognition of the work I'm doing. To the question itself: I do not think I'm interested, at least not right now. As an ordinary user I have all the editing rights that I currently want. Hekaheka 20:11, 21 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Do tell us if you ever change your mind. It would be useful e.g. in editing protected templates, if the issue were to arise. DAVilla 14:26, 3 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Ok, I tell you when I grow out of my current limits. Hekaheka 17:26, 3 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Regarding ]: only sysops/admins can delete pages. —Ruakh_TALK 17:03, 2 September 2008 (UTC)Reply

BGC, if I'm not mistaken, is books.google.com. Hope this helps! sewnmouthsecret 19:32, 25 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Yep, it does. Thank you. Hekaheka 19:34, 25 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

AKA: GBS = “Google Book Search”. † ﴾^(u):Raifʻhār ^(t):Doremítzwr﴿ 00:19, 26 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Those definitions are not redundant in English. --EncycloPetey 22:09, 28 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

No big deal, if you think so, but the entry is not good the way it is either. I did not write that all three are redundant, only "sexual receptivity", which is roughly the same thing as "interest in sexual activity" in def # 2. Of the other two (sexual identity and sexual orientation) I wrote that they seem to be partial definitions of the wider term "sexuality". To say that sexuality is sexual identity is like saying that sex is genitals. They are important but they are not the whole thing. I did some background research (as I normally do before venturing to edit English articles) and I could not identify other dictionaries that would include "sexual orientation" or "sexual identity" as a definition to "sexuality". Sexual orientation has also its own entry, which would seem to support my line of thinking. Are you sure that you were not too quick in your judgment? Hekaheka 22:33, 28 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I am sure. This is a major issue where I live, and I have friends who specialize in gender studies. If a person asks about someone's sexuality, they may be asking about their sexual orientation, their gender identity, their sexual acitivity or any number of things. The word is synonymous with several more specific terms. The existence of those specific terms does not change the meaning of the synonym. --EncycloPetey 22:41, 28 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

OK, I believe you. Can I still bother you to provide an example sentence onthe sense "sexual receptivity", or even for all the senses if you like? It would help me and probably many others in doing the translations. Hekaheka 07:29, 29 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Please use {{t}} when entering your Finnish translations. All it takes is getting used to writing {{t|fi| instead of the ] — OK? Thanks. † ﴾^(u):Raifʻhār ^(t):Doremítzwr﴿ 22:44, 28 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, bud. I have used it quite a lot, but it is not so easy to change one's old ways, and I tend to forget it at times. Hekaheka 22:51, 28 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

I understand. Sorry to be brusque. † ﴾^(u):Raifʻhār ^(t):Doremítzwr﴿ 22:57, 28 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Please note that it isn't required, and straightforward cases will get updated by 'bot over time (no-one is going to do all of them by hand). Still a good idea, especially with multiple words or other cases. Robert Ullmann 23:26, 28 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

I don't suppose you could look over my recent attempts to clean up -ja and -jä? I don't know any Finnish, so had to work with what was already there …

Thanks in advance!
—Ruakh_TALK 21:01, 2 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hei, lisäillessäni kategorioita huomasin, että olet englanninkielisillä horsetail-määrityksissä käyttänyt family-sanaa genus-sanan sijaan. Family on tässä merkityksessä ns. väärä ystävä, koskapa englannin family (lat. familia) tarkoittaa suvun (genus) sijaan heimoa.--Jyril 17:44, 19 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Samperi, se oli ihan vahinko, tottakai juuri noin. Hyvä, kun huomasit. Hekaheka 17:51, 19 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Please do not add translations to any language section except English. Translingual entries are... translingual. That means that they apply in multiple languages. There may also be a local colloquial equivalent, but they are not Translations. Transligual sections, by their very nature, should never have a Translations section, just as we do not put Translations sections in any language other than English. --EncycloPetey 15:58, 24 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Okay EP: where then, does the (e.g. Finnish) name go? (the name of the species in a language, not necessarily "local" or "colloquial") Should be there somewhere. (And no, expecting someone to go through the English name of the species will not work, except in cases where English has a word that means specifically that exact species.) If not Translations, what? Robert Ullmann 16:06, 24 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Note that at Hepaticae you simply blanked content; you didn't move it to liverworts. Not good. Robert Ullmann 16:09, 24 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

There is an "official" Finnish term defined for every taxonomic family and other life grouping thereabove. A few examples from my botany book: Lycopodiaceae - liekokasvit, Selaginellaceae - mähkäkasvit, Isoëtaceae - lahnanruohokasvit , Hepaticae - maksasammalet etc. The Translingual terms are also used but they are generally only recognized by botanists. To my understanding there is no equivalent system in English. What should I do? Hekaheka 16:22, 24 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

An aside: this isn't just Finnish; Hebrew has the same thing. —Ruakh_TALK 18:09, 24 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Another example of the problem: aitotumainen ("true + nucleus + -ic") is a Finnish noun meaning "any species belonging to Eukaryota" and adjective meaning "belonging to Eukaryota". The plural of the word (aitotumaiset) also means "Eukaryota". How do I build an entry which helps a Wiktionary user to find the Finnish equivalent for "Eukaryota"? Hekaheka 16:42, 24 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

In my opinion, "translations" sections are OK for translingual entries if (and only if) there is no corresponding English term available. "Synonyms" section is fine if the synonymous term is also translingual (e.g. alternative taxonomic names) but it obviously doesn't work in the case of language-specific names (because "aitotumalliset" is not a synomym of "Eukaryota" in English). Simply not having links to language-specific articles is not a solution, nor is creating new types of headers.--Jyril 17:32, 24 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

how can i help? --TheRaccoon 18:23, 24 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Below are the links to the policies/guidelines that I think are relevant for the airline discussion (excluding the airline abbreviations, like SAS, TWA, Avianca, Qantas, Sabena, PanAm or Pan Am, Varig, LANChile, for which, arguably the abbreviation rules apply):

• Wiktionary:Criteria_for_inclusion#Names
• Wiktionary:Criteria_for_inclusion#Names_of_specific_entities
• Wiktionary:Criteria_for_inclusion/Brand_names

I almost think I understand this stuff, but the veterans here know it better. I hope I didn't waste my time on Lufthansa. Finnair seems harder, but the some of the same things that favored Lufthansa apply. From the PoV of an English-language author, it evokes IMHO "foreign", "international travel", "Cold War neutrality", "gateway to Russia/Soviet Union". American Airlines also seems harder because it is not an evocative name, not that useful for writers. And they might change brand name rules anyway. DCDuring 12:44, 1 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Terve. Hieno homma, että olet selvittänyt KO:n englanninkieliset vastineet ja vielä noinkin laajasti. :) -- Frous 12:56, 9 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hi. That quote you removed was one I entered earlier today, having removed the original SoP. I am surprised you think it also SoP.

1. • I thought it was a bad joke. But I was wrong. What happened in Sarajevo was far worse than anyone could have predicted.
     Why? (If you don't mind me asking). - Algrif 19:04, 11 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Of course I don't mind. It appears that the person telling the story had heard earlier about the mass murder in Sarajevo, but he did not believe it first. Instead, he believed it was a bad joke in its literal (SoP) sense. A bad joke defined in the gloss is "a situation that is badly planned, or illogical". I don't think anyone can believe that a mass murder is merely a badly planned situation. Hekaheka 19:16, 11 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Fair enough. I didn't check the source carefully enough. Cheers. - Algrif 12:19, 12 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

For redirects, just speedy {{delete}} if it can't be turned into a real entry. RFD is for discussion, there's nothing to discuss about redirects. Mainspace redirects get shot on sight, unless they go to a multi-word idiom, the only exception I know of. Cynewulf 15:44, 17 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Terve, viitsisitkö Tbotin käännöksiä tarkistaessasi korvata {{infl}}-templaatit {{fi-noun}} jne. templateilla niin artikkelit menevät oikeisiin luokkiin. Jälkikäteen onpi vaikea etsiä sanoja, joista taivutusmuoto puuttuu.--Jyril 18:17, 18 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Joo, ilman muuta, kun kerran pyydetään. Luulin, että tämä infl-ym -muoto olisi jotenkin suositeltava. Teenpä nyt sillä tavalla, että korjaan "my contributions" -listan avulla tähän mennessä tekemäni tarkistukset. Lähes kaikkien pitäisi löytyä tällä tavalla, koska kirjoitan yleensä kommenttiriville "checked tbot entry". Hekaheka 18:22, 18 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Minun ymmärtääkseni {{infl}} on tarkoitettu nimenomaan niitä kieliä varten, joilla ei ole omia header-templaatteja. Täytyy tunnustaa, että itseäni hieman vihlaisee käyttää epästandardimaisia templaatteja, mutta ovatpahan ainakin informatiivisempia.--Jyril 18:30, 18 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for catching the error. I was so bent on spiking the probably spurious senses that I didn't notice that my cite had the word as a noun. At least it has sometimes been used as a verb in the embargo sense. DCDuring 17:50, 20 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

It wasn't an error in the sense that the word seems to have also the verb sense "to lay an embargo" or "to embargo", but I didn't find an appropriate quote yet. Hekaheka 21:07, 20 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hei, pistä lang-parametrille arvo "Finnish" niin toimii. Ihan niin kuin {{plural of}}-templaatin kanssa (ks. esim. koirat). Adjektiivin tapauksessa käytä {{fi-form of}} -templaattia (suuret). Koska vertailumuodot taipuvat, käytä {{fi-adj}}-templaattia. Komparatiivia ja superlatiivia varten {{fi-adj}}-templaatissa on comparison=true -optio, jolloinka artikkeli ei listaudu Category:Finnish adjectives-luokkaan (kylmempi). Superlatiivilla sama juttu, tosin kannattaa muistaa, että se on identtinen monikon instruktiivin kanssa (sievin). Multiplikatiivi (-sti) on oma sanansa ja sen voi listata ====Derived terms==== -otsikon alle. Muista että silläkin on omat vertailumuotonsa, ks. {{fi-adv}} miten ne lisätään. {{comparative of}}-templaatilla on POS-parametri, jonka arvoksi voi laittaa adverb (kauniimmin; tai noun, vrt. rannempi!). Nominatiivia on ihan turha mainita missään, nominatiivin yksikkö on sana perusmuodossa ja monikko pelkkä plural (tämä koskee/pitäisi koskea kaikkia kieliä). Possessiivi- ja liitepartikkelimuodot voidaan lisätä {{fi-form of}}-templaattiin suffix=] -parametrilla. Näiden sanojen lisääminen sen sortin homma, että niitä ei kannata lisäillä kuin tapauksissa, joissa jokin toinen sana muistuttaa sitä (koskemme) tai se on hyvin yleinen (enkö).--Jyril 12:05, 29 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Niin, ja vertailumuotojen taivutukset onnistuu {{fi-form of}}:lla, kunhan type=adjective-parametrin tilalle pistää adjective comparative/superlative.--Jyril 12:09, 29 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Happy New Year! When you have a moment, could you please add Finnish and Swedish translations to the entry for hinder (both verb and adjective)? Do watch out for edit conflicts, though, since I'm asking several folks for help with this (including Jyril). --EncycloPetey 20:14, 1 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

Done. The textbook translation of to hinder is estää, which can always used without causing major misunderstanding. I added a couple of synonyms which deal with the different aspects of hindering. Hekaheka 21:12, 1 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi! You checked Tbot's entry on setäpuoli, confirming that the word may have the meaning of "husband of someone’s paternal aunt", i.e. "isän siskon mies". Do you have sources for this? For me, "setäpuoli" could plausibly mean just "father's half-brother", and that's what most Google hits seem to refer to, too. Or did you just not check the entry carefully enough? Malhonen 23:13, 6 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

The problem is that there's nowhere to check. NSK (Nykysuomen sanakirja) does not know the word, and different people use it differently. My first thought was the same as yours, but when I checked at work around the coffee table, this definition (which is originally somebody else's; it has come here through the English entry uncle) got some support. The logic was that only a blood relative can be setä, and therefore "isän siskon mies" is a setäpuoli. Perhaps the right solution would be to add "setä" as synonym to the first sense, and write a user note saying that the actual usage of the term is ambiguous. Hekaheka 07:18, 7 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

I see. Can you cite a real-world example of somebody actually using the word in the sense of the aunt's husband? I mean that if you ask people of what the word might mean, they might start philosophizing and give you a definition they would never use in real life, even if it would make sense according to somone's logic. In my experience, what people really use, is either tädin mies, or in some people's speech setä (as in referring to a married couple as Maija-täti ja Kalle-setä). Malhonen 10:00, 13 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

I have not been able to find any source where the word "setäpuoli" had been explicitely defined, which means that neither interpretation can be proven right or wrong. Besides, if we accept the translation "paternal half-uncle", we accept a whole lot of even more distant relatives under the term "setäpuoli". Hekaheka 21:54, 24 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Well, if you take a look at the Finnish Wikipedia article on Henry VI of England, you can see that "Henrik Beaufort" is supposed to be "Henrik V:n setäpuoli". After some research on the English Wikipedia I found out that Henry Beaufort's parents are John of Gaunt and Katherine Swynford, while Henry IV was born to John of Gaunt and Blanche of Lancaster. Henry V is the son of Henry IV and Mary de Bohun. That makes Henry Beaufort Henry V's father's half-brother. If Wikipedia could be used as a source here, this would make a good case on the meaning of "setäpuoli" as "father's half-brother". While the word hasn't been explicitly defined, you can easily deduce what its exact meaning is supposed to be. Any such examples in permanently recorded media? Malhonen 06:32, 27 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Yep, that's right and this usage is covered by the "half-uncle" sense. The original problem was "husband of someone’s paternal aunt". So far we have not been able to determine whether he should be called setä, setäpuoli, tädin mies or isän siskon mies. My point is that there's no such definition to be found, and all are used by actual speakers. Hekaheka 08:07, 27 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I understand and hadn't forgotten about the original question. My point in the previous comment was just that this Wikipedia example proves the definition of setäpuoli as one sort of a "paternal half-uncle" correct (a maternal half-uncle would presumably be "enopuoli"). But, I repeat, I have still never seen or heard any such example of somebody actually using the word in the sense of "paternal aunt's husband". There is a certain rationale behind the Wiktionary policy on including just words which can be attested. If it can't be attested, it's presumably too rare for Wiktionary anyways. (BTW, "tädin mies" gives several hundreds of Google hits, so that one is attested for "paternal aunt's husband" for the least.) Malhonen 05:25, 28 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Käytä mieluummin esimerkkisanoja, jotka on listattu täällä. Siis samalla tavoin kuin nominaalien kanssa. Kaikkia esimerkkisanoja ei tosin ole vielä lisätty, mutta niitä on helppo löytää KOTUSin sanalistasta. --Jyril 17:05, 7 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

hello HekaHeka do you know where i get finnish trans and put them here? --72.73.90.185 05:51, 8 February 2008 (UTC)--72.73.90.185 05:51, 8 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

I don't quite get you. What do you want to do? If you do not know Finnish, it's better you do not work with it, but concentrate in your own language instead. Would like to explain a little bit more in detail? Hekaheka 07:08, 8 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Could you check the IP edits to this entry, please? They look suspect to me. -- Algrif 18:52, 11 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

We keep "piped links" (with ]) around the names of languages that aren't generally well known. Galician, Asturian, Macedonian, Aromanian. Things like that. :) — opiaterein — 00:55, 16 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

Thanks for your suggestion for "reindeer", and for not messing up the table :)

The term "herd" is correct, and is already there for "deer". Since a reindeer is a type of deer, I've added cross-references from "reindeer" (and from "roe deer") to "deer" to prevent unnecessarily duplication. If, in the future, anyone finds specific terms to replace these cross-references, they can of course add them. — Paul G 21:28, 19 February 2008 (UTC)Reply

I can't transcribe most Cyrillic. Could you finish the transciption in the etymology if you can? There actually does seem to be adjectival use of abeam, same meaning according to dictionary (MW3) and in line with cites. Because we are kind of rigid about PoS, we show both PoS's even thought there is little to be gained from doing so. I'm not in love with this appraoch, but it seems to be consistent with what Wt's been doing lately. DCDuring TALK 15:30, 17 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Why not just put them in citation space? They are uses of the collocation. A couple are certainly illustrative of the etymology. DCDuring TALK 18:25, 7 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Did as you suggested. Hekaheka 19:50, 7 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

There's a BP discussion on Hebrew that may be of interest to you as a Finnish-entry author. See Wiktionary:Beer parlour#Treatment_of_other_types_of_compound_terms if you're interested.—msh210℠ 17:32, 9 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hello, I reverted your edit, the word is quite verifiable, see the etymology or look it up in the Oxford English Dictionary. WritersCramp 11:24, 15 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Just to keep both of you up to date, I have merged the first five senses as they all meant the same thing. Conrad.Irwin 11:57, 15 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Good, that's what I thought should be done. Hekaheka 18:41, 15 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Could you express your thoughts on the adequacy or inadequacy of what we have done with offend? We haven't attested the senses, but have tagged them along the lines of your original tag comment. I'd like to see if it could be cleared, but not without good reason. DCDuring TALK 18:17, 19 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Could you put some kind of statement at WT:RFV#offend ? DCDuring TALK 09:35, 20 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Moro. Taisit korjata noiden termien suhteet. Mutta...ainakin minun tietääkseni Suomen laissa olisi toisen ihmisen kuoleman epäluonnoliselle aiheuttamiselle neljä eri rikosnimikettä, eli nuo kuolemantuottamus, surma, tappo, murha...vai onko rikoslain viimeisimmässä uudistuksessa, joka on toteutettu tietääkseni ihan viime vuosina, tapon tilalle tullut termi surma ja taposta luovuttu lakitekstissä? Kiitos, jos tiedät minua paremmin. :) -- Frous 05:08, 29 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Selvä. Mutta miksi otit tapon murhan ja surman välistä, sillä surmahan on tappo lieventävien asianhaarojen vallitessa ja murha tappo jos se tehdään "vakaasti harkiten -- raa'alla tai julmalla tavalla" jenejene, eli tappo olisi törkeydeltään niiden välissä? Eri rikosnimikkeistähän on kuitenkin kyse (jos tappo tehdään -- tekijä on tuomittava murhasta, jolloin murha on rikosnimike), joten laitoin ne "törkeysjärjestykseen". -- Frous 09:23, 30 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Ja vielä: minä käyttäisin (law)-kohdassa mielelläni käännöksissä myös tätä lähdettä (oikeuministeriön käännös — epävirallinen koska englantihan ei ole virallinen kieli Suomessa), korjasinkin tapon, surman ja kuolemantuottamuksen käännökset sen mukaisiksi. -- Frous 09:46, 30 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Just as a quick note, in English the abbreviations "WWI" and "WWII", nor their expansions "World War I" and "World War II" do not take "the". In contrast "First World War" and "Second World War" do take "the". For example "in WWI" and "in World War I" but "in the First World War". Thryduulf 21:21, 27 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

Moikka. Mä vähä mietin tota sivua, sillä juomattomuushan on johtuu -uus-liitteellä negatiivisesta agenttipartisiipista juomaton...?? Ja täällähän on jo sivut -ma, -ton ja -uus. :P Turha sivu?? -- Frous 12:25, 4 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

Njaa. Sivu häilyy kyl mun mielest ihan sillä rajalla, mut ton suffiksirakenteen selvittämisen perusteel sivun vois kyl toistaiseks säilyttää. :) Jotenka jotenka...olisiko tähän tarkoitukseen hyvä luoda oma luokka tyyliin Finnish suffix clusters -mattomuuden kaltaisille takaliiterykelmille, jolloin -mattomuus kuuluisi vain tohon "erikoisluokkaan", joka olisi Finnish suffixes -luokan alaluokka? -- Frous 13:52, 4 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

Moikka taas, mä lueskelin näitä ja mun mielestä esille-sivulla olevat verbi–adverbi-parit ei sinällään täytä noita ns. idiomaattisuuskriteerejä (kts. kohta Idiomaticity) eli niille ei tulisi luoda omia sivuja, koska adverbin parina olevat verbit ilmaisevat liikettä ja adverbi jo sinällään on liikeadverbi jolla on konkreettinen ja kuvaannollinen merkitys (ja toi selitys on jo selitysrivillä). Mitä mieltä ite oot? Lisäks – tää on kyl vaan makuasia:) – mutta ite pitäisin esille-sivun viimesimmän version sanaparien esitystapaa esteettisempänä, mustaaminen tekee tekstist mun mielest vähä liian räikeen. En muista ootko sä tai kenties Jyril mustannu noita rivejä mut aattelin vaan selittää muokkauspolitiikkani, kun oon niitä ite muokannu mielestäni hienommiks. :) -- Frous 15:47, 5 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

Vastattakoon tähän: jos verbiin liittyvä adverbi tms. ei ole itsestäänselvää muotoa tai ne muodostavat idiomin, sanapari kuuluu lisätä erikseen. Niin kuin sanoit, taitaa olla vähän makuasia milloin ko. kriteerit täyttyvät. Esille-sanaa ei taida esiintyä muualla, joten kyllä verbi + esille -muotojen pitäisi läpäistä inkluusiokriteeri... Vältetään lihavointia, se rumentaa tekstiä, ja erityisesti kursivoitua lihavointia. Poikkeuksena sanat esimerkkilauseissa. --Jyril 18:48, 28 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

Please do not add links to example sentences given after definitions. --EncycloPetey 00:52, 11 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

OK, thanks for advice.--Hekaheka 08:50, 11 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

Have you noticed the few new cleanup items listed at Wiktionary:Categorizing#Finnish? I can handle French, Latin, and even Turkish at times, but not Finnish, so your help would be appreciated. --EncycloPetey 06:43, 16 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

Most of them seemed to have at least a POS category (<fi-noun> etc.). I fixed the ones that didn't. Do you mean that there should be a category in addition to that? --Hekaheka 07:37, 16 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

Could you use the {{term}} template in etymology sections? Makes the text prettier... --Jyril 08:44, 21 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

I don't believe I ever edited those pages. Hyacinth 04:22, 19 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

The pages have been deleted in October 2007, so it does not really matter. --Hekaheka 06:52, 19 August 2008 (UTC)Reply

Terve :) I wonder if you could help me translate a little Finnish. They're some old journal entries of my friend Leena who died. It's less than 1000 words. I just wondered, 'cause you're obviously interested in both languages. Equinox 23:56, 2 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

I've posted the text on my talk page. Thanks a lot for your help, and of course there's no urgency; just whenever you find some time. Equinox 13:52, 5 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

Your translation is fine. I appreciate it! Equinox 21:05, 7 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

By the way, lankapuhelin ("wire phone") would be landline. Equinox 21:03, 6 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thank you, I'll add that to the Wiktionary. --Hekaheka 21:06, 6 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

I'm deleting the noun sense of evil laugh, as it's failed RFD. Note that käkätys is listed as a translation. I'm informing you, so that this info doesn't get lost completely.—msh210℠ 23:53, 26 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

You've combined definitions pertaining to Ancient Greek culture with one pertaining to modern Greek culture. --EncycloPetey 06:25, 28 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

OK now? --Hekaheka 10:01, 28 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I just removed this definition, as I couldn't imagine how the noun dandy could be defined as the adjective foppish (and fop is listed among synonyms), but in the process I also removed the translation table for the definition, which contained two "red" Finnish words, so I wanted to let you know in case you wanted to treat them in some other way. --Duncan 23:11, 12 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for info. Keikari means fop or dandy. Added an entry for it. --Hekaheka 07:23, 13 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

In your edit you wrote: "removed a rare German translation beaten in Google by 150:1 by the one left". But to be correct, you removed the translation of video game console and left the translation of just game console. Spielkonsole => Videospielkonsole is exactly like game console => video game console. Mutante 08:04, 30 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Yes, but according to the entry game console (and to my limited experience) "video game console" and "game console" are the same thing. If that's not correct, there is more fixing to do than just the German translation. Btw, also in English "game console" seems more widely used than "video game console", probably because the word "video" is redundant. --Hekaheka 08:13, 30 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi, POS categories go to Category:{Language name} {POS} category (e.g. Category:Meänkieli nouns), topical categories to Category:{language code}:{Topic} (Category:fit:Birds). Use {{infl}} for POS categories so you don't have to type it by yourself. If the language code template (in this case {{fit}}) is missing the template breaks but you can fix it by creating a new code template by copying and modifying an existing one. --Jyril 19:01, 14 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks a lot! --Hekaheka 20:23, 14 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

This has already been discussed in the Tea Room. the conclusion was that the noun senses are overwhlemingly capitalized, even if the particular quote chosen for illustration is not. --EncycloPetey 07:28, 16 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

I see. I did not know that. I checked other dictionaries and they seemed to prefer the non-capitalized form. I'll reverse that part soon. Please don't just undo everything I did, there were other changes which I believe are valid. --Hekaheka 07:33, 16 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Damn it, you did it already. The adjective sense and Finnish translations are gone. --Hekaheka 07:36, 16 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Your capitalization and translation additions should still be there. You had removed the adjective translations yourself. The adjective should be un-capitalized. --EncycloPetey 07:36, 16 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

I've put the adj translations on the philistine page. The interwiki links were wrong too (from when the page was moved), so I corrected those as well. --EncycloPetey 07:48, 16 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Actually, we use the language name Azeri, not Azerbaijani. See {{az}}. --EncycloPetey 01:03, 19 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hm, but there's also a language code for Azerbaijani, azb. --Hekaheka 01:10, 19 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

We prefer the 2-letter code when there is one. The code "azb" is only for the southern dialect of the langauge. --EncycloPetey 01:11, 19 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Ok, good to know. According to Robert Ullman's list there are 83 Azerbaijani translations in the English entries. I suppose it's better to change them to Azeri, if I ever see them? --Hekaheka 01:16, 19 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yes, although Robert is equipping AF to make these changes for us. I looked at the edit history for {{azb}}; an anon had changed it, so I have restored the form we use, and have protected the template to avoid this problem in future. --EncycloPetey 01:19, 19 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

This is just a "thank you" message for all the translations you add to the Word of the Day each day. Few other contributors have so consistently helped to improve these entries, and I wanted you to know that all your work is appreciated. --EncycloPetey 06:06, 16 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for encouragement, it's always nice to get some. --Hekaheka 09:20, 16 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi. There are two cities in Russia. Rostov-na-Donu is a centre of a region and Rostov is a smaller town. I checked Wikipedia, the Finnish version says Rostov-na-Donu as well. Kiitos. --Anatoli 13:07, 16 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the comment, but very few people actually say or write Rostov-na-Donu in Finland. On the maps and news (seldom, I need to admit) it seems to be almost always Rostov. The criteria of Wiktionary and Wikipedia are slightly different. Wikipedia tries to be absolutely correct and unambiguous, whereas Wiktionary tries to catch the language that people actually use, with all its ambiguities. For your other point, it's not so uncommon that several localities share one name. As an example, there are two Helsinkis in Finland, and I believe there are about 23 Barcelonas in the world. --Hekaheka 13:47, 16 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

What you are saying is common for any language, Rostov-na-Donu is also called colloquially Rostov in Russia, especially in Rostov-na-Donu itself and it is the centre of Rostov oblast but it's necessary to make this distinction between Rostov in Yaroslavl oblast and Rostov-na-Donu. --Anatoli 22:10, 16 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Please do not use {{top}}, {{mid}} and {{bottom}} for translation sections. These templates are deprecated because they conflict with ISO language codes. Instead, use {{trans-top}}, {{trans-mid}} and {{trans-bottom}}. -- Prince Kassad 13:51, 22 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

OK --Hekaheka 14:07, 22 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'm just drunk and curious. Does this name have a meaning in Finnish? P.S. Your English is excellent. I would not previously have imagined any non-native speaker saying "___ look like clear keepers to me". Equinox ◑ 23:00, 26 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

It's just my nickname doubled, like Jack > Jackjack. Well, and thanks for the compliment. --Hekaheka 23:12, 26 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I have made some changes to the inflection templates as you have probably already noticed. The inflection type is now seen on the table header if it is included is set in the template (see karhu for example). I have also started moving the relevant Wiktionary:Finnish inflection types/nouns pages to Appendix:Finnish declension types (cf. Appendix:Finnish declension types/valo). One page/template should be enough. I also created a pseudo inflection table for entries that don't need own inflection tables ({{fi-decl-see}}, cf. hallinto-oikeus). --Jyril 13:08, 20 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, and fi-decl-see is a great innovation. --Hekaheka 15:22, 20 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

No offence but I don't like the ides of {{fi-decl-see}}. Even if we have a Finnish word "x" with declension and another word which is simply "y+x" I still think that "y+x" should be treated equally. 50 Xylophone Players talk 12:16, 29 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Interesting. Why do you think so? BTW, "if" in your comment is unnecessary. As far as I know the template is only used with compound terms, i.e. words that are of the form w = y+x. --Hekaheka 17:06, 29 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

I guess for ease of finding things for everybody that uses this site; something slightly like the reason that it has been agreed that romaji entries are a must for Japanese. Although, romaji is really included because it isn't just transliteration of Japanese. If somebody comes along who knows nothing about Finnish (or perhaps any language using cases for that matter) who for some reason decides to type in the word tilinylitysten they won't know that it's the genitive plural of tilinylitys (heck, they might not even know what genitive means). 50 Xylophone Players talk 18:02, 29 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

P.S. I might be leaning towards agreeing to its use in entries like Jyril's example.

We will never be able to serve well someone who knows nothing about Finnish. The inclusion of all forms of all Finnish words, including compound terms, is a huge task. I have estimated that there are about 20 million different forms, if one does not count the variation caused by suffixes, of which the most important ones are possessive suffixes and the interrogative suffix -ko. Taking only these into account one by one would increase the number of noun and adjective forms alone to more than 40 million. Other suffixes and the combinations thereof would easily bring the total to more than 100 million. The verb forms would probably double this figure. --Hekaheka 23:31, 29 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hmmm, I think didn't think enough before saying what I did. Anyway, perhaps a more relevant point is the fact that considering that according to the website ethnologue there are 6,912 languages, by "signing up" to being an omnilingual dictionary we have already agreed to include billions of entries. So, form ofs like these and toponyms (which I am going to strongly fight for the inclusion of) are just another drop in the bucket as someone said here in a similar argument. 50 Xylophone Players talk 07:43, 30 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

But many of these 6912 languages are scarcely attested, exempli gratia there are only three extant words from Vandal. There are numerous other examples as well. So we can't count for an average 10^6 words from each language, especially considering the fact that many of them are nor written. The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 07:48, 30 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

Even so 295 languages (obviously not the real total but that which is given on our main page) is a lot (even excepting the few we may have which exist today as mere virtually forgotten shards of what they once were), since hypothesising that we have entries for 295 languages which are alive and well, going from your average figure it amounts to 295x10^6 entries. 50 Xylophone Players talk 12:39, 30 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

I think this discussion is growing to a policy question, and deserves to be discussed on a wider forum. I will bring it to the Beer Parlour in near future, probably next weekend. --Hekaheka 05:16, 31 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

As somebody (probably Jyril) has changed the Finnish declension templates so that they do not create 30 red links every time they are applied this discussion is not required anymore. Using {{fi-decl-see}} does not provide any benefits over the declension type-specific templates. --Hekaheka 16:24, 10 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Ugh, just a plea: when you're not adding declension/conjugation tables, could you please use the {{fi-noun}} etc. templates? They will add the hidden Category:Finnish nouns that lack declension type categories, otherwise it is really hard to find the incomplete entries. When the tables exist, we should use the standard {{infl}} templates... Or, even better, we could create new maintenance templates which add those categories. --Jyril 17:11, 8 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Vandalism is not a ticket for insulting users. Just let them do their work, they'll be blocked shortly anyway. No need to bother with them. -- Prince Kassad 08:43, 4 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hello Hekaheka -- Many thanks for this contribution. It is gratifying and reassuring to see that the distinct senses of morality which I entered in English translate into distinct senses and terms in Finnish. Thanks again. -- WikiPedant 16:17, 27 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thank you, and thanks for the great job in writing the English definitions. It is not always easy to understand the difference between alternative definitions, but in this case they were clear. The citations were very useful. --Hekaheka 21:06, 27 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

Could I convince you to take a look at Category:English proverbs? We don't seem to have any particular criteria by which items enter this category or are excluded from it. Judging from the discussion at WT:BP#Place names it seems increasingly clear that almost anything that might be of interest for translation is a candidate for inclusion. To keep us from being overrun we would like to have some easy-to-apply criteria that keep out junk, preferably allowing patrolers to speedy delete things with a clear rationale and not require extended discussion at either RfD or RfV. I don't know whether we would want to include the patriotism quote or not. If you'd like we could use the RfD process to get some opinion on this, from which we might infer what the sense of the community was. I have been working through the English L3/PoS headers Proverb, Phrase, Idiom, and Interjection to try to make some sense of what is there. DCDuring TALK 11:02, 28 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

So it's you who has been promptly completing the Finnish translation requests! Well done! One question though - why did you put "n.a." under TESL? Tooironic 14:17, 29 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

I did it because there's no Finnish acronym that would mean Teaching English as a Second Language, nor was I able to find a Finnish text where the acronym TESL would have been used. Therefore I concluded that the translation does not exist. If anyone needed that term in Finnish, he or she would say englannin opetus toisena kielenä, but would certainly not abbreviate it as EOTK. --User:Hekaheka July 31 2009

Interesting. I'm very much in the dark about European language translations, but with Chinese at least, there are no equivalent acronyms (well, abbreviations really, considering its an ideographic language), so I just put down a literal translation of what it means ("Teaching English as a Second Language"). At least this way a Chinese reader would understand the meaning of the word TESL. I wonder if that approach work in Finnish as well? Tooironic 01:04, 2 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

That's one possibility, but I don't know what's our policy in this respect. Also, I don't know how useful a word-by-word translation would be. An interested user can easily do it himself by combining teaching + English + as a + second + language. But feel free to copy my translation from above, if you think it would be useful.

Another aspect is that the term TESL is not fully understood by its parts even in English. According to Wikipedia article TESL refers to the methods and programs for "teaching English to students whose first language is not English and who live in a region where English is the dominant language and natural English language immersion situations are apt to be plentiful". Another acronym - TEFL - is used of the method for teaching English as a foreign language in a non-English speaking environment. This explains why the concept does not seem to exist in Finnish, not at least in the Finnish spoken in Finland (perhaps the Finnish American community has a word for it, but if they do, is it to be classified as Finnish or Finglish?). Anyway, I will add a gloss and Pedia link to the article on TESL. --Hekaheka 07:06, 2 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Could you please tidy this page someone just created? It's using en-noun instead of the appropriate Finnish template, and the plural is wrong. Equinox ◑ 18:22, 30 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

Done --Hekaheka 18:36, 30 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

By the way, I don't suppose you know any good resource (preferably something professionally made, with audio) for learning Finnish from English, do you? I was hoping to get the Finnish Rosetta Stone, but they don't have one, annoyingly. Equinox ◑ 21:58, 30 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

The University of Helsinki runs courses in "Finnish for foreigners". They have produced this material for self-study: . Let me know what you think about it. You can find more by googling "Finnish for foreigners online". Good luck and patience! According to the US Foreign Office, Finnish is one of the toughest languages for an American to learn. --Hekaheka 22:24, 30 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

I've finally got started with that Web site. At least the pronunciation makes sense. Equinox ◑ 14:47, 15 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

to continue getting off the subject, an excellent website for grammar is here: Heyzeuss 15:54, 28 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Alas, I don't seem to have got far with this. OTOH, I now own a "teach yourself Finnish" book (which I've so far avoided, because it starts with everyday phrases and I would prefer to dive into the grammar) and an en/fi dictionary. I was trying to translate a news article, one word at a time, as a beginner exercise, but it was very hard. Erm I can do the pronunciation too. Baby steps. Equinox ◑ 00:32, 9 January 2012 (UTC)Reply

thanks for adding the new article. when i began learning finnish, this was the first word (of many) that i couldn't find in my dictionary. the structure of the language is such that a dictionary is quite useless without some knowlege of the morphology. Heyzeuss 13:33, 10 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your kind notice. It's good to see that somebody is interested in what one is doing. --Hekaheka 05:24, 11 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Also, thank you for adding kermanekka. Heyzeuss 15:37, 28 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

You wrote (on Finnish requested entries): "nam = yum, yummy? Nam is an interjection, thus yum is better." But what is the problem with interjections? They count as words, right? Equinox ◑ 22:10, 14 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

No problem with interjections, of course. I meant that the interjection 'yum' is a better translation for the interjection 'nam' than the adjective 'yummy'. Hekaheka, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Please do not use this except when two words are exact synonyms. The words "brownnose" and "flatter" are NOT exact synonyms. --EncycloPetey 05:05, 10 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi Hekaheka,

Could you take another look at this edit? I don't understand why you removed sense #2, and your change to the logic expression makes it a much less meaningful example IMHO. (TBH, I'm kind of tempted to just roll back the change …)

—Ruakh_TALK 13:54, 15 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

OK, I'll take a look, but right now I got to go somewhere else. Whatever you do, don't revert the formula in usage notes. It was simply wrong. --Hekaheka 14:03, 15 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

No, it was quite correct. (Maybe you're confusing → (“implies”) with ↔ (“if and only if”)?) —Ruakh_TALK 14:20, 15 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

All right, I reverted the definitions, although I don't see how they were better. My understanding was that "exclusive disjunction" and "exclusive or" are slightly different things, the latter being an operator or connective that produces the former, but as a non-native I don't want to argue about it. The idea of my editing was that the definitions of exclusive or and inclusive or should be construed in the same way. But I still claim that the formula was incomplete as it was. Exclusive or does not specify which of the two elements is correct. The formula only covered the "x and not y" -case, but omitted the "y and not x" -part. --Hekaheka 21:40, 15 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

I've been adding these to some entries I've been working on if they seem interesting and good enough to be provide a stable base for translations in my opinion. Have they been adequate in your opinion? DCDuring TALK 13:05, 5 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for taking the advice. However, it appears that I was wrong in the first place. The undesired functioning of assisted translation with a trreq-template does not depend on leaving or not leaving the space. It seems that the only way to make it work with multiple translations is to add the first translation, then update the page and continue only after that with additional translations. --Hekaheka 13:56, 9 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

The culprit may actually be the colon that you tend to add after trreq-templates. I just did two trreqs which didn't have the colon and did not encounter any problems. --Hekaheka 21:34, 11 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi there. Did you mean to make the derived terms listed of samperi the same as the title of the entry? Cheers, Razorflame 04:23, 22 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Nope. Thanks for noticing. --Hekaheka 08:19, 22 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

No problem. Cheers, Razorflame 20:11, 22 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yeah just watch CSI or another police series, they use 'slug' all the time. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:27, 29 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

They might, but in many countries foreign TV series are dubbed. I think one should not assume too many things when working with a dictionary. --Hekaheka 17:30, 29 November 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi, nice to see you've stayed active. :) A few suggestions:

1. Could you use etymology templates such as {{term}}, {{compound}}, {{prefix}}, {{suffix}}, and {{confix}}? They also include the relevant categories (see bioyhteensopivuus, bioyhteensopiva, kahvipapu). Please don't add links in {{infl}} template unless there's spaces/hyphens (in which case please do that.) I started that habit, sorry for that. Much better to use the compound template in etymology section. Genitive forms can be retained by using alt1= parameter (kahvinpapu: {{compound|kahvi|alt1=kahvin|papu|lang=fi}}). In the cases where there is no clear root we can use alt1= parameter and empty section (agressiivinen: {{suffix||alt1=aggressiivi-|inen|lang=fi}}). I think the {{prefix}} template should be limited to words that are clearly suffixes and have no basic forms (ylä-, etu-, epä-, nano-, ...). --Jyril 11:21, 6 December 2009 (UTC)Reply
2. The {{etycomp}} is complicated and redundant, I'm going to remove it. Any help of converting it into the above-mentioned templates is appreciated.

   There are no Finnish entries left using this template, but there are almost 150 in other languages, mainly Irish. It seems to have some virtue after all. --Hekaheka (talk) 14:23, 6 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

3. When you use inflection templates, could you include whole gradation in the gradation section (e.g., {{fi-decl-valo|ka|tt|t|o}} instead of {{fi-decl-valo|kat|t||o}}). I think it is a "righter" way to do, different ways could be problematic if for example a bot is used to determine the gradation type. Also, note that I changed {{fi-conj-tulla}} so that the internal 'e' is no longer located in the gradation section ({{fi-decl-tulla|teeske|nn|nt|e|l|ä|y|ö}} etc.).
4. I think ===Alternative spellings=== section should be reserved for words which only differ from spelling (shakki, šakki, sakki). Words that are otherwise identical should go under ===Alternative forms=== (and that means many different similarities such as kahvipapu, kahvinpapu; omenoiden, omenoitten; steriloida, sterilisoida). Thanks. --Jyril 11:21, 6 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi there Hekaheka. Which part of speech is the declension for the word rakentava? Thanks, Razorflame 14:29, 7 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Same declension is valid for both the participle and the adjective. That's why I put it before both. User:Hekaheka 14:55, 7 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

So if one were to create a form of entry from this declension table, what would they write? Would they write both Adjective and Verb headings with the same information? Razorflame 15:02, 7 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hmm, a good question. Participles behave in a sentence as if they were adjectives, i.e. they follow the number and case of the word which they qualify, and are often comparable. Some, as for example rakentava, have come to mean something that is not directly inferable of their quality of being participles, and consequently they are regarded as adjectives or, in some cases, nouns (ex. kuollut) in their own right. The line between them is anything but clear. I think the form of -entries could be written for the participle alone, but some other approach might be as justified. Maybe we should ask User:Jyril, if he has an opinion on this. --Hekaheka 18:13, 7 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Eh, I barely followed what you were saying because I'm not a big educated person. I'm a student still learning. Anyways, yes, I think we should ask Jyril about it because he might know something. Cheers, Razorflame 18:18, 7 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Well, it is a matter of taste where we put the inflection template(s). The example is ok for me except that I would put it behind the adjective as L3 header. --Jyril 05:41, 8 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi there Hekaheka. Can you add the declension template to the page that I just created? Thanks, Razorflame 06:13, 8 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

For rakentavin, I decided to just say that it was the instructive plural of the adjective, which is true, but because of the problem above, I was not sure about whether or not to include the participle declension on the same page. By the way, can you add the declension table to that page, too? Razorflame 06:22, 8 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

So I just made this entry, and I am having trouble figuring out which declension it would use. I know that words that end in -i use -rist, right? What does a word like pakettidata use? Thanks, Razorflame 06:37, 8 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Sorry to bother you again, but did I select the correct declension table for this word? Thanks, Razorflame 06:45, 8 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'll check this and the previous one later, because I've got to go now. Awaiting this, another aspect: I don't think one should add too many entries in a language that one knows little of. It would be better to add trreq-templates in the translations sections of the English entries, as is used e.g. in the entry inoffensive. I check Finnish trreq's regularly. --Hekaheka 06:48, 8 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Don't worry. I only wanted to see if I could select the correct declension template for an entry, which I believe I did. Anyways, I'll stop adding Finnish words now :). Cheers, Razorflame 06:50, 8 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

The declension is right but I'm not sure about the translation. I would normally translate "imperishable" as pilaantumaton. To continue the discussion above, the declension rules may be quite tricky. Compare e.g. muki and tuki or vastaus vs. kalleus. --Hekaheka 22:26, 8 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

I used a single translation service for the translation, so the translation might be incorrect, but I used the same translation for pakettidata, which evidently was the right translation, so maybe it could be correct. Anyways, thanks for the massive amount of help so far :). Cheers, Razorflame 18:53, 11 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

By the way, I wrote the entry for pilaantumaton :). Razorflame 22:10, 11 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

How did I do on pilaantumaton? Cheers, Razorflame 06:09, 12 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

A grammatical question that you might be able to help with: Wiktionary:Feedback#paljon. —Stephen 06:02, 10 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Done --Hekaheka 08:10, 10 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi there. On Jyril's talk page, I asked this question: I looked at the pieni declension index and it said that it was used on the nominals that ended in -ri, however, Jyril said that grammari would be a paperi declension type instead of pieni declension type. Can you please explain to me why paperi is used instead of pieni? Thanks, Razorflame 20:31, 12 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

There's really no explanation of the kind which one could formulate as a rule. As I tried to show with the muki vs. tuki -example above, two words that look almost the same may be inflected differently. I, as a native speaker, know which is which but I honestly cannot give any rational reason why there should be this difference. That's why I want to give this advice again: don't mess with languages that you don't know. I understand that some other people have given to you this advice before! --Hekaheka 20:38, 12 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'm trying to learn Finnish, though, so I really want to learn things, and I feel like this is a good way to learn things about the language. Razorflame 20:39, 12 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, maybe I was too harsh. You said you were looking at the examples, and did not understand why there was this difference, and this provoked the question, which is all right of course. Let's try to look it this way: the explanation means that some words ending with -ri may be inflected that way, but it does not mean all words ending -ri should be inflected that way. --Hekaheka 20:43, 12 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Ok. I looked on the appendix sections for both risti and paperi and found that risti is used with -i ending words that have two syllables, whereas paperi is used with -i ending words that have three syllables. Am I right? Razorflame 20:48, 12 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'm afraid it's not as simple as that. Nuori has two syllables but is inflected like pieni, whereas vuori is inflected like pieni in one sense and like risti in the other, and muori is always of risti -type. --Hekaheka 21:10, 12 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

I see. Finnish is complicated :o. I think I'll just leave Finnish alone for now :) Razorflame 21:14, 12 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

"High school graduate" is a broad definition. American high schools include university-bound students as well as vocation oriented students. Some American students just take harder classes and get better grades. A high-school diploma is not as prestigious as a lukio diploma. Having said that, I don't recommend changing the gloss.

What are the Finnish words for a graduate of ammattikoulu, a graduate of ammattikorkeakoulu, a lukio diploma, an ammattikoulu diploma, and an ammattikorkeakoulu diploma?

Heyzeuss 21:49, 12 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

That's a bit complicated. Officially ammattikoulu does not exist anymore (see usage note in ammattikoulu). There's no one word for its graduates, but the term depends on the field of study. Some typical degrees are: lastenohjaaja, merkonomi, datanomi, automekaanikko, asentaja, metsuri, hammasteknikko, lähihoitaja and kokki .

The graduates of ammattikorkeakoulu are also named by professional field to e.g. tradenomi, insinööri, agrologi, sairaanhoitaja, kätilö, rakennusmestari. Officially, the titles include the abbreviation AMK in brackets, e.g. "restonomi (AMK)".

By finishing a lukio one earns a lukion päättötodistus as a diploma, which is completed by ylioppilastutkintotodistus or more simply ylioppilastodistus when one passes the national matriculation examination (ylioppilastutkinto). An ammattikoulu diploma is also called päättötodistus, and from ammattikorkeakoulu one gets an ammattikorkeakoulun tutkintotodistus or more simply tutkintotodistus.

Gosh, what a number of redlinks! --Hekaheka 06:52, 13 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Not that I really know how to find them, but I've found some articles that just use :see foo instead of this template. Do replace them if you can find them. Cheers. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:16, 13 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

OK. --Hekaheka 13:17, 13 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi there. Can you add the definition for heliometri (in Finnish). It means heliometer. Thanks, Razorflame 20:40, 23 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Done. --Hekaheka 20:57, 23 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks :) Razorflame 21:15, 23 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi there. Can you please make this entry here? Thanks, Razorflame 18:08, 24 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for making this entry :) Razorflame 22:34, 28 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi there Hekaheka. Can you please make harjoitusliike for me please? I need to know what this word means so that I can know what the English equivalent of the word is so that I can add it on another Wiktionary. Thanks, Razorflame 22:34, 28 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure about the English equivalent. Maybe you'll know when I explain. The word is a compound of harjoitus (“exercise”) + liike (“movement”), and it means a body movement which is performed mainly for the purpose of training, such as movements performed by an athlete when he/she develops his/her body for the sport, or a movement that is particularly suitable to develop a certain muscle. A man interested in the looks of his body may perform long series of harjoitusliike to develop his abs. --Hekaheka 06:41, 29 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

That sounds an awful lot like what we call a "repetition". A repetition is a set movement that is made during an exercise. For example, one makes 10 repetitions of lifting a ten pound dumbbell over his shoulder. Does that sound like what that word might mean? Razorflame 08:26, 29 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure. Repetition is toisto in Finnish, but for example "lifting a ten pound dumbbell over one's shoulder" is a harjoitusliike, which can be performed only once or repeated several times. An example bit of conversation might go like this:

• Mitä harjoitusliikkeitä olet tehnyt tänään? - Nostelin viiden kilon painoja ja tein punnerruksia. --Kuinka monta toistoa teit? --- Kaksi kahdenkymmenen sarjaa kumpaakin.
  • Which X have you done today? - I lifted ten pound dumbbells and did push-ups. -- How many repetitions did you do? --- Two sets of twenty of each. --Hekaheka 09:28, 29 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Could "X" simply be called exercise motion? If it can, is "repetition" a synonym to it? --Hekaheka 09:37, 29 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, X could be called exercise motion. I'm not sure if repetition is a synonym to it, though. Cheers, Razorflame 09:47, 29 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

I think the difference is that "repetition" is an act of performing an "exercise motion". The Finnish translations would thus be toisto and harjoitusliike. --Hekaheka 09:50, 29 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Sounds good to me. Razorflame 10:13, 29 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi there Hekaheka. There isn't a need to add the {{infl| before the fi-noun template because fi-noun template by default automatically puts out the same thing as the inflection template. Just thought that I would let you know, Razorflame 10:35, 29 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

The effect is not exactly the same. There's a watchdog which creates a list of Finnish nouns lacking declension tables. It recognizes the pages which carry the plain <fi-noun> -template as not having a declension table. On the other hand I think it's a good idea that you continue using <fi-noun>, <fi-adj> etc. because I'd like to check that you have chosen the correct declension template for each entry. As I demonstrated earlier, the choice of declension template can be a tricky business. There are even words which have two declensions depending on the meaning, like e.g. kuusi and vuori --Hekaheka 10:47, 29 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

I know. I'm talking about changing them on entries that already have declension tables. For example: this, this, and this. I wouldn't bother with the ones lacking them. Cheers, Razorflame 10:50, 29 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Ok, but the template <fi-noun> puts them to the list anyway, and I want to keep the list empty! --Hekaheka 11:13, 29 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Well, by adding the inflection line, you still are adding them to the category. I am sure that Conrad.Irwin could easily whip you up a list of all Finnish nouns that are lacking declension if you ask him nicely. We really need to get the fi-nouns and the templates used on those pages standardized. Razorflame 11:14, 29 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Conrad.Irwin said he would be able to generate a list of Finnish nouns that lack a declension table. Would that be of assisstance for you? Razorflame 11:59, 29 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Conrad.Irwin has generated the list at User:Conrad.Irwin/Finnish_nouns. This lists all instances of the inflection line template without a declension table on it. This should help you out quite a lot :) Razorflame 17:23, 29 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

It really does. Thanks a lot. --Hekaheka 19:30, 29 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

No problems :). Now can we talk about the stanardizing of the rest of the Finnish nouns? EP brought up a good point in the BP post I made in that not every noun should be switched over, and I proposed that we make a list of some Finnish noun entries that don't work with the {{fi-noun}} template. Razorflame 19:32, 29 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

I would want to involve User:Jyril into any discussion about standardizing Finnish entries. He's really the Finnish guru here who has written the inflection templates etc. Besides, he's an admin and I'm not. Regards, --Hekaheka 19:38, 29 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Of course Jyril will be involved in the discussion :). I wouldn't want him not to be :). By the way, have you ever thought about running for adminship? I've been watching you over these past few months, and I think that you make a pretty good candidate. I would be willing to nominate you if you so desired. Razorflame 19:40, 29 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hey there. What is my username translated into Finnish? I'm talking about the word razor like a knife and a flame (noun) like a big fire or a flame on a candle. Thanks, Razorflame 11:45, 29 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Razor is partaveitsi and flame is liekki. --Hekaheka 12:08, 29 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the translation :) Razorflame 12:10, 29 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hi, example sentences are formatted without a bullet:

#: ''Example sentence''

rather than

#:* ''Example sentence''

See also WT:ELE#Example_sentences. --Dan Polansky 12:56, 1 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

Got that, thanks for advice. --Hekaheka 11:10, 9 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hello there Hekaheka. I would like to nominate you for adminship here on the English Wiktionary. I believe that you will do good in the role of administrator here. Please let me know on my talk page if you would like me to nominate you or if you don't want me to.

No, I'm not interested in becoming an admin. I've been asked that before, but my current status allows me to do everything that I want to do. --Hekaheka 11:09, 9 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

Very well. Thank you for the consideration, nonetheless :) Razorflame 20:13, 10 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

How about now?  :-) ​—msh210℠ (talk) 16:54, 26 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Also, when you make a new page, could you please make sure that you say, for example, instead An airplane. for the Finnish word for airplane if you could make it just airplane without an a/an or a period at the end? Translation entries are usually not formatted in sentences, so there isn't any reason to format them as such. Cheers, Razorflame 14:01, 7 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

Do you still not want to be an admin? You are really more deserving than any other non-admin, just so you know. --Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 05:43, 26 July 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hi there Hekaheka. This word exists on the Ido Wiktionary, and I am at a loss as to what it means? What exactly does it mean? Based on the Ido word that it is attached to, okulofundo, I am guessing that it means something around eyelid, but I am not too sure. Okulo means eye in Ido, while fundo means bottom, and the closest thing that I could think of that means eye bottom would be eyelid. Am I correct in my assumptions? Thanks, Razorflame 20:42, 12 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for writing this entry! It helped me fill in the English translation over on the Ido Wiktionary! I've got another word that isn't defined here that would be helpful to have defined here because it might allow me to add the English translation over on the Ido Wiktionary: avunpyyntö. Thanks, Razorflame 01:08, 14 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi there Hekaheka. I noticed that the entry iljanne lists kaljama as a synonym, but kaljama does not list iljanne as a synonym. Could you add a synonym section to kaljama please? Thanks, Razorflame 01:47, 13 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thanks again for the help! Cheers, Razorflame 01:07, 14 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi there Hekaheka. If I were to start writing sentences in Finnish, would you be willing to look over them every once in a while and make corrections to them as necessary? It would help me out a lot to know what exactly I would be doing wrong so that I can fix it. Thanks again, Razorflame 13:58, 21 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

In principle, yes. In practice, it depends on the quantity of work required. The best way to do this might be that you write in English what you want to say, then give your best effort to do the same in Finnish, and then I check it. Let's try how it goes. --Hekaheka 14:18, 21 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

That is how I have done it with Italian: User:Razorflame/Italian sentences and that was the way that I was going to do so anyways. I'll let you know when I have written some Finnish sentences that might need corrections when I write them. Cheers, Razorflame 14:37, 21 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

I am going to put this on hold for now because I am going to focus on Italian for now. I will come back around to work with Finnish at a later point in time, though. Cheers, Razorflame 02:33, 30 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hello Hakaheka I notice that you are almost every day an earlier bird than me! I try to « bring my stone » (as we say in french) by translating the « Word of the day » in latin tongues (fr,es,it) whenever I can, since I am interested in tongues, am said to have a somewhat extended vocabulary, & get a lot of dictionnaries.

Semperblotto (and in a less curtly way Mgloves) has given me some brief advices, but I am often at a loss...

Since they seem so very busy, could you give me some tips? I should like to understand

• why do very usual words, which exist in little dictionnaries, appear in red ? (like the french « exécration » for the english « imprecation ») ?

It's simply that nobody has so far written an entry for exécration. This is a completely volunteer project, and there is no program or plan that would dictate the order in which entries are written. There are more than 50.000 Finnish entries and I still encounter very common words that are missing. --Hekaheka 08:41, 3 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

• why have my translations often disappeared some days later , even when blue ?

Probably because somebody thinks they are wrong. By studying the history of an entry you can find out who removed your translation and ask from him, why he did it. Sometimes when I use "preview" I forget to save the result. This may also explain at least some of the disappearances. --Hekaheka 08:41, 3 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

• « Semper » wrote to me that I « could add several words at the same time » , but when I do so, a text appears ordering me to add a coma by clicking here - or the words are red.

I don't understand your question. Are you referring to assisted translation? If one adds several translations into a single sense, one has to add the translations one at a time by clicking "Preview translation" between each word. If the translation consists of several words, then write the whole translation and click "Preview translation". At least most of the times the program accepts it without complaints. --Hekaheka 08:41, 3 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Pardon me for the inconvenience, thanks in advance Arapaima 07:47, 3 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Ok Hk, so it's much clearer . Thanks a lot! Arapaima 11:03, 8 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi there Hekaheka. Does aatomipomm sound like the right translation in Eesti for atomic bomb? I found it on the Eesti Wiktionary, and I wanted to make sure that it was correct before it got added. Thanks, Razorflame 02:32, 10 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

An entry should not be made on the basis that "it sounds right". Why do you want to add an entry in a language you don't know in the first place? --Hekaheka 07:52, 10 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

I agree. An entry should be made only if it is the correct translation. Since you have on your userpage that you are an et-1 user, I decided to ask you about it because I thought that you knew more about it than I did. Razorflame 18:10, 10 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi there. May I have your permission to make form-of entries for the Finnish entries that you add (the forms in the declension table)? Thank you, Razorflame 08:43, 21 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

I don't know. I believe this should be a policy question. Finnish word forms are so numerous (10 million at the very least, not counting the possibilities that various suffixes give) that adding them systematically probably would not make sense. I have tried to limit form-of entries to a) most common words b) forms that may cause confusion and c) forms that have acquired a meaning that is not necessarily easy to deduce from the main entry (as an example, many participles of verbs have become adjectives in their own right). I suggest you talk with Jyril on this one, or open a discussion in BP. --Hekaheka 08:54, 21 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

I was only thinking of making the nominative plural at the moment, and any adjective form-ofs. Razorflame 09:00, 21 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

I guess the plurals are all right. --Hekaheka 19:10, 21 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

I think that since the declension types are so important that we include all the forms of all the words that are the declension types. What do you think? Razorflame 19:40, 21 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

I already said that I don't know. I'm aware of the credo, but I don't think it occurred to the person who formulated it that there might be languages with tens of millions of word forms. I still think that this should be taken to a wider forum for discussion. I have enough to think about with the base forms. So far we cover only about ten percent of the Finnish words even in their base form. --Hekaheka 21:30, 22 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

I'll bring this up at the Beer Parlour, then :) Cheers, Razorflame 21:38, 22 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Brought up here. Your input would be very much valued :) Razorflame 21:49, 22 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for helping out with this entry (a user request from WT:FB). With my ever-so limited knowledge in Finnish, I pretty much had both of my hands tied on this one! Jamesjiao → ^{T ◊ C} 11:13, 27 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

My pleasure. It's always encouraging to see that somewhere out there there's someone who has at least some interest in this exotic language. --Hekaheka 19:50, 27 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Could you help me understand which declension to use here? I am thinking that it could be just plain old risti, but I wanted to double-check with you first. Thanks for the help, Razorflame 21:42, 3 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Yep, it's risti. --Hekaheka 21:47, 3 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Ok, thanks :) Since there is an a, it would be the first type listed on the Appendix. Also, is maalaji risti as well? Thanks for the help! I really appreciate it! I'm still learning the declensions (been reading print books about Finnish declension and grammar for about a week and a half now, so I enjoy your help, as it helps me learn even more! Thanks, Razorflame 21:50, 3 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

The declension of a compound is always the same as the declension of last component of the compound term, in this case laji. You can simply copy the declension line from the entry for laji, add maa in front of laj and presto - you've got the declension. But make sure that you don't guess when doing declensions! It is easy to err in apophony and vowel harmony as the rules are not too straightforward. I think no declension is definitely better than wrong declension. --Hekaheka 22:01, 3 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

I agree with you on this! I would only add a declension if I were extremely sure that I was right. Most of the time, I just write the skeleton of a Finnish entry (meaning no etymology, pronunciation, or declension), but lately, I've been finding more and more words that I know the declension to, such as words like numeraali, pedaali (both risti), and others. Thanks again for the sage words of advice, Razorflame 22:28, 3 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for adding the declension for aaltolevy. I made this entry because I felt fairly confident that I could make the word and add the correct translation for that word. What I figured was that it was a compound word, aalto (wave) + levy (which is a lot of different words, but after looking through all of them and trying out different combinations of possible words, and after using lots of different web searches and online Finnish dictionaries, I figured that wave plate made the most sense). Thanks again for the help, Razorflame 23:31, 6 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

You did exactly what one should not do, GUESSED the meaning of a word and ADDED it to Wiktionary. This is supposed to be a dictionary and not a collection of educated guesses. Your guess was partly correct, true, but at least 99,999% of Finnish speakers think of "corrugated plate" instead of "wave plate" as the first alternative when they hear or read the word aaltolevy. Although it is more exciting to skate on thin ice, I strongly recommend that you stay on more familiar and safe grounds from now on. --Hekaheka 06:33, 7 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I agree on that. Therefore, I'll only add declensions that I am 100% sure of (mainly risti, vanhempi, and sisin declensions). By the way, can you write an entry for lajite? Thanks, Razorflame 03:29, 19 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Sure, but it will take a few days. The word is not in ordinary Finnish-English dictionaries and it will require some research. Based on maalajite, separate is a candidate, but the current entry does not support the assumption. --Hekaheka 04:44, 19 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

When I removed the e from the word, it became a word for species, but that is because lajit is the plural and accusative plural of laji, which is why species is the term used there. I would have to agree that it either means separate, but it could also mean texture, because the Finnish Wikipedia has the entry listed as soil texture and not soil separate. What do you think of that assumption? Razorflame 05:01, 19 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Not exactly so. Texture is rakenne in Finnish. --Hekaheka 05:04, 19 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hmm...tough call. By the way, that red link above with the discussion about that exercise motion...after thinking about that long and hard, I think exercise motion would be an appropriate definition for that word :) Razorflame 05:05, 19 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi there Hekaheka...after using a reputable Finnish --> English dictionary, I've come up with the translation unstructured for this word. Before I made it, I wanted to double-check with you to make sure it is right before adding it. Thanks, Razorflame 05:11, 19 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

What's the source? I understand it almost antonymously. One sees this word most often as the main element in a compound term, e.g. kevytrakenteinen means "having a light structure" (I don't know the exact English equivalent right away, probably lightweight). It might also be a rarely used shorter form of rakenteellinen (“structural”). My first translations for "unstructured" would be jäsentymätön or jäsentämätön. --Hekaheka 05:23, 19 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

When you say "having a light structure", we aren't talking about structures as in buildings, right? We are talking about structures like molecular structures or how things are structured, right? For example, lightweight book. Is that what we are going for with this word? Razorflame 08:51, 19 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Quite the contrary, we are talking mainly of buildings and other mechanical structures. For example a bridge may be kevytrakenteinen, if it is built for light traffic or it is a temporary structure. --Hekaheka 09:46, 19 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Ok, so a "lightweight" building as in a building made of lightweight materials, then? Razorflame 10:07, 19 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

This is why I wanted to ask you first, to make sure that the source I was using was correct. I've now learnt that it isn't, so I'll have to find a new one. Razorflame 05:38, 19 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

If I have a term that I want to add in Finnish, how about I just ask you to add it for me. Would that be good with you? Razorflame 23:03, 28 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Yes, it'll be ok. --Hekaheka 23:20, 28 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Ok. While looking at the page firmware, I noticed that it had a Finnish translation. After checking it and verifying it, I found that it does indeed exist, so I proceeded to add a skeleton of a Finnish entry. I did not add anything that I was unsure about. I only added the language header, noun header, and the translation. I am pretty sure that that is the only sense for that word, so that is why I decided to add it myself. In almost every other case, though, I would have asked you. That alright with you? Razorflame 23:30, 28 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Please do not place Wikipedia link boxes outside of language sectios. Each such link is specific to one language, and should only appear within a language section, not at the top of a page. --EncycloPetey 21:16, 9 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

OK. I had previously understood that English would be an exception as this is an Englih dictionary. I read somewhere that the entry for parrot could be regarded as a 'model for what we are trying to achieve'. In that entry the Wikipedia link is outside the language section. --Hekaheka

Only because someone made that change (incorrectly), and I've been offline much of the past month. Thanks for pointing out the error in the parrot entry; I've now made the correction. --EncycloPetey 01:18, 10 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Mglovesfun (talk) 16:08, 16 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

fixed --Hekaheka 20:12, 16 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Can you double-check the translations that I found for both of these words? I looked for a long time for each, and I finally decided on the translations for both. It would be much appreciated. Thanks, Razorflame 10:08, 19 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Sorry about the switchup on fasetti in terms of the declension...I do know that special declension, I just could not remember order they went in. Thanks for showing me which order they go in so that I can remember that for next time :} Razorflame 12:59, 19 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

I've agreed to stop making them from scratch, but I will still make form-of entries, all right? Razorflame 17:39, 19 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I believe form-of's are OK. --Hekaheka 17:41, 19 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Very good :) I enjoy making them (as you might have noticed), and it gives me something to do to stay out of trouble :) Thanks again, Razorflame 17:44, 19 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Another note: I'll make a page just like the one that I use to verify Kannada transliterations, and whenever you have the time, you can check them out and make sure that they are right before being made, alright? Does that sound like a plan to you? Razorflame 17:51, 19 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Page made at User:Razorflame/Finnish/FV. I'll add any entries that I might want to make there first so that they can be verified before being added to the project.

On a completely separate and unrelated note: As promised, I told you that I would not add the declension tables to any words that I did not know the declensions to, as was agreed upon earlier. Razorflame 00:57, 20 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi there. Do you know why the Finnish declension tables no longer hide themselves like they used to? By the way, can you make an entry for projekti? I believed this to be project, but I wanted to let you add it because you know all of the other senses that it could be. Thanks, Razorflame 19:30, 27 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

No idea. Must be something with your system. On my screen they still hide all right. --Hekaheka 23:57, 27 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, I had to clear my cache to solve the problem. Thanks anyways :) Razorflame 23:59, 27 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Never mind about the request for the article...already made ;) Razorflame 19:36, 27 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for adding to the phrasebook, especially missä on vessa, which is disappointingly not in my paper phrasebook. ~ heyzeuss 05:33, 29 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

A note re: . In botanical taxonomy (and possibly for zoology), names above the rank of genus are not italicized. --EncycloPetey 14:14, 30 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Zoological names > genus are definitely not italicized. --Jyril 19:48, 8 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

All right, I'll remember that, but the logic is not obvious. Can you explain? --Hekaheka 01:26, 9 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

Only generic and species/subspecies names (of any organism) are italicized.

Example:

* Primates (order)

* Hominidae (family)

* Homininae (subfamily)

* Hominini (tribe)

* Homo (genus)

* Homo sapiens (species)

* Homo sapiens sapiens (subspecies)

--Jyril 17:30, 10 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

Fine, but I still do not see the logic behind the rule. I had understood that "scientific" names are italicized because they are regarded as more or less Latin or at least non-English words. "Primates" is clearly an English word, but "Hominidae, Homininae" and "Hominini" are not. Or is this just a convention without any deeper logic behind it? --Hekaheka 17:37, 10 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

Can you clarify the second definition here? ~ heyzeuss 11:12, 7 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

Better now? --Hekaheka 17:27, 7 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, thanks. ~ heyzeuss 13:22, 12 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hei, ainakin KOTUSin mukaan viekoitella jne. muodot (i:n kanssa) ovat ainoita oikeita. Varmasti ei ole vanhentunut muoto. Myös Googlen perusteella i:lliset muodot ovat yleisempiä. --Jyril 19:47, 8 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

No pahus, niin näkyy olevan, eli kielikorva teki jo toisen tepposen kuukauden sisällä. Korjasin "viekoitella" -muodon päämuodoksi. Googlessa "viekotella" saa 1/4 kannatuksen, joten pidin sen alt formina. --Hekaheka 01:24, 9 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

This template example is broken. Is "pieäyyö" supposed to be "pierrä?" ~ heyzeuss 13:22, 12 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

Yes, it was, and the second last was supposed to be purra. --Hekaheka 13:59, 12 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Could you please take a look at the declension table of the article saippuasarja? It says saippusarja for nominative singular, I think it must be saippuasarja and the plural..? Thanks in advance! Sinek 20:38, 14 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

Fixed. --Hekaheka 21:07, 14 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

I thought I would be nice and make a reference template for you, but it turns out that Jyril has done it already. {{R:Hakkinen 2005}} ~ heyzeuss 09:45, 30 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

Well, thank you anyway for the thought! --Hekaheka 10:24, 30 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

{{R:Hakkinen 2004}} is now available for use. ~ heyzeuss 07:16, 5 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

Do you know of a thorough Finnish-Finnish online dictionary? ~ heyzeuss 07:16, 5 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

As far as I know there's none. Finnish Wiktionary is one, but it suffers of lack of enthusiasm. The Finnish Research Centre for Domestic Languages (Kotimaisten kielten tutkimuskeskus, KOTUS, www.kotus.fi) maintains a wordlist but I don't believe it's a true dictionary. I do not really know, because the wordlist is not available online and my Mac does not understand the zipped downloadable version. They also have a Finnish-Finnish dictionary available on CD, which one can purchase through their web pages. You might also want to ask from User:Jyril; he tends to be rather knowledgeable about KOTUS. --Hekaheka 19:48, 5 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

Some intransitive verb definitions start with "to be." I'm trying to think of examples to help understand them better. Part of my confusion is that for the transitive form, in the English definition, the verb is no longer transitive. e.g. harmittaa:

1. (transitive) To irritate.

   Minua harmittaa.

   I am irritated.

2. (intransitive) To be irritated.

   Minä harmitan.

   I am irritated.        ~ heyzeuss 07:57, 17 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

Actually harmittaa is always transitive, because the person who is irritated or is being irritated is always the object of a Finnish sentence. Most Finnish verbs that express feelings behave that way. Grammatically speaking, these verbs are called monopersonal. Thus you can say either:

• minua harmittaa , or
• X harmittaa minua

The expression "minä harmitan" would mean that I am irritating someone else, but this usage is rare; ärsyttää would be a more likely choice for verb in such case. I fixed the entry for harmittaa according to these lines. Did I manage to clarify the issue or did I just make you more confused? --Hekaheka 09:11, 17 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, that helps a lot. It is difficult because to be irritated looks like a literal gloss and not an idiomatic translation. I think it needs {{idiomatic}} to show that it does not translate straight across, but it is clear for me now. ~ heyzeuss 13:22, 17 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

I am trying to learn Finnish from a book and CD. I am having a lot of trouble with the vowel u. My Finnish friend thinks I am saying y. I try to make the sound like French vu for y (which seems to be correct) and the sound like English boot for u (which is different, but my friend can't tell). This is really aggravating and it makes me want to give it up as a bad job, if I can't even pronounce a fucking basic vowel. Do you have any hints on pronouncing u for an English speaker? Equinox ◑ 20:29, 30 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

If you knew Spanish, half of your job would be done. The vowels a, e, i, o and u are pronounced exactly the same way in both languages. If this does not help, you have a good enough "u" in the word "rudimentary" and "uu" in "boot" or "too". I'd say the vowel in "vue" comes close to "yy". A good example of "y" does not occur to me right now, but just try to keep the vowel of "vue" short. If your friend does not hear the difference between the vowels in "vue" and "boot", he should not try to teach pronunciation to other people. Another tip: don't worry too much about getting it right in the beginning. After 40 years of studying and speaking English the vowels in "hot dog" are still a mystery to me. --Hekaheka 21:32, 30 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

Now I found it. The "u" in French "superior" sounds pretty much the same as "y" in Finnish. --Hekaheka 21:34, 30 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

boot and rudimentary have the same vowel in my accent. My sister has told me that vous and vu sound different in French, but I've never really picked it up. Oh well, thanks for trying! Equinox ◑ 21:36, 30 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

Same vowel but different duration, right? --Hekaheka 21:43, 30 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

(No – vous is /vu/, vue is /vy/. Ƿidsiþ 17:15, 3 June 2010 (UTC))Reply

Of course. I was referring to boot and rudimentary. Vue and vous have a different vowel, but same duration. --Hekaheka 05:19, 4 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Well, possibly. I don't think the duration difference really exists in English. Are you saying that Finnish u and y are the same vowel with different durations? I was trying to make my mouth into different shapes, basically! I've seen the u as the "English oo" (boot, root) and the y as a different sound, more precisely shaped, that occurs in French and German but not English. (Bear in mind that English is never spoken but always mumbled.) Equinox ◑ 21:52, 30 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

Duration of vowels is very important in Finnish. It's the only thing that separates e.g. tuleen (to the fire), tuulen (of the wind), tulen (I come or of the fire) and tuuleen (to the wind) from each other. Likewise with the consonants: valita and vallita are not the same thing, nor do they sound the same. I was trying to point out the difference between "u" and "uu" because I know from earlier experience that English-speakers often have difficulties with duration. Some people have found it helpful to think that the long and short variant of the same vowel are two different vowels. The difference in producing "u" and "y" is the position of the tongue. Pay attention to where your tongue is when pronouncing "u" or "uu" (this you can, because it's the vowel in "boot"). Then move your tongue forward so that the tip touches your lower teeth. Keep everything else unchanged. If you try to keep making the "u" sound while moving the tongue, you will notice you can't. The new sound should be "y". The pitch of your voice will increase a bit in the process, because extending the tongue will affect the position of the vocal chords. Let your sister judge the result as she is able to hear the difference between vous and vue. Hope this helps. At least your sister is going to have fun with your first experiments! --Hekaheka 08:44, 31 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

I have trouble saying u as well; it always comes out more like y. Finnish people stick their lips way out when they say u, which is a quite funny to watch, especially on the evening news. This is my main failure point and I'm lazy and forget to do it. It requires an extra concious effort for a native English speaker such as myself. ~ heyzeuss 14:55, 2 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

I wrote a complete entry for the comitative suffix -ne. Can you take a look before I add it as the Finnish section in -ne? Right now it's in the user name space: User:Heyzeuss/-ne. ~ heyzeuss 08:47, 7 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

An effort made. Like it? User:Hekaheka

Yep. That one really needed a Finnish ear. I moved it over. ~ heyzeuss 12:17, 7 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi there Hekaheka. Can you add a Finnish translation to this entry please? Thanks, Razorflame 17:18, 14 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

I don't think the definition is clear enough. Does it mean just anything to drink or something containing alcohol? These two cases translate differently into Finnish. I'm also a bit hesitant, because I really think we should have better guidelines for the Phrasebook before we let it mushroom too big to manage. See the RFD discussions for e.g. I have a big penis, I don't speak Belarusian, I'm allergic to milk, two beers please, I need a diaper , I'm eighteen years old etc. --Hekaheka 17:33, 14 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

I found a couple of your recent edits where you accidentally put "Translation" instead of "Declension" (eg kambri). I've fixed them, but just wanted to let you know in case it was a systematic error that needed fixing. Cheers. --Bequw → τ 05:25, 17 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

No systematic error, just not paying enough attention. I guess it happens because I often add a Finnish entry right after adding the Finnish translation into an English entry. I need to be more careful, thanks for noticing. --Hekaheka 05:54, 17 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Do you happen to know what this word means? Thanks, Razorflame 07:54, 17 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Essive singular of kuultu. --Hekaheka 08:45, 17 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Yes, but what is the closest English word that means kuultuna? Razorflame 08:46, 17 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

"When heard" or "as heard" cover the cases that I can quickly think of. --Hekaheka 08:49, 17 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Ok, thanks. :) Razorflame 09:11, 17 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hello HKHK, you entered 2 translations in finnish of "any animal of the genus Procyonidae" , but aren't those the names for the "raccoon DOG" ? . I had entered the french name ("chien viverrin") of "raccoon dog", but I reverted it : "raccoon dog" is of the Canidae family, Nyctereutes genus - while "raccoon" is of the procyonidae genus... Are you also invaded by raccoon dogs in Finland ? T.y. Arapaima 09:40, 23 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hold your horses. I'm curremtly working with entries raccoon, raccoon dog, supi, supikoira and pesukarhu. Their names are a bit of a mess in Finnish, and I'm trying to shed a little light on it. While in the process, the entries may not be synchronized at all times. You can get an idea of the problem by reading the usage notes of the entry pesukarhu. --Hekaheka 09:54, 23 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

And yes, there are raccoon dogs in Finland, perhaps not to the point of invasion, but they definitely live here. --Hekaheka 09:55, 23 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Just curious - would you consider this entry HIV-koe sum of parts? ---> Tooironic 00:16, 24 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I would. Why? --Hekaheka 03:18, 24 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Well you might want to RfD it then. ---> Tooironic 08:31, 27 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Interesting. Why do you want me to RfD it instead of doing it yourself? --Hekaheka 22:55, 27 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Because I can't speak Finnish? ---> Tooironic 05:13, 28 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Can you take a look at these at User:Heyzeuss#Miscellaneous words? ~ heyzeuss 08:43, 25 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Done. Apologies for slow delivery! --Hekaheka (talk) 06:11, 17 June 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hi, there seems to be something strange with this edit, can you have a look? --Thrissel 20:47, 26 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Fixed, thanks for noticing. --Hekaheka 21:04, 26 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

Please confirm that your translation of Franco- is ranskalais- (linked to ranskalinen). Did you mean ranskalais- (linked to ranskalainen)? --Anatoli 23:15, 28 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

I meant to link it to the page ranskalainen. There are a lot of adjectives in Finnish ending with -inen which in combined terms is replaced with -is-. Example: ]. I don't think these "is-forms" woud need their own entries. --Hekaheka 05:38, 29 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Kiitos. I only checked if there was an error, you know better, which words or word parts need entries :) Thanks for fixing it. One more request, please check if my translations of vodyanoy into Finnish are okey with you - vodjanoi and vetehinen. I'm less certain about the latter. --Anatoli 06:08, 29 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

I would regard vodjanoi a transliteration rather than a Finnish word. Vetehinen appears to be the equivalent of водяной in Finnish mythology. The mythologies of various northern Eurasian nations have so many common elements that I would regard vetehinen and водяной as the same "personality". I think we could as well keep both. I'll write the Finnish entries. --Hekaheka 16:08, 29 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thanks again. --Anatoli 22:11, 29 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Is n.a. here supposed to mean “not applicable” or is it a Finnish abbreviation of propiska? --Vahagn Petrosyan 09:53, 30 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

It was intended to show that there is no Finnish word for this Russian document. I have been earlier citicized for removing trreq's for Finnish words that do not exist. I hoped this would be a better approach, but obviously it creates other questions. --Hekaheka 11:05, 30 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

A descriptive translation, even if it's SoP, is OK like asuinpaikkamerkintä, IMHO. It's understandable that not all concepts in one language/culture/system exist or have been translated into all languages. I used literal propiska in some translations where it was, at least occasionally (Wikipedia and other articles). I see that in Finnish, literal propiska wasn't used that often. Note (when translating) that it doesn't just mean the stamp/marking in the ID - 1) it's the system itself, 2) permission to stay in a region/city and 3) (by extension) - domicile, place where one lives. --Anatoli 05:33, 1 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

I encountered some Finnish texts where propiska was used, but it was always explained first. I picked asuinpaikkamerkintä from an article which discussed some frequently occurring terminological problems in translating Russian texts into Finnish. It was written by a professional translator and appeared well thought-out. Perhaps you should split these three meanings more clearly in the entry for propiska. Sense 1) translation into Finnish might be "asuinpaikkarekisteri", sense 2) oleskelulupa and 3) kotipaikka or asuinpaikka. --Hekaheka 05:44, 1 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

I've split and added glosses. Kindly add translations, please. I may get them in a wrong order. :)--Anatoli 06:06, 1 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

I divided a translation table into three here - could you please check out whether I haven't messsed up the Finnish translations? Thanks, --Thrissel 20:12, 2 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Why did you add an extra sense here? It seems redundant. ---> Tooironic 00:41, 20 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

I added and I didn't - I separated an existing definition line in two. To me the two glosses appear as two separate definitions as they do to many writers of online dictionaries.

Free Online Dictionary, AudioEnglish, Wordnik (with slight differences):

1. To adorn unnecessarily something already beautiful.
2. To make superfluous additions to what is already complete.

Allwords:

1. To embellish something that does not need it.
2. To add unnecessary bells and whistles.

Some others only have one definition, which is close to our current #1. --Hekaheka 03:12, 20 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

I made entries for those accounting words in the user namespace. Can you take a look?

kirjaus, tulokirjaus, kuntayhtymä, yhtymävaltuusto, toiminnallinen, summautua, lainanlyhennys, lähetysluettelo, tarjouspyyntö, pitkän aikavälin vastuu, pitkäaikainen vastuu, pitkäaikainen vieras pääoma

~ heyzeuss 14:57, 25 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Checked. I'm not an expert in English accounting terminology, but they appear good to me in the sense that they seem to mean the same thing as the Finnish terms. --Hekaheka 10:57, 26 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

thx ~ heyzeuss 13:10, 26 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Sorry to have dumped all these on you, but they showed up in rfc-structure. I try to handle them, but that only works if the problem is mostly structural. Non-English PoS determination is often beyond my pay grade. Thanks. DCDuring TALK 16:12, 31 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

If you just caught the edit summary for the one, the others ending in "sen" are at: Category:Finnish words needing attention. DCDuring TALK 16:15, 31 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Does Finnish have a quality scale similar to the one used in English for rating used automobiles, trading cards, antique furniture, etc? i.e bad, poor, fair, good, excellent, mint ~ heyzeuss 17:34, 2 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

Nothing universally accepted AFAIK. One possible scale would be huono/huonokuntoinen, välttävä, tyydyttävä, hyvä/hyväkuntoinen, erinomainen, uuden veroinen/kuin uusi.

This entry came to my attention via the uncategorized pages list (no inflection line template). I took advantage of the opportunity to treat it the way I would the entry for the English gloss:

1. PoS Verb using {{infl}} (formerly: phrase)
2. Category:Finnish predicates

As I know no Finnish, this could be wrong or misleading. Even if it is as "right" as it is in English (where no one has objected, but ....), it is up to you and your fellow Finnish contributors whether you find it worthwhile or even to your taste. Feel free to simply revert (but it still needs a PoS category). I really edited it only to ask you questions about how I should treat Finnish entries that occasionally come up on cleanup lists. Also: Should it have {{idiom|fi}}? DCDuring TALK 12:03, 7 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

I added -htaa. Please tell me if I'm missing something important. ~ heyzeuss 16:30, 7 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

Can you verify the conjugation of nakella? The appendix for tulla-type verbs says that it should have k→kk consonant gradation, but the entry doesn't show any consonant gradation. ~ heyzeuss 13:52, 14 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

Checked - and thanks for asking. Locating improper conjugations afterwards would be a huge job. --Hekaheka 13:57, 14 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

I'm making consonant gradation categories that are fed automatically by the conjugation templates, so it will be easier to check them sometime. For example, Category:Finnish tulla-type verbs/consonant gradation t-tt. ~ heyzeuss 14:11, 14 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for helping me clarify those suffixes. Wiktionary may be the only place where the information is published in English. -us still has two forms of consonant gradation: kalleus and vastaus. Is it correct? ~ heyzeuss 13:00, 22 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

Yes and no: -us as short form of -uus is always inflected according to type kalleus, but -us as a suffix in its own right is always of the type vastaus. --Hekaheka 18:10, 22 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

I don't agree with your changes to the definition here. It gives the impression that the word only refers to boots used in combat but this is not the case since they are also used in fashion, hiking and other contexts. ---> Tooironic 13:14, 25 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

Current definition reads:

1. A type of boot designed to be worn by soldiers during actual combat or combat training.

Before my editing it read:

1. A type of boot made from hardened leather, used in the military, or worn by civilians.

I deleted "hardened leather" because I do not think that the material is essential. A combat boot is a combat boot also, if it is made e.g. of Goretex, Kevlar or some type of composite material. Current formulation does not exclude civilian use, it only states that the boot is designed for military use. Are the "combat boots" used in fashion, hiking etc. exactly the same shoes used by the military or are they just looking similar? If they are the same shoes, I'm happy with a mention that they are also used by civilians, although I would not regard it as necessary. If they are just look-alikes, a second definition might be justified. --Hekaheka 14:07, 25 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

Could you move the translations of taffrail log to fi:taffrail log? Translations between foreign languages is the purview of the respective foreign language Wiktionaries. Thanks. --Bequw → τ 22:52, 25 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

The entry has the wrong heading, it's English, not Finnish. --Anatoli 23:02, 25 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. --Bequw → τ 03:00, 26 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

Special:UncategorizedPages contains ~30 Finnish entries with just L2 header and the headword. Do you want to treat them as Requested entries or delete them. I can't even tell PoS so I can't add value. DCDuring TALK 11:59, 31 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

I'll check. --Hekaheka 14:24, 31 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

Problem caused by User:Heyzeuss. I left message. I should have checked the history. DCDuring TALK 14:30, 31 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

I edited the entry poljeta, which is now correct as far as I can say. I even added an example to show how the "impersonal indicative present connegative" form can be used. It might be sufficient to use the {{inflected form of||lang=fi}} -template as the gloss isn't likely to be of much value to most users. --Hekaheka 16:52, 31 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

It seems like a difference in point of view on that last point is at the core, but I am out of my depth. In English, we don't have glosses for inflected forms, but do have them for other terms created by suffixes (-ly) and prefixes (un-, non-), some of which don't seem worth a full entry to me (the un- and non- forms, usually). DCDuring TALK 17:17, 31 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

Sorry about that. I have cleared it up. ~ heyzeuss 20:20, 3 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hope it is OK all around. For me, I just want to keep the cleanup lists short. DCDuring TALK 20:26, 3 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Words ending in -nne are sometimes formed from a -ntaa-type verb + -e, but sometimes the verb is non-existant, as in the case of liikenne and tilanne. It then seems appropriate that the etymology should indicate an imaginary infinitive ending, as in: liike + -ntaa + -e. I already changed liikenne. Does this seem right, or am I way off base? ~ heyzeuss 20:18, 3 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

I think that would be a hasty conclusion. The usage of the Finnish suffixes is sometimes quite ambiguous. In case of -nne one use is the one that you mention. Examples:

• rakentaa (“to build”) > rakenne (“structure”)
• ohentaa (“to make thinner”) > ohenne (“thinner”)
• kääntää (“to turn”) > käänne (“twist, turn”)

But then on the other hand there are a lot of -ntaa verbs of which one cannot form a noun that way. Examples include:

• pienentää (“to make smaller”)
• kaventaa (“to make narrower”)
• harventaa (“to thin out”)

Then there are nouns that more or less loosely express a situational or diminutive aspect of another word:

• liike (“movement”) > liikenne (“traffic”)
• tila (“space”) > tilanne (“situation”)
• kuja (“alley”) > kujanne (“tiny alley”)
• tasainen (“smooth, level”) > tasanne (“small, level area in otherwise rugged terrain”)

And then there are nouns that seem to belong to some of the groups above, but there is no root word:

• iljanne (“icy spot on a road”)
• asenne (“attitude”) - has nothing to do with asentaa (“to install”) --Hekaheka 21:27, 18 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for getting back to me on that. Those are really good examples. ~ heyzeuss 11:01, 13 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi, could you please put the information on the words forming a compound in the etymology section instead of adding links into {{infl}} template? If you use etymology templates such as {{compound}} or {{suffix}} the words also get correctly categorized. See kaislahame for example. --Jyril 09:53, 18 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

As you wish. That's actually what I used to do but then I read somewhere criticism toward that practice. I also noticed that the English compound terms seldom have an etymology section, but use {{en-noun|sg=]]}} instead. --Hekaheka 21:01, 18 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Well, I got criticism after using that practice. I think the lack of Etymologies is because nobody has bothered to add them. BTW, could you use the lang=fi parameter, now the articles go to English categories? And if you care, could you also use {{prefix}} or {{suffix}} categories so that the categorization goes more neatly. Ant finally, please avoid using the redundant {{etycomp}} monster, I want to kill it as soon as possible. :) --Jyril 15:54, 20 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

You mean lang=fi -parameter should be used with compound-template? Sorry, it did not occur to me. I think I use lang=fi in other occasions where it is necessary, or have you noticed something else? I don't know how and where to use {{prefix}} and {{suffix}} categories. Could you point out an entry in which they are used properly? --Hekaheka 16:02, 20 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hello, the compound template takes a lang parameter, so it would be nice if you would provide it in future. --Dan Polansky 15:18, 12 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

Yes, thanks, sorry, in principle I know, but it appears that sometimes I forget to add it. --Hekaheka 15:21, 12 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, it seems that you get it right most of the time, so it seems I should not have bothered you with it. I am sorry. --Dan Polansky 07:58, 13 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

One click to the Wikipedia page provided would have shown you it's not "bullshit". ---> Tooironic 12:46, 14 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

An article in Wikipedia is not enough to prove anything, alone. Funny that there are no English-language scientific articles about such a popularly interesting phenomenon in BGC. The best I found is anecdotal evidence to a "Japanese psychiatrist based in Paris". Not even this individual's name is mentioned. Yes, there is the summary of an article by Katada Tamami, but the article in itself is in Japanese, and one can quite safely state that "Paris syndrome" has not been attested as a medical term in English. The term seems to exist as it has been used in so many places, but the disease itself might as well be an urban legend. In absence of scientific sources I would add the word "alleged" to the definition. --Hekaheka 04:01, 15 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

Does this change look appropriate to you? ~ heyzeuss 13:24, 10 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

Yes, it is perfect. --Hekaheka 19:38, 10 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

They only seem to go up to 9. Is it supposed to be an appendix? SemperBlotto 16:50, 19 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, sorry, a stupid mistake. I wanted to make it an appendix covering cardinal numbers from 0 to 9. Additional appendices could be written for other sets of numbers. I wrote this as a comment to the ongoing discussion in RFD on the entry three hundred. Someone complained of the community's unwillingness to write appendices and proposed it as a good solution for numbers and similar sets of entries. I wanted folks to check whether this would be an appropriate solution to the problem. As you are an admin, could you change the pagename to Cardinal numbers 0 to 9 ?

OK - another admin has already moved it to the appendix namespace, so it is now Appendix:Cardinal numbers 0 to 9. SemperBlotto 17:00, 19 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

There appears to be dialectical preferences for kala-type superlative adjectives. On the page for laaja, laajampi is shown as the superlative. Can you clarify?

vanhempi vanhampi

laajempi laajampi

parempi parampi

~ heyzeuss 08:45, 26 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

The standard comparative ending for kala-type adjectives is -empi. I corrected the entry for laaja accordingly. I don't understand where the -ampi comes from, probably it's simply a typo. I probably don't know every dialect, but I don't think I have ever heard vanhampi or laajampi, except from children. --Hekaheka 21:30, 26 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

Ohi there! First, thanks for cleaning up and thoroughly expanding "ohi". Great work! Second, could you comment at WT:RFV#mumina? Someone has called into question whether "mumina" really means "mumbling" or not. We've found some quotations that seem to show that it does mean "mumbling" — commented-out on the page you can even see where I've tried to translate one — but your input as a native speaker would be most helpful. — Beobach 01:50, 5 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

Head word says "common firefly". Mglovesfun (talk) 22:39, 17 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

Fixed.

I've been trying to clean up Category:Finnish nominals that lack declension type, but there are a few that I can't quite place into the existing template structure. aborigine and a few others seem to decline as though they end in -i even though they don't. And then there are of course all those numbers, most of which have a first part that declines and a second part that doesn't. Our templates don't seem to support that either. —CodeCat 20:34, 1 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Aborigine, and probably the others you have tried, is a special case because it is a foreign-language word adopted to Finnish in its foreign-language form. It does not fit directly into any declension category, and that's precisely why the line-by-line declension template has been used. Personally, I think your formulation for the declension template is no improvement. It makes things more messy. I would prefer to revert your edition, if you don't mind. --Hekaheka 20:43, 1 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Btw, do you have an explation to why the category "Verbs lacking inflection type" has disappeared? There were about 100 verbs still to do before you edited the category, and now there's only one. --Hekaheka 20:44, 1 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

I was editing fi-noun and I didn't realise fi-verb included it (which seems rather strange to me but ok). I've fixed that now, but it will take a little while for the category to be repopulated.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by formulation of the declension template, though. Are you referring to the use of named parameters? I did that because I thought it was very confusing to have to count all the vertical bars. It's extremely error prone, and using names is clearer. It also allows you to skip a few entries if they don't exist, like for plural-only nouns. The same has been used for Catalan, Spanish and other romance languages with success. —CodeCat 20:55, 1 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

The plural-only nouns have been no problem up to now. One simply adds the qualifier to the declension tempalte like for example here:

Lua error in Module:fi-nominals at line 184: Nominative grade (parameter 2) may not be omitted. --Hekaheka 21:05, 1 January 2011 (UTC) Are you absolutely sure that it's a good idea for you to fiddle with Finnish templates? After all you define yourself to be level 1 Finnish speaker, which means that you may not notice basic errors that you may make. That something works with a romance language is no proof for it working with Finnish. --Hekaheka 21:13, 1 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

I've been very careful not to change anything I don't know about, and most of what I've done is more template-related than language-related. The reason for making all these changes though is because I am thinking of making a bot to create forms of verbs and nominals. To make a bot like that means I have to first understand how the templates work, because the bot's job would be to mimic those precisely. And that's where I hit a barrier, because the templates seemed very messy and unintuitive to me. So I've tried to improve that a little, while trying not to mess things up so much nobody else knows how it works anymore. And, I guess working with these templates is a good way to learn the grammar, in a strange kind of way. —CodeCat 21:20, 1 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Ok, that's an acceptable justification, and even the missing verbs seem to have reappeared on the list of "missing conjugations". There's still one problem. The words inflected with the new version of fi-decl -template (e.g mää) appear on the list "Finnish nominals that lack declension type" although they shouldn't. --Hekaheka 21:34, 1 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

That's because the declension and conjugation types now put entries in that category whenever the type= is missing. Should we just call them 'irregular' or 'no type', and make a category for them alongside the other types? —CodeCat 22:04, 1 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Irregular sounds good to me, because that's what they are. --Hekaheka 22:54, 1 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Please use gloss for glosses, tr being for transliterations. Thanks, Mglovesfun (talk) 13:04, 6 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Oh, shit, I did not know, I just copied this practice from somebody else. I believed "tr" meant "translation". I must have made hundreds of these errors. Fortunately they are easily trackable as they fall in categories fi:Compounds and fi:Words-suffixed-with-something. I'll try to fix them. --Hekaheka 13:43, 6 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Can you think of any examples for tokko, as a conjunction? ~ heyzeuss 07:29, 23 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I can. Check the entry now. --Hekaheka 23:43, 24 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

1. On the page at Appendix:Finnish_conjugation/saartaa, does the placement of 3.sg past (a) mutated saarsi before 3.sg past (b) weak saarroi mean to suggest that the first form is more common than the second, or does it follow some other convention or standard? IS saarsi in fact more common than saarroi-? Oh wait, I see that is supposed to be the complete 3p past sing -- but shouldn't 1. and 3. be saarroin and saartoi for the past tense (when not saarsin and saarsi)?

The two forms are equally acceptable and the choice between them is a question of personal preference. --Hekaheka 05:39, 27 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

2. On the page for saartaa alone at saartaa, there is apparently a problem with the template (or more likely with its invocation) because it is producing forms like saardan, saardoin, and so on.

Yes, there was a problem, which is now fixed. --Hekaheka 05:39, 27 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

3. At (the link to Category...salata from Valssata disappeared when I formatted it as internal), a link to Heyzeuss' user page appears between the Z's and the Ä's.

Fixed this one. --Hekaheka 12:31, 30 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

4. At Appendix:Finnish_conjugation/käydä, a typo misidentifies käydä as kotus type 66 instead of 65.

5. I put these notes here because somehow I stumbled across Jyril's talk page and saw that both of you are active in the Finnish entries. So far I'm having trouble grasping the structure of the Finnish sub-community at Wiktionary, its meeting points, its reference materials, its directories(?), etc. So far I have clicked on a few help links but I haven't yet even encountered instructions for writing a proper comment. I'm interested in watching, possibly participating in discussion (either language), raising questions, and pointing out problems I notice, but I don't intend to write direct contributions.

Any newbie guidance will be appreciated. Onyx 18:22, 26 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

OK, now I have at least discovered the Babel category pages, fi-template category pages, and such, and I'm starting to get a sense of a de facto community structure alongside the beer parlour. So together with user talk pages, that's most of the glue right there? The Finnish content is all the more remarkable now that I begin to comprehend the small number of contributors and the amount of work that has been accomplished by bot. Onyx 19:40, 26 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

I've been working on writing a bot to generate form entries for Finnish verbs, but there are a few things I'm wondering. The long first infinitive and the fifth infinitive always have a possessive suffix, and the second and third are not used in all cases. However in theory, each infinitive ought to be a full noun, except that not all cases are used for semantic reasons. The long first infinitive looks like it is the translative case of the short infinitive, and the 3rd infinitive appears to be identical to the agent participle. Is this coincidence or are they one and the same (one being the noun form of the other)? Then there is the fifth, which seems to be an adessive (plural?) form of some sort.

So my question is, should we create proper entries for these, with conjugation tables and everything? And how should we handle the infinitives that require a possessive suffix? Should there be an entry with the suffixless form, since that's really what it is? —CodeCat 20:13, 26 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure what you mean about each infinitive being a noun. A possessive suffix isn't enough to make something a noun. Only the fourth infinitive is a true noun, it seems to me. "Sanominen" means "the act of saying" and it is a true noun that can exist in more cases than simply the nominative and partitive shown in the conjugation tables. I can't conceptualize any of the other kinds of infinitives as nouns even though some can be translated using -ing.

1st: Aion sanoa, että "I intend to say that..." Ostin kirjan osoittaakseni, että... "I bought the book in order to demonstrate that..." 2nd: Ostaessani kirjan, huomasin että "While I was buying the book (in my buying of the book), I noticed that" Paloauto kiirehti sireenit ulvoen kohti palavaa taloa." The fire truck sped with sirens howling toward the burning house" 3rd: Kävin ostamassa maitoa. "I went buying (to buy) milk and came back". Menin ostamaan maitoa. "I went to buying (to buy) milk." Tulin ostamasta maitoa. "I came (returned) from buying milk." Juomalla maitoa vältyin... "By drinking milk, I avoided..." Lähdin kaupasta ostamatta mitään. "I left the store without buying anything." I believe (not sure) that the usage of the rare instructive 3rd infinitive is like 'Minun piti menemän' or 'Minun piti mentämän', each meaning "I was supposed to go," but I don't think I've ever encountered those in real life. 5th: Olin sanomaisillani simply means "I was on the verge of saying."

I have a comment to the instructive of third infinitive. It is true, as with the instructive case in general, that it is seldom used. Your idea of the usage is correct for the active form 'menemän', but one should note that 'mentämän' is a passive form and therefore the sentence 'Minun piti mentämän' does not exist. A possible usage could be e.g. 'Piti mentämän ravintolaan, mutta se oli kiinni' meaning roughly "There was an idea of going to the restaurant, but it was closed." --Hekaheka 11:46, 27 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, I felt when writing it that they couldn't be quite so identical in usage, but couldn't put my finger on it. And though the difference should have been obvious, I needed to be reminded that in passive, even a genitive subject is not possible. Onyx 16:30, 27 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

So you can probably see why I say these are not nouns. And maybe begin to see as well why the agent participle is a separate thing from the stem of the third infinitive. The agent participle is very much like the present participle in concept but it is an "object" participle. Laulava nainen on kaunis. "The woman who is singing (or a woman who sings) is beautiful." Naisen laulama laulu on kaunis. "The song being sung by the woman is beautiful." Laulamani laulu on kaunis. "The song I am singing (or sang) is beautiful." I believe there may be a way to use it in the partitive without a possessive suffix or an object (like laulamaa) but I can't quite put that together and I may be in left field.

Is this an appropriate comment in an appropriate place? Are the infinitives any clearer now? I don't think I have standing to comment on your other questions, nor do I have any opinion at this point. Onyx 21:44, 26 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

I've made an addition to the Finnish declension and conjugation templates so that they add an entry to Category:Finnish terms needing attention whenever the headword of the template isn't identical to the name of the page. Unfortunately it seems that there are quite a few of them, and I don't know enough Finnish to be able to judge all of them correctly. Could you help out? —CodeCat 18:57, 27 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hey, this is great! Your addition reveals all the mistakes that have been made in writing the templates and have remained unnoticed. Keep up the good work! --Hekaheka 23:37, 27 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thank you! But there is a little problem... I only noticed these mistakes after my bot had already run through a few of them. So now we have all those wrong entries: balkanisoitua, diftongiutua and diversifioitua still have all the form entries with -o-. Can you help move them to the proper names? (There is no need to leave a redirect behind when you move them.) —CodeCat 00:20, 28 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

I already did most of them. There are two remaining problems, i.e. the verbs oudostuttaa and rei’ittyä. They seem to be correct but they still appear on the attention needed -list. Would you be able to figure out why? Should you run your bot again in order to find all confused declension templates? There's no need to move anything. The verbs are right, only the declension templates were wrong. --Hekaheka 00:29, 28 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

I know, but the bot had created lots of form-of entries based on the wrong declension template. So you have entries called balkanisoidon and so on with -o- in them. oudostuttaa has {{attention|fi}} on it still in the code, probably because the definition isn't really ideal. And I have no idea what is wrong with rei’ittyä... —CodeCat 00:47, 28 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

I see. This reveals a problem in automated approach to creating form-of entries. Many of the Finnish verb forms are rather theoretical in the sense that they are hardly ever used due to the nature and/or rareness of the verb. For example, the verb balkanisoitua describes a political process and therefore it's difficult to imagine a meaningful usage in which the word would appear in first or second person, passive, imperative, agent participle or negative participle. This means that a bot like this one is going to create a lot of useless entries that no one would ever look up. Finnish and other heavily inflected languages each have millions of word forms that are hardly ever used. Therefore, the approach to creating form-of entries should ideally be selective, but I don't know how it should be done in practice. --Hekaheka 08:00, 28 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

I don't think it's much of a problem if words are never used, as long as they do exist in theory. It's better to have an entry nobody will look up than miss one that someone eventually will try to look up.

I fixed the problem with rei’ittyä, and I also noticed I made a mistake with the declension template that made the categorisation not work. I fixed that now, so there should be more entries in the attention category soon. —CodeCat 10:33, 28 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

I still feel that this issue should be discussed on some more general forum before rushing into action. Perhaps the beer parlour would be the proper place. I repeat, there are perhaps 50,000 Finnish verbs and each of them has about 50 different forms. That alone makes potentially 2,5 million verb form-entries without possessive suffixes or cases of certain participles and infinitives. In addition there are, say, 150,000 nouns with 30 forms each, 30,000 adjectives with 90 forms and so on. If we add possessive suffixes and clitics, we get potentially at least 100 million Finnish entries, perhaps even a billion! I can imagine this to cause some usability and system-level problems. As a very simple example, it will clog drop-down boxes. As an alternative, I've been thinking of the possibility of making an entry for the stem of each word with a link to the entry or entries derived from this stem. --Hekaheka 11:16, 28 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

There is already a bot for Catalan, which has verbs with a similar amount of forms (around 50). And that one works quite well. Other languages with many forms also have their form entries and that works without problems. I really don't think the amount of entries is a problem. However, I do think we should limit the entries only to cases where there is a definite limit on what you can create. Suffixes like -lla can only be attached to nominals. But something like -nsa or -kaan can be attached to almost anything in theory. I believe Finnish grammars distinguish between inflectional suffixes and particles. So in order to limit the huge amount of possible combinations, I say we list only inflectional suffixes, but not particles. Essentially that means only those forms that are in inflection tables, nothing else. —CodeCat 12:11, 28 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

This is kind of a silly example, but it shows the extent to which you can take a Finnish noun. I use it to show the hazards of marrying a Finnish woman. You know how they say that Eskimos have over 200 words for snow, well Finnish has over 2,253 words for shop. I know, its a misrepresentation of Finnish culture, but I can't help poking fun. ~ heyzeuss 17:36, 28 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

I don't think such a bot creating pages indiscriminately is a good idea. Words are meant to be attestable. Equinox ◑ 21:29, 28 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Not limited to Finnish by any means. Certainly rare verbs in French like ixer, not all the inflected forms are attested, but it seems a bit silly to delete a few and leave the rest as blue links. Since entries are assumed to be valid until shown otherwise, it's ok to create these. Though if a large proportion of these turn out to be unattested, there will be some egg on face. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:36, 28 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

We've had lots of these bots going around for years, Finnish is just the latest language to get one of its own. It's a little late to complain about them now... :/ —CodeCat 21:38, 28 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Not too late to oppose a new bot creating unused words. Even if we have 1000 entries we shouldn't, that's better than 1001. Equinox ◑ 21:40, 28 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

As I understand it then, you're opposing the general use of formbots on Wiktionary... that's definitely something you'd want to discuss on Beer Parlour first! —CodeCat 21:43, 28 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

There is an error in the template invocation for esikypsentää, currently ((fi-conj-huutaa|esikypsen|t|d|ä|y|ö)). (d for n, obviously). Before I created a user account, I thought I saw a "report an error" link on the left and even used it on something or other. Do those reports find their way to the right person at the right time? At the moment I don't see such a link. So where/how is it best for me to report these for correction? Obviously that one would be simple for me to fix but for all I know it is downstream from a master source that would then still contain the error and eventually regenerate it. And even if that isn't the case, I expect you guys have a sense of ownership and prefer simply to receive reports so that you know what the heck is going on with your content. And I am merely stumbling across these incidentally, as my main focus is elsewhere at the moment. Are there summaries of changes within various content domains that get reported somewhere? It doesn't seem like one would want to be following this stuff at the page level, but what do I know at this point. Onyx 21:26, 28 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Just noticed these others: arabiantaa, hollannintaa, kiinantaa, kreikantaa, and norjantaa. Those appear to be all the instances of that particular error in huutaa verbs. Onyx 21:34, 28 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

You can fix them yourself. Just edit the page, and in the template call, change the d to n. —CodeCat 21:45, 28 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

I noticed only now that for the verbs ending -ntaa in "huutaa" -category the declension template must be written like this {{fi-decl-huutaa|arabian|t|n}} instead of {{fi-decl-huutaa|arabia|nt|nn}}. The reason is that the active past forms result wrong if the latter is used, e.g. arabiansi turns to arabiasi. --Hekaheka 13:14, 17 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

A lot of the hits on Google Books are in fact capitalised. ---> Tooironic 13:16, 29 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

I noticed, but I have understood that as a rule the names of species are not capitalized. The sources that capitalized pale clouded yellow consistently capitalized all species. I think we should be consistent, too. --Hekaheka 14:47, 29 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

I'd bet that "Pale Clouded Yellow" is capitalized where other English species names are not to prevent it from being misread as three successive adjectives. It probably could be shown the capitalized is the more common form for many species names in running text, but much usage of these is in headings. DCDuring TALK 16:53, 29 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Browsing the internet for a number of species names has made me less sure about my opinion. It seems that the names of butterflies are capitalized in a larger number of texts than, say, mammals. This might depend on the fact that their names are often combinations of common nouns and adjectives and may therefore be cumbersome to pick from plain text. Also it may be practical to be able to distinguish between pale clouded yellow the butterfly and pale clouded yellow the shade. Perhaps we should "upgrade" Pale Clouded Yellow from "Redirect" to "Alternative form"? --Hekaheka 12:20, 30 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Sounds good. I don't particularly enjoy this kind of capitalized entry and the possibility that in each case we need to check the relative frequency of forms. If there are some time-saving defaults to use for determining main form, that would be great. But facts can always override defaults. DCDuring TALK 14:09, 30 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Done. --Hekaheka 14:23, 30 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

I realize the kotus list is almost certainly correct and I'm not. But just to be sure: do rapsuttaa and tepsuttaa really belong in separate conjugations, with rapsuttaa becoming rapsutin like a good 53 and tepsuttaa becoming tepsutoin like a 56? I would never have guessed the latter and have trouble hearing it as correct. (I'm reviewing tail-to-head sorts by infinitive and also by 1p present, where such things sort of jump off the page at you.) Onyx 14:24, 29 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

turvottoi/turvotoin and taputtoi/taputoin also sound seriously "off" to me. Onyx 14:30, 29 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

You are right. Rapsuttaa is the only correct one here, and tepsuttaa, turvottaa and taputtaa are conjugated the same way. --Hekaheka 14:53, 29 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

There seems to be about 30 verbs that have been erroneously conjugated as "kaivaa", but they really belong to "muistaa" -type. What's embarrassing is that they seem to be my making of December 2009. I'll fix them. --Hekaheka 15:08, 29 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Ah, you caught them already. I was just coming back to post links to some files that I hope may be helpful. They are compilations of downloads I made over several days about a week ago from all the verb pages indexed from conjugation-type summary pages. Thus some of the erroneous forms have already been fixed, I notice, such as "kirjaata" ;) and its children (line 1 in one of these file). One short file is tta verbs in type 56, some of which are obviously right, some obviously wrong, and a couple I'm not confident to say. It sounds like you've gone through and fixed all that, but I had already "grepped" the file for you. Then there is a Zip of all verbs, which has a straight compilation, a compilation sorted on column 1 where it is the reversed infinitive, and a compilation sorted on column 1 where it is the reversed 1st person present. It's not every single form, just an assortment of key forms and stems with some redundancy. The zipped files are simple non-quoted .csv files, so they can easily be examined/edited as either text or a spreadsheet. Often right-justifying the columns makes anomalies more apparent, but sometimes left-justification is preferable, too. I don't have the CC/SA and LGPL notices there yet but they'll be there by the time I do anything public with this. Onyx 15:50, 29 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Also, does taittaa go exclusively to taittoi or can it ever be taitti? Onyx 15:50, 29 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Taittoi is regarded as grammatically correct by Nykysuomen sanakirja, but one sees and hears also taitti and NSK is already 50 years old. This source accepts taitti as parallel form. In google taittoi beats taitti by 98% vs. 2 %. --Hekaheka 11:59, 30 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

PS. I wrote an example to the entry ompeluttaa. Could you check the English translation? I have the hunch that I may have used an old-fashioned way to express the idea, but I don't know how to make it better. --Hekaheka 11:59, 30 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

I changed let sew to let be sewn and the independence day to Independence Day, checking the "minor edit" box. Your example (as edited) is the best way to translate it; the let be sewn is just there to clarify the correct sense of have sewn. Because as I expect you're well aware, to have sewn a dress is quite different from to have a dress sewn. In fact, maybe the translation should say to have something sewn, but I'm not yet familiar with guidelines on how that should possibly be marked up or whether it's congruent with similar usage elsewhere. Onyx 16:56, 30 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

Just as an example of how these files "work," if you scan down the first 1469 lines of all-long-rev.csv (which takes surprisingly little time), they are a sea of type 53's with occasional exceptions floating by. Some of the exceptions are correct, and you can easily see from the character of the letters before -ttaa why they are conjugated differently, but then others are erroneous. Onyx 16:14, 29 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

I ran an automated validation last night that turned up a few problems I'm not confident to fix since they may involve either a template invocation or the actual template itself. They're listed on my talk page User_talk:Onyx. I gather you and CodeCat have the most to do with the templates, so I'm raising a flag here. Onyx 18:17, 3 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

I was able to fix most of the problems, but not all of them. I hope it helps at least! —CodeCat 20:31, 3 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

It has somewhat scrolled into the mists of history above (User_talk:Hekaheka#Finnish_Infinitives), but CodeCat asked about generating nominal declensions related to infinitives. What do others think about putting a declension table on the page for each of the six participles? Or putting on each participle page a link to a unified page for that kind of participle showing how it is declined, e.g. -va, -van, -vaa, etc., with a similar page for -minen. (Or have I overlooked such treatments elsewhere?)

That latter solution still leaves some question about how to handle the past participles, since the combination of u/y and various initial letters creates a number of possible tables, particularly in the passive. Perhaps that could still be managed with wide tables like the ones on conjugation category pages that show principal parts for verbs with various types of consonant gradation. If only e.g. -ttu, -ltu, etc. is shown for each group and not a full sample word like sanottu, the spread might not be untenable.

I think these would constitute a valuable addition if CodeCat is still interested in doing them. (At present it is worlds beyond my Wiktionary prowess.) Or would this be venturing too much into the domain of Wikipedia? Onyx 18:55, 4 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

I don't know whether we should do them, but if one wants to, the participles and fourth infinitive can be done with existing tools. One only needs to remember that the participles behave as adjectives, but not all are comparable, whereas fourth infinitive behaves as noun. Long first infinitive and fifth infinitive are not inflected but one might want to develop a table which lists all possessive-suffixed forms. Second and third infinitive only have a small number of cases and do not require a table. In order to give something concrete to ponder about, I added declension tables to appropriate forms of the verb tehdä: tekevä, tehtävä, tehnyt, tehty, tekemä, tekemätön, tekeminen. For some I made a separate "Adjective" -section, for others I didn't. There's no logical thinking behind which is treated which way, but this might also be something to give a thought to before rushing forward. --Hekaheka 19:55, 4 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

I think it's useful if someone could look up tekemän and find that it's the genitive of tekemä. So we should include declension tables for participles. I'm not sure what part of speech we should use for them though. Participles are technically free-standing adjectives, and I believe a participle can always be replaced with a regular adjective, is that right? If that's the case then we should probably list participles as ===Adjective=== and not as ===Verb===. —CodeCat 20:15, 4 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Either solution could be justified by some logic. In Finnish participles and infinitives are called verbin nominaalimuoto (“nominal form of a verb”) which is an elegant way to circumvent the question of them being verbs or nominals.--Hekaheka 20:21, 4 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

I see that in English, lying and lain are listed under ===Verb=== and identified as participles, as are sung and singing in its role as participle. Is there more to consider in that particular decision for Finnish participles? "Singing" is actually an interesting example in this question since it is also listed under adjective while lying is not. I guess Heka put his finger on this in noting that not all participles can take comparative forms. Sujuva has an adjectival quality somewhat beyond its participial role and consequently it already has a page including declension and comparative forms. So is the default to list all participles as Verb (participle) and additionally to identify some as adjectives?

Now if, additionally, someone should be able to look up tekemän to see that it comes from tekemä, that suggests all entries in the table will get a page created for them; and it seemed to me the question was still open (in discussion above) about whether to start down the road of creating a page for every possible form of every verb. Onyx 00:06, 5 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Comparing Hekaheka's implementation of tekemätön and tehtävä, I think it is sufficient to have one table that appears after all the Finnish-language categories to which the word belongs. (Could there ever be a case where they would differ?) That will sometimes be Verb alone and sometimes Verb and Adjective or Noun. At least that's what I suggest. Onyx 00:17, 5 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

There's a slight difference in comitative plural in those relatively rare cases in which the participle has also developed to a noun. Examples include lentävä (“colloquial term for highway patrol”), tehtävä, juopunut, grillattu (“a type of hamburger”), rupeama, koskematon (“untouchable; outcaste”). --Hekaheka 05:51, 5 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

I wrote a new entry for koskematon (“untouched, virgin, pristine, untouchable”). We might use that as a test case as it has both noun and adjective senses in addition to being a participle of koskea (“to touch”). --Hekaheka 09:26, 5 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

"There's a slight difference in comitative plural..." And you knew that off the top of your head, did you? I see your point. I have some concern (always) about the essence of the information getting lost in the proliferation of details, but I'm not sure I see a solution to that. Including three tables that look identical in all but a single letter does not do much to emphasize the presence or significance of that difference. Rather, people would assume that because the tables look the same, they are the same. Even if the tiny difference were noticed, it might be thought a typo. Yet the way the reference seems to be organized, I don't know that there is a mechanism, or at least a convention, for contrasting the comitative. Unless it were a unified side-by-side double or triple table at the end of the Finnish section of the article or something like that. I'm just ruminating here, not ready to push one approach over any other. Apart from that, the article on koskematon seems unremarkable, i.e. acceptable. Why do you suppose Finnish does not distinguish between untouched and untouchable, which seem quite opposite in spirit if not literal status? I'll bet it would not be that way if Finland had such a caste. Onyx 20:57, 5 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

I admit that koskematon sounds bit weird in the sense "untouchable", but that's how the outcastes were historically called in Finnish. At least a partial explanation is that there's no one-size-fits-all Finnish equivalent to the structure "un-verb-able". One possibility would be to use a compound of kelvoton (“unfit”) like in juomakelvoton (“undrinkable”). But koskettamiskelvoton, kosketettavaksi kelpaamaton or epäkosketeltava would sound quite weird as well. In current Finnish the term for "untouchable" is kastiton (“outcaste”) or more preferably, as the caste system has been officially discontinued, the loanword dalit. --Hekaheka 14:07, 6 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

One other thing: would redirects as opposed to full pages for some types of derived forms be a workable compromise in the question of where to draw the line on exploding quantities of Finnish words? Would it actually win anything or would it simply be stuffing a different resource? Given that Finland is such a small percentage of the world population, it would be odd to have the language dominating a multi-lingual resource in numbers of entries (and resources consumed), like some kind of digital kudzu. Onyx 20:57, 5 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hmm, on the other hand, the space in Wiktionary should probably not be allocated according to the number of speakers. But I agree that a large number of almost similar entries in any language would be difficult to handle. --Hekaheka 14:07, 6 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Wiktionary's mission statement is to include all words in all languages, though. And while I agree that we try to reduce combinations for the sake of convenience, I still don't see the problem in having entries for each of these forms. —CodeCat 21:13, 5 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

We could draw the line between nominal forms of verbs and their declined forms. We could permit an automated entry for each participle and each fourth infinitive, but no further. Otherwise, attestability becomes more and more of an issue, and it would take a very long time for a bot to add all of those words.

7,296 Finnish verbs x 7 declinable nominal forms x 30 forms of nominals = 1,532,160 forms of declinable forms of verbs

At 6 edits per minute, it would take 177 days to add them. ~ heyzeuss 10:11, 6 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

One notion that might be useful is that with the exception of past participles there's actually very little variation in the way the nominal forms are inflected, i.e. if you know one, you know them all:

4th infinitive always ends with -minen

active present participle always ends with -va or -vä

passive present participle always ends with -tava or -tävä

agent participle always ends with -ma or -mä

negative agent participle always ends with -maton or -mätön

Lua error in Module:fi-nominals at line 192: Vowel harmony (parameter 2) must be "a" or "ä". Lua error in Module:fi-nominals at line 192: Vowel harmony (parameter 2) must be "a" or "ä".

As a default, there could be a link from the conjugation table to the standard declension of each of these five forms. A separate entry would be written only if there's a good reason for that, such as in case the nominal form may also be regarded as an adjective or noun. If a separate entry exists, the link should automatically lead to that page. Past participles could have their own entries with declension table and everything as they are subject to consonant gradation. --Hekaheka 14:07, 6 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

I think this is going the right direction. The way I'm leaning so far, based on the comments above and a bit of my own thinking, is that there would be some kind of summary page about declinable nominal forms of verbs. (Are the non-declinables truly nominal forms, as labeled, BTW? Most of the infinitives don't feel nominal to me.) Then every verb's participles and -minen would, at a minimum, have auto-generated pages identifying their grammatical role, showing their specific declension, and linking to the summary of declinable nominal forms page. That page would have all the hyphen-prefixed tables and an explanation of what each form means in general. Every verb's conjugation table would link to the page for each form but would also have a general link to the summary of declinable nominal forms. THAT page would probably offer possessive suffixes where appropriate, but not the individual form pages.(?) Onyx 16:48, 6 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Is that really a true footnote about the agent participle? Is it such an abomination to say something like menemä tie or kävelemäni tie? I realize that kulkemani would usually better in both cases, but wait -- kulkea is also called intransitive. I see that the English entry for "walk" labels as transitive several usages that also exist for these three verbs in Finnish. Isn't it more the verbs like hidastua, laihtua, etc., where the agent participle doesn't make sense? And isn't there a more specific name for that class of verbs? Onyx 17:07, 6 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

On further thought, I suppose it IS a true statement, the problem being that the verbs I mentioned are not strictly intransitive. Because I can't think of any adjectival way to use kasvamani. Now when it comes to a sentence like Naittivaifilla on aina hidastuma Bocaliittymän kohdalla, does hidastuma then fall under the warning not to confuse -ma nouns with the agent participle, or does the warning refer only to words like mustelma? Can one really say that an agent participle doesn't exist or only that it is nonsensical?

The grammar of a language is a convention or approximation rather than an absolute truth. My experience about agent participle says that it is always used with an object. The verb may be intransitive most of the time, but sensible use of agent participle requires an object or at least something that can be interpreted as an object. Kävellä is a good example. Most of the time it is intransitive, but in the expression kävelemäni tie, tie becomes an object. Another example might be poliisin pysäyttämä auto - a car stopped by the police. This is ok, because pysäyttää (“to stop”) is a transitive verb, but a I cannot think of a usage example of pysähtymä, which is the agent participle of the intransitive verb pysähtyä (“to stop”). And yes, I would interpret hidastuma as a noun.

When you say "I would interpret," that is telling me it's not an established noun with an entry in any dictionary but merely a usage so inherently sensible that it functions as a noun without raising any eyebrows or hackles. And I guess I understand now that to qualify as a participle (agent or otherwise) in a Finnish phrase or sentence, a word must be used like an adjective. Thus in Onko sanottavaa, "sanottava" is not functioning as a participle. Or is it functioning as a participle with an implied object of mitään? And in some parallel universe, kasvama might be used in place of kasvain, but it would not be a participle in that usage. Would pysähtymä really be so different from tapahtuma? As in tuotantolinjalla (-linjassa?) sattui pysähtymä? I mean if pysähdys didn't already exist for that purpose. So we have keskeytys and pysähdys but no tapahdus. Maybe these questions belong better on Finlanforum, I guess. Onyx 01:32, 7 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

I said "interpret" because I had never heard or seen the word pysähtymä. A Google search gives 2800 raw hits but they appear mostly to be 3rd infinitives of pysähtyä rather than nouns. And yes, it might as well exist if it had occurred to someone to call a stop pysähtymä rather than pysähdys. As a matter of fact, some writers of medical articles used it in the sense "an abnormal stoppage in the growth or development of an individual or organ", but I doubt one could find it in a dictionary.

I would say that in your example sanottava is a participle. But I'm not sure of the sentence: Olen sanonut sanottavani. - "I have said what I had to say." I guess it could still be defined as participle and the usage would be comparable to usage of an adjective as a noun. In the end, I would guess it's a question of convention. Perhaps we have a linguist somewhere around who could give the final judgment, Your other inventions for a word are possible in the sense that they might as well be used the way you propose. --Hekaheka 09:11, 7 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Actually it was hidastuma rather than pysähtymä to which "I would interpret" originally referred. Google only shows 5,000-some of those, but some are pretty official-looking. So many at the start of the results are medical that it begins to look like one of those words that is difficult to use in any other context -- like "retardation," just to pick one out of the blue  :) At the time, hidastua was merely one of the first -tua verbs that came to mind that seemed suitable for an example of a natural but un-established formation. Not that I would expect to recognize all the established ones... Onyx 01:40, 8 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

I wrote that footnote. The thing is that you can say "kuulemani tarina" (story heard by me), but you can't say "kuolemani ..." (it would be " died by me"). I didn't read this whole thread, but is that footnote comprehensible? Because it's at least linguistically 100% true, I'm 100% sure of that. -- Frous 05:38, 18 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hmmmmmmm. Sanottavani and tehtäväni are IMO temporarily used as nouns in the phrases olen tehnyt tehtäväni and olen sanonut sanottavani (cos they are objects). I could actually imagine writing an entry for sanoa sanottavansa, because it verges on an idiom. -- Frous 05:44, 18 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

I don't really care one way or the other, but I get controversy for using either template. When I tried to get a flood flag I got refused pretty quickly because I was using {{infl}}. ~ heyzeuss 20:09, 6 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Can you explain what is really the difference? Why should fi-noun be preferable to infl|fi|noun? Which benefits would it bring and which are the disadvantages of using infl|fi|noun? The only thing I have against fi-noun is that it swells the list Category:Finnish_nominals_that_lack_declension_type. It should be possible to redefine the list so that it would only include those entries which fulfil the condition that they are either fi-noun, fi-adj, fi-pron or fi-num and they do not have a declension line. My problem is that I cannot do it. --Hekaheka 08:49, 7 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

No, I really can't tell the difference, except that people will stop bothering me about using {{infl}}. I have to give in one way or the other. Each language is "supposed" to has its own set of xx-partofspeech templates, like the ones for Italian. It's recommended policy, although it's been different for Finnish because of our transition to complete inflection tables.

Wiki markup does not provide a way for a template to search an entry and return a value true or false, in the way that you described (I'm sure somebody will prove me wrong), although the task can be performed periodically with other tools. For example, CodeCat made us some lists of entries that do not transclude fi-decl-table.

Like I said though, one template is not better than the other, they both produce the same results. People are just anxious about things getting out of rank and file. ~ heyzeuss 10:20, 7 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello Haka., I notice we've often been the only ones on Wiktionary's WOTD translations (along with catalano Morkai, and of course the wardens...). Am afraid you'll be even more solitary for a month or about : am going to Latinoland for some language steeping, sun, sea, and as much sex, too, as my age'll allow me (exclusively within the bonds of wedlock, of course...;-) - and very few (if any) Internet. I'll lack WOTD, got quite addict to it... BTW, do you know what has become of Encyclopetey ? I haven't seen anything of him since last mid-december, & I lack his velvet glove in his iron hand... Adios compañero, t.y. Arapaima 06:50, 12 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Template:fi-decl-yhdestoista is really nice, thanks. ~ heyzeuss 10:52, 28 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Are -va words always like this, with the -vineine ending, as in auttavineine? What if the word is a noun? ~ heyzeuss 15:15, 5 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Never mind. It was just a victim of a template change. ~ heyzeuss 16:00, 5 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

No, it was a victim of wrong template use. The entry is now fixed. In the case of noun, write "en" in the last space. --Hekaheka 20:28, 5 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi there. Is it true that kaksikymmentäluku has no plural, while kolmekymmentäluku has? Or is it a mistake? Sinek 12:19, 22 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

I think there's only one kaksikymmentäluku etc., whereas the word kaksituhattaluku is ambiguous and therefore one might need the plural. One might find arguments in favor of the plural of any x-kymmentäluku, but then they should all be treated the same. --Hekaheka 12:55, 22 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

The old translation bug came back and in adding a few translations, the page quadrupled in size. So I reverted; feel free to add those translations back. --Mglovesfun (talk) 13:28, 29 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

All right, I was wondering what's going on. --Hekaheka 13:30, 29 March 2011 (UTC)Reply

See go to seed (2nd definition). SemperBlotto 19:53, 2 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

Possibly let oneself go? - -sche (discuss) 20:42, 2 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

Judging by the usexes neither seems to be exactly what I'm looking for. Rupsahtaminen (“action noun for rupsahtaa”) is rather the transformation resulting of letting oneself go, or it might happen independently of one's action or inaction as a natural result of ageing. I would translate "let oneself go" as antaa (“to let”) + itsensä (“oneself”) + rupsahtaa. To "go" has a nearby definition, but it appears a bit harsh for this purpose:

17. To break down or decay.

Let's try through an example. One might use the verb rupsahtaa of breasts to indicate that they have lost their youthful roundness and are more or less sagging:

Hänen rintansa olivat rupsahtaneet.

Her breasts had gone to seed.

She had let her breasts go.

Her breasts had gone.

Does any of the attempts for an English translation appear right, i.e. like one that someone might actually use or what would be the verb for this particular context? --Hekaheka 09:13, 3 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

I would not say "her breasts had gone". I agree "she had let her breasts go" isn't quite right unless her own negligence/unconcern allowed the decline. I have added two quotations to rupsahtaa; I think the first one (Maria Kara) could be translated with go to seed/pot (or let go to seed/pot?) — compare these and these quotations. Another phrase may be needed to translate the Uppol Ukla quotation and yours, above, though. - -sche (discuss) 17:35, 3 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

I'm attempting to understand the difference between singular and plural usage of molempi. Currently, the example is:

molemmassa kädessä / molemmissa käsissä

In both hands

What about:

molemmassa kädessä

in each hand

molemmissa käsissä

in both hands

~ heyzeuss 06:20, 6 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

Don't try, only the plural usage is regarded as correct. I see from the page history that I have once accepted the singular usage but that was in my early days in Wiktionary and I did not dare to challenge the existing interpretation. I've edited the entry accordingly.

Another issue is that kumpikin/kummatkin may be used both in singular and plural. The plural is used with pluralia tantum and when speaking of two groups of similar items. --Hekaheka 08:00, 6 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

I found a list that shows the frequency of Finnish words words used in printed news. I reproduced it at Wiktionary:Frequency lists/Finnish/notexist, showing the most common words first, with bluelinked words and proper nouns removed. Near the top of the list are: sen sijaan, ainakaan, työryhmä, ohella, and mukaisesti. The full list is available, too, in the form of a sortable table. Proper nouns are uncapitalized, which I would like to fix, someday. ~ heyzeuss 08:16, 6 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

This is good. I will use this as my priority list for creating new entries. --Hekaheka 08:19, 6 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

Yair rand wrote a script where you can edit the definition without loading up the edit page. It also has language tabs at the top, which reduce scrolling. If you want to try it out, click enable, then clear your cache (Internet Explorer, Firefox ctrl+f5). If you hate having any changes to your interface, ignore this completely.

~ heyzeuss 06:53, 11 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

Please review my new entry, osakkuus. ~ heyzeuss 07:18, 12 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

I added mitä jos as a translation for what if. Please check. ~ heyzeuss 11:25, 13 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

Looks that you forgot to save as there's no trace of your edits in the page history. --Hekaheka 14:25, 13 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, I must've forgotten to save. Thanks for checking for me. BTW the translation section gives mitä and jos separate links. * Finnish: ] {{t|fi|jos}} Is that what you meant to put in, or did the form make it that way? ~ heyzeuss 16:02, 13 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

Yes, that's what I meant to do, because I think both mitä jos and "what if" are SoP, but I have no energy for starting a lengthy smartass RFD discussion on "what if". --Hekaheka 19:44, 13 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

No need. I was about to use it in conversation, but I thought that nobody would understand me, carrying an English idiom into Finnish. There was a political candidate handing out fliers at Halpa-Halli. I asked him in English, "What if you win?" The phrase is already present in Finnish, so I guess it is more SoP than I thought. Funny how that happens, sometimes. ~ heyzeuss 06:26, 14 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

Where does pahiten come from? ~ heyzeuss 09:05, 19 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

See entry. --Hekaheka 14:46, 26 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

I noticed you added this Finnish translation for horror story. However the definition given for kauhutarina presently is "horror story; ghost story". FYI a "horror story" has nothing to do with "horror" as in ghosts, and more to do with anything that can be considered unpleasant, e.g. "I've heard horror stories of westerners having their Lonely Planet guides confiscated by Chinese officials." ---> Tooironic 22:58, 25 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

I deleted "ghost story" from translations for kauhutarina. A better Finnish equivalent for ghost story is kummitusjuttu = kummitus (“ghost”) +‎ juttu (“story”). --Hekaheka 07:20, 26 April 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hey what's the etymology here? Just curious. ---> Tooironic 23:54, 24 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

Etymology added to the entry. --Hekaheka 00:15, 25 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

Some Anon editor seems to have "corrected" you: . Have a look? Ƿidsiþ 09:04, 1 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for notification. The correction was good. In fact, I had had to interrupt my editing before I was happy with the result.

--Hekaheka 11:41, 1 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Good entry. Clears things up for me a lot. Thanks. ~ heyzeuss 09:02, 11 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

I've made a list of all the affix categories that are listed in 'wanted categories'. Can you see what you can do about the Finnish categories? They may need to be checked because some of them could be compounds or not real affixes. Thank you! —CodeCat 00:08, 19 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

I categorized the list. Does that help? --Hekaheka 17:26, 19 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

I was hoping you could create those that should be created, and fix the entries that are categorised in the others. I'm still not really sure which are ok and which aren't. —CodeCat 17:31, 19 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

OK. I'm not so sure either about what to call an affix and what not. Are you aware of an existing policy or guideline? I did -kielinen already, interpreting it as being a usage of the adjective kielinen rather than a suffix. I'll work the list further but it's rather time-consuming and there are other lists to work, so it will take time. --Hekaheka 04:35, 20 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

There isn't really any policy on it as far as I know, but there have been a few discussions about it, like about new-. If you like, I could use a bot to create all the categories that you said are certainly affixes? —CodeCat 11:07, 20 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Do you think -lla is not a suffix even for frequentative verbs? —CodeCat 09:40, 22 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

It is, as it is a suffix for all adessive forms. These are discussed in the entry -lla. The problem is the quantity and even more than that, the added value of creating a category for words suffixed with "-lla", which I consider minimal. Practically every verb has a frequentative form and therefore a list of verbs suffixed with "-lla" would more or less duplicate the list of all Finnish verbs, and it would be almost exactly the same as the list of Finnish frequentative verbs, which we already have. Therefore I thought the treatment of frequentative verbs should be analogous to adessive forms in the sense that one should not use suffix-template but categorize them to "Finnish frequentative verbs". As an improvement to current practice one might consider creating a template of the type {{freqform|ostaa|gloss=to buy|lang=fi}}, which would produce a text "Frequentative form of the verb ostaa ("to buy")." and categorize the entry to Finnish frequentative verbs. This would spare some writing and standardize the output. --Hekaheka 11:30, 22 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

But aren't there several ways to form a frequentative in Finnish? If there are, it would be useful to be able to distinguish the different kinds. —CodeCat 11:50, 22 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

True, I forgot that, because the form with "-lla" is quite dominating. But then the category should be "Finnish frequentattive forms suffixed with "-lla". I'm still not convinced of the added value, but if you think it's good for something, I do not oppose. My template idea might then be developed a bit. For example {{freqform|ostaa|lla|gloss=to buy|lang=fi}} would be used for ostella, {{freqform|kulkea|ksia|gloss=to go|lang=fi}} for kuljeksia and {{freqform|kulkea|skella|gloss=to go|lang=fi}} for kuljeskella. --Hekaheka 13:19, 22 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Maybe it's useful, I don't really know. I think it would be better to discuss this at the beer parlour. —CodeCat 13:20, 22 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

I have now updated all the header templates ({{fi-noun}} etc.) and added short instructions how to use them. Basic things such as sorting, changing default head text work now. Additional categories for verbs, pronouns, numbers, and suffixes can be added (less messy than adding categories directly). Please refer to the documentation for further info. --Jyril 07:40, 20 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Löytyi tällainen web-sivusto. Sisältää automaattisesti dumpattua ja käännettyä roskaa, mutta kummallista kyllä näyttää siltä, että se sisältää myös KOTUS-tietokannan useimpine määritelmineen. Minulla on ihan luvallinen pääsy ko. tietokantaan, mutta jos sinulla ei ole, voit varmaankin käyttää tuota sivustoa apunasi. Kaikki määritelmää vailla olevat sanat ovat peräisin KOTUS-sanalistasta, joten tuosta sivustosta voi olla paljonkin hyötyä. --Jyril 08:15, 20 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Ok, tästä on varmasti hyötyä. --Hekaheka 11:37, 20 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

The English category is now (only since recently, a few weeks now) Category:en:Fish. I will fix these by bot. Cheers, --Mglovesfun (talk) 19:39, 22 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

All right, thanks. --Hekaheka 19:48, 22 July 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hello. Our entry blackberry has a Finnish translation muurain, but that entry says it means cloudberry. Which is right? Equinox ◑ 16:43, 2 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Blackberry is karhunvatukka in Finnish and muurain means a cloudberry. I have corrected the entry. --Hekaheka 16:58, 2 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

The {{{d|d}}} and {{{t|t}}} items in the templates are to allow the gradation to be highlighted in appendices - see the use in the bottom section of Appendix:Finnish_declension/käsi.

I see, got it. --Hekaheka 14:22, 16 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Mind you, various recent changes to the inflection templates have broken the appendices. They're not looking very good these days. --KJBracey 13:54, 16 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Would you like to point out, which? --Hekaheka 14:22, 16 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

It is the tables that show consonant gradation. The words have square brackets around them. It has been that way since CodeCat edited them. I asked him to fix the appendices, but he hasn't got around to it. Most of his edits have been positive though. ~ heyzeuss 15:53, 16 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Perhaps he should be reminded. I was afraid that I had done something stupid. --Hekaheka 15:56, 16 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Kielitoimiston nimiopas itse asiassa suosittaa taivutusta Soinnun, ja sekä Urpun että Urvun on mainittu mahdollisina. Etunimien taivutus on hiukan makuasia, on ehkä turha mainita mikä on oikein ja mikä väärin, raportoidaan vain mitä tapahtuu. Minun vaarini oli oikeakielisyysmies ja kutsui sisartani aina "Oudiksi"...mutta se ei ehkä ole mainitsemisen arvoista--Makaokalani 12:56, 25 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

OK. Kirjoitin sen mukaan, mitä itse koulussa opin, ja siitä on jo vähän aikaa. Uudempi tieto korvatkoon vanhemman. --Hekaheka 13:02, 25 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

That was a silly mistake of mine. Sorry and thanks. — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (U · T · C) ~ 18:32, 26 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Not a big thing. Everybody makes them. --Hekaheka 21:14, 26 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, I suppose. BTW, could you translate (using basileiolatry) that 1967 quotation I've added to kuningas, kuninkaan, palvonta, palvontaan, Citations:kuningas‎, and Citations:palvonta please? If you like, just add it to one of them, then I'll copy and paste it to the other five. — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (U · T · C) ~ 10:20, 27 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Translation added to "palvontaan". It's rather stiff but so is the original text. Feel free to improve. --Hekaheka 11:31, 27 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. Being fi-0, I wouldn't know where to begin improving any translation; I trust yours is accurate. A good day to you, sir. — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (U · T · C) ~ 16:17, 27 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

I meant that you may have a comment on the English I used. If it e.g. sounds unnatural, we might be able to do something to it. --Hekaheka 16:20, 27 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

OK, I get this word-for-word translation: Tällainen (“This kind of”) epämiellyttävien (gen. pl., “unpleasant”) totuuksien (“of truths”) lausuja (agent noun of lausua; “to speak”, “to utter”, &c.?) alkoi (“began to”, “started”) käydä (“to get”, “to grow”, “to become”) epämukavaksi (form of epämukava, “uncomfortable”?) kuninkaan (“of a king”) palvontaan (“(toward) worship”) omistautuneessa (form of omistautua; “devote oneself to”, “dedicate oneself to”?) hovimaailmassa (= hovi (“court”)?). From that, and without any other information or context, I suppose that “kind” or “sort” would be better than “type” and “to become” would suit the tone better than “to get”, I think. I may have something to say about “inconvenient” as well, but that would be dependent on my (very probably erroneous) assumption that epämukavaksi is a form of epämukava. Is that at all useful? — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (U · T · C) ~ 07:42, 28 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

I agree with preferring "kind" or "sort" to "type" and "become" to "get". Epämukava has both the sense "inconvenient" and "uncomfortable". I would think a speaker of truths is rather inconvenient than uncomfortable to the rest of the court. Hovimaailma means literally "court world". I think it is best translated simply as "court" to English. To "dedicate" seems to have the sense "devote", but the latter is probably less prone to being misunderstood. I'll edit my translation according to these lines. --Hekaheka 18:13, 16 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

I agree with your changes. I've applied them in the other five cases. Thanks for your work on this. — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (U · T · C) ~ 07:22, 18 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Did you see the redlinks page? ~ heyzeuss 08:41, 27 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Sure I did. I'm working on it right now. Any specific reason to ask? --Hekaheka 08:44, 27 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Nothing specific. Thanks for the new entries. ~ heyzeuss 17:48, 27 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

There are no red links left on that page! --Hekaheka 17:54, 16 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hey, great, thanks! ~ heyzeuss 21:14, 16 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Should huomiseen have "Greeting" as another part of speech? ~ heyzeuss 20:25, 30 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

It is used as greeting very much the same way as see you tomorrow. I guess this usage should be recognized as it is not an SoP like see you tomorrow. --Hekaheka 22:08, 30 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for clarifying jooko because it has been bothering me. I thought that it might be joukkoon with the 'n' omitted, as in, Leikkitään, joukkoon? (Let's play, are you with me?), but it's not, and I can think about something else now. ~ heyzeuss 19:17, 7 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

You're welcome. If there are other words that keep bothering you, don't hesitate to ask. --Hekaheka 20:48, 7 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

How are my example sentences for mutka?

Finnish is perfect, but I have two comments on the English part:

1. Don't you say "around" the corner rather than "behind"? I remember having been corrected by my Canadian ex-girlfriend on this issue.
2. I'm used think that "corner" refers to a streetcorner, i.e. a place where two streets meet. Streetcorner is kulma or kadunkulma in Finnish. Mutka on the other hand is a curve, i.e. a place where the direction of a road or street changes more or less sharply, usually without intersecting with other roads. Naturally there may be a kulma which is located in a mutka but the road planners try to avoid those. --Hekaheka 14:15, 8 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Idiomatically, yes, but my example is a literal translation. It depends on how sneaky the corner negotiator is: The mugger suddenly appeared from behind a dark corner.

Yes, corners are sharper than bends. Johnny Cash sings, in Folsom Prison Blues, I hear that train a-comin', it's rollin' 'round the bend. Do you think that I should move the examples to the entry for kulma? ~ heyzeuss 19:32, 8 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

They are now examples of the sense "curve" of the word "mutka", but using the word "corner". Unless you can substitute "curve" for "corner", it would probably be better to move them to "kulma". Then, of course, "mutka" must be substituted with "kulma". --Hekaheka 04:42, 9 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Can you check my examples at hetki and hetkinen? I really don't know how to use them, so right now they are commented out. ~ heyzeuss 18:50, 18 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

My mother-in-law says, "minä en tunne sanaa huitale." -hz

Me neither. Marked for speedy deletion. The correct word is hiutale. --Hekaheka 19:02, 25 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

Thanks for your support but the vote starts on 17 October 2011. I think you can't vote yet. --Anatoli 19:23, 4 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for correcting the date, sorry. :) --Anatoli 10:38, 5 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

We have a similar vote, you may want to have a look: Wiktionary:Votes/pl-2011-10/Mixed script Mandarin entries. --Anatoli 10:32, 1 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

I saw you know some Estonian, so I hope you can help a little. I've created a conjugation table for Estonian tulema, based on the Finnish templates. But I don't really know much Estonian and I've had to rely on references. Can you check it and make sure it's correct? Thank you! —CodeCat 14:18, 15 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I'm sorry, but I don't know enough Estonian to say anything trustworthy about the conjugation of Estonian verbs, but as far as I can say it looks good. There's nothing that I could contradict with and I recognize most of the forms, but you must be aware that I have never studied Estonian and all my knowledge of the language is based on personal experience. I checked the page history of quite a few Estonian words in order to identify a native Estonian contributor who could help, but I couldn't find any. Most of the Estonian words that we have seem to be added by Finns. --Hekaheka 20:09, 15 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Ha, there are at least two Estonian contributors. You find them here: Wiktionary:Wiktionarians#Estonia. --Hekaheka 20:19, 15 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

What are the correct comparatives and superlatives for oikea, väärä, oikein, and väärin? Here's one opinion. Can you write some example sentences?

	comparative	superlative
oikea	oikeampi	oikein
väärä	väärempi	väärin
oikein	oikeammin	oikeimmin
väärin	vääremmin	väärimmin

~ heyzeuss 22:42, 15 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

While noting that the superlatives of oikea and väärä are rarely appropriate, the table appears correct to me. Due to the possible confusion with much more frequently used adverbs, the superlatives oikein and väärin are rarely used though. People tend to circumvent them by saying eniten väärä, lähinnä oikeaa and eniten oikea, choosing another adjective if available (e.g. kiero, oikeanpuoleinen, oikeellinen) or using kaikista as determiner. --Hekaheka 03:36, 16 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

It seems that "oikein" as superlative of oikea is so rarely used that it's difficult to find examples of actual usage. This is natural, because right and wrong are often understood as absolutes. I can imagine that the superlative might be used e.g. in a case where there are many wrong answers, but some are better than the others, and one is closest to the truth, i.e. "rightest" or most correct. Example:

Kaikki vastasivat vähän väärin, mutta Annen vastaus on kaikista oikein.

All got their answers slightly wrong, but Anne's is the most correct of them all.

Even there, one might prefer to say e.g.:

... Annen vastaus on lähimpänä oikeaa.

... Anne's is closest to the correct one.

I don't think the logic differs much of the comparison of the adjective "right" in English. Thus my answer to the original question is: oikein is the grammatical superlative of oikea, but it is hardly ever used in real life. Examples of the other comparative forms:

Annen vastaus on oikeampi kuin minun.

Anne's answer more correct than mine.

Anne vastasi oikeammin kuin kukaan muu.

Anne answered more correctly than anyone else.

Anne vastasi oikeimmin.

Anne answered most correctly.

Jos haetaan Kustaa IV:ttä, niin Napoleon IV on väärempi vastaus kuin Kustaa III.

If Gustav IV is sought after, Napoleon IV is a more incorrect answer than Gustav III.

Annetuista vastauksista väärin on Napoleon IV, joka ei edes ollut Ruotsin kuninkaita.

Among the answers given the most incorrect is Napoleon IV, who wasn't even one of the kings of Sweden.

Minä vastasin vääremmin kuin Anne.

I answered more incorrectly than Anne.

Minä vastasin väärimmin.

I answered most incorrectly.

--Hekaheka 08:45, 16 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Those are pretty good. I'll work them, as well as the usage notes, into the entries ~ heyzeuss 11:59, 16 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I think your edit might have been a mistake: see ].​—msh210℠ (talk) 20:53, 17 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Perhaps I was quick in drawing my conclusion but still after giving it a second thought, isn't it just an adjectival use of a noun - clothes designed to be used in a resort? If we add a fashion sense to "resort", shouldn't we logically have fashion senses for casual, sailing, yachting, marine, baseball, skiing etc. for what ever it occurs to designers to create clothes for? --Hekaheka 04:58, 18 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

You may well be right.​—msh210℠ (talk) 05:40, 18 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Can it also be muovikassi? 71.66.97.228 04:59, 19 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

If Wikipedia is right, plastic bag is a more generic term than plastic shopping bag i.e. "plastic shopping bag" is a "plastic bag" designed for carrying goods from a shop to home or wherever. It's kind of similar in Finnish: the generic term being muovipussi and the more specific being muovikassi. The difference between pussi and kassi is a bit flexible, but generally I would say that if a soft bag is made for carrying things rather than storing them, has handles and is made of relatively tough material, then it tends to be kassi and if the opposite is true, then it tends to be pussi. A large pussi is usually called säkki. If we assume that a "plastic shopping bag" is in English speaking countries often called "plastic bag" for the sake of simplicity, then yes, "plastic bag" may be translated as muovikassi whenever it refers to a "plastic shopping bag". --Hekaheka 05:21, 19 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Is there another sense of the word peli that indicates some kind of tool or machine, as in ajopeli and kulkupeli? ~ heyzeuss 18:51, 20 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Yes, there is. It's synonymous to väline. There's also ankkuripeli. It may also be used alone:

Kiva peli!

Nice wheels!

--Hekaheka 19:00, 20 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I think vasten is used in similar ways to vastaan, as a postposition as well. But I'm not quite sure of the meanings. Could you improve it maybe? Thank you! —CodeCat 17:02, 26 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

They are partly synonymous but they also have non-synonymous senses/usages. The meanings are pretty close anyway, and if one uses these words in "wrong" sense, nothing fatal happens. I already expanded vasten. Also vastaan has more usages than those currently listed. --Hekaheka 04:19, 27 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I made some edits at Category:Finnish possessive suffixes. Can you check the table, especially the illative part? ~ heyzeuss 10:35, 31 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Checked. "-an" may not be used with all cases. See table. --Hekaheka 18:20, 31 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

thanks for helping improve that entry, i appreciate it and hope you had a great halloween if that is something you celebrate.Acdcrocks 09:52, 2 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

In the U.S., motorists are required to give right-of-way to pedestrians showing intent to cross a crosswalk. However, w:fi:Suojatie#Suojatiet Suomessa states that "Tieliikennelaki määrää ajoneuvon kuljettajan antamaan esteettömän kulun jalankulkijalle, joka on suojatiellä tai astumassa sille." So, in America, if I see a pedestrian approaching a crosswalk, I stop, and in Finland I keep going, unless the pedestrian is actually stepping onto the crosswalk. Of course, there is a difference between local law and custom, but curiosity gets the best of me. I don't know if bicycles count as ajoneuvo, but as a personal guideline, I stop when old ladies and children on bicycles wait to cross the street. So does "asua suojatielle" mean "to step onto the crosswalk?" ~ heyzeuss 07:15, 12 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Astua suojatielle actually means "to step onto the crosswalk", but olla astumassa suojatielle means "to be about to step onto the cosswalk" or "to be in the process of stepping onto the crosswalk". The idea expressed by the law seems to be about the same in both countries, but in Finland this particular law is badly enforced and in practice the drivers don't give a damn about pedestrians' rights. --Hekaheka 14:17, 12 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

What's peppermint stick? Peppermint is obvious, but what's the stick? Mglovesfun (talk) 12:33, 27 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

They are those mint-flavoured candy canes. Equinox ◑ 12:44, 27 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

That's right. Perhaps we need an entry for "peppermint stick" the candy but not "peppermint stick" the ice cream flavor, because peppermint stick ice cream is just ice cream that is flavored with peppermint stick or similar aroma. --Hekaheka 12:49, 27 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Case governance? ~ heyzeuss 14:10, 1 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure what you meant, but check it now. --Hekaheka 14:45, 1 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, I was lazy and didn't give an example. Is the word followed by another verb in the III infinitive elative, as in lakata ohjaamasta? ~ heyzeuss 17:26, 1 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Yes, that's correct. I added an exmple in the entry. --Hekaheka 21:13, 1 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

The example sentence you gave seems more suited to the "Not to remain constant: to change with time or a similar parameter" sense, no?​—msh210℠ (talk) 21:58, 1 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

I don't think so. If there's a diffrence between the two senses I understand it like this: in #3 the quality of an object varies over time or some other parameter and in #4 there are differences between the individual objects that belong to a group. In my example, the potatoes are the group, the sprouting tendency of each potato is what it is i.e. more or less given, but there are differences between the potatoes. --Hekaheka 04:22, 2 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Ah! I didn't understand #4 (hence my {{rfex}}), butnow I do. Thanks. So then "of a group" means actually not "of a group as a unit" but "of the members of a group" (which I hasn't realized). I'll make that edit, for clarity's sake.​—msh210℠ (talk) 04:40, 2 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Actually, then "The sprouting tendency of potatoes varies between cultivars, years and places of growing" should illustrate "Not to remain constant: to change with time or a similar parameter", whereas "(of the members of a group, intransitive) To display differences" should be illustrated instead by "Potatoes vary in terms of their sprouting tendency depending on cultivar, year, and location"?​—msh210℠ (talk) 19:22, 6 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

Thanks for saving translations but I think grammar cases should be kept as well as many other grammar terms. --Anatoli ^{(обсудить)} 22:10, 8 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

I think it does not make sense to keep translation tables in both, say, genitive and genitive case. As there's a possibility of genitive case being classified as SoP and thus deleted, I thought to "rescue" the translations by moving them under "genitive", which is certainly not going to be deleted. Thus no translations were lost in the process. --Hekaheka 22:15, 8 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

Yes, avoiding duplication is a good thing and using {{trans-see}} but I just think that the full terms (e.g. genitive case) are more common than the shorter versions (genitive) and they should be kept regardless where the translations are. --Anatoli ^{(обсудить)} 22:28, 8 December 2011 (UTC)Reply

A-ha. Let's wait for the result of rfd before continuing. In any case, now I have combined the translation tables for some cases (nominative, genitive, partitive, accusative, inessive). They can easily be moved to respective X-case entries if the rfv ends up with a consensus on keeping them. --Hekaheka 22:34, 8 December 2011 (UTC)Reply