Welcome!
Hello, welcome to Wiktionary, and thank you for your contributions so far.
If you are unfamiliar with wiki editing, take a look at Help:How to edit a page. It is a concise list of technical guidelines to the wiki format we use here: how to, for example, make text boldfaced or create hyperlinks. Feel free to practice in the sandbox. If you would like a slower introduction we have a short tutorial.
These links may help you familiarize yourself with Wiktionary:
You are encouraged to add a BabelBox to your userpage. This shows which languages you know, so other editors know which languages you'll be working on, and what they can ask you for help with.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! If you have any questions, bring them to the Wiktionary:Information desk, or ask me on my talk page. If you do so, please sign your posts with four tildes: ~~~~ which automatically produces your username and the current date and time.
Again, welcome!
Since most of our Syriac entries have been created, many better templates and practices have been adopted. Therefore it is not the best to link terms with square brackets in sections titled “synonyms”. Instead the most amenable practice is to use {{syn}} under the meanings and also give transcriptions via |trN=. Due to lack of Syriac editors we lag behind in cleaning up old entries, so that there are many entries which aren’t good models. Fay Freak (talk) 22:15, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
Ohh okay thank you! im confused on what format we should use, could you give me an example please? Shuraya (talk) 01:20, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
{{syn}} and related templates passed it was left to the editor’s discretion whether he actually uses them or whether he uses sections named “synonyms”, “meronyms” and so on (sections acknowledged by WT:EL). It may make sense, for example, to have a long list of synonyms in a dedicated section for the standard verb meaning “to eat” in a language, as they are usually many more such words than could reasonably fit a line formatted by {{syn}}, though one can also use the Thesaurus namespace for the same purpose (which is also linked at the Arabic page I have just given). But if you just want to give one synonym it probably is not worth it to make a whole section just for it. So now you are able to see yourself what you should use? 🪀 Fay Freak (talk) 02:03, 11 December 2020 (UTC)Yes I understand, thank you Shuraya (talk) 02:08, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
sorry to bother but what would be the preferred format if two or more definitions have the same synonym? would we just repeat the same synonym under both/all definitions? Shuraya (talk) 08:48, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
{{sense}} preceding the line containing the synonym(s) applicable to multiple senses. Fay Freak (talk) 15:46, 15 December 2020 (UTC)Okay thank you! And sorry for bugging you with these questions, but, for example, if there’s a definition that looks like
2. fire, light
and I want to add a synonym for fire only, do I just put it under that definition, or should I indicate that it’s only synonymous to fire? Thank you Shuraya (talk) 05:25, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
also, from my reply before my last one, do the synonyms under the entry for ܙܩܝܦܐ look right? it looks a little repetitive to me so i’m not sure if I understood your reply correctly or if it’s ok. Shuraya (talk) 05:48, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
{{syn}} via |q=. Although if it is “light” in an abstract sense opposed to a concrete “fire, light” perhaps it is not a synonym – light has several senses! People add such things as “see also” sections, to which there is no corresponding template for placing under definition lines, which is, I believe, caused by lack of terms in the English language for this kind of relation: in German, which is used on German Wiktionary, it would be “sinnverwandte Wörter”, “words with similar senses”. I think I also have suggested @Benwing2 to implement into the {{syn}} family the |t= which parameter is not present yet: one would think it doesn’t make sense to have |t= in a synonyms line but this is different for antonyms (answering the question “in which respect the opposite?”) and coordinate terms (e.g. for the four parts of the ruminant stomach as on кни́жка (knížka), where I really wanted to disambiguate under the definition line but couldn’t properly). ܙܩܝܦܐ (zəqīp̄ā) looks alright. Fay Freak (talk) 11:23, 19 December 2020 (UTC)Thank you for the help, I understand Shuraya (talk) 20:41, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi there Shuraya, I've noticed you've gone through a lot of my articles and changed the spelling of a lot of the verbs. I don't know Classical Syriac so it just might be their spelling but at least in Assyrian, e.g. 1st Person Singular "I write" is "ܟܵܬܒ݂ܹܢ" and not "ܟܵܬܒ݂ܹܝܢ" as the present participle is ܟܬܵܒ݂ܵܐ. However with a verb like ܚܙܵܝܵܐ (to see) where the spelling ends with a "ܵܝܵܐ" the 1st person singular spelling is "ܚܵܙܹܝܢ".
Another thing is in the past tense when the verb ends in ܢ or ܪ the next lamad in the pronoun gets dropped e.g. "he said" would be "ܐ݇ܡܝܼܪܹܗ" and not "ܐ݇ܡܝܼܪ ܠܹܗ".
i appreciate you trying to fix the errors but I thought I'd share with you the correct spelling. Hope it helps! :) --Antonklroberts (talk) 06:19, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello thank you for the feedback!! However I was not writing in Classical. There is no standardization of Assyrian Neo-Aramaic but most publications will use and have used spellings akin in form to “ܐ݇ܡܝܼܪ ܠܹܗ” or sometimes more recently “ܐ݇ܡܸܪ ܠܹܗ”. This is so that all dialects can speak and write the language without there being a curve to a certain dialect, otherwise we would have innumerable spellings such as ܐ݇ܡܹܪܹܗ or ܐ݇ܡܸܪܹܗ without or without the alip and more. Some dialects may also pronounce the lamadh.
In spellings like ܟܵܬ݂ܒ݂ܹܝܢ “I write”, both Classical and Modern will usually spell it as such. Otherwise, again, there would be numerous spellings (ܟܲܬ݂ܒ݂ܸܢ، ܟܵܬ݂ܒ݂ܸܢ، ܟܵܬ݂ܒ݂ܹܢ، etc.). This is again not tailored to a specific dialect.
I do hope that makes sense and again thank you for the feedback! Shuraya (talk) 23:32, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
If ܥܙܐ is a female goat and not ܥܙܝܬܐ even though I learnt it as standard. Then what is the male goat? Antonklroberts (talk) 12:54, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
Oh and also I thought I’d mention the 2014 revision of the New Testament and psalms is now regarded as the basis for standard Assyrian. I have the book copy but it should be somewhere online. All the new dictionaries are following that spelling and grammar rules which is why I specifically write it ܟܵܬܒ݂ܹܢ ܚܵܙܹܝܢ and ܐ݇ܡܝܼܪܹܗ
Hope that helps Antonklroberts (talk) 12:57, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
Hi, a male goat is a taysha ܬܝܫܐ or barkha ܒܪܚܐ some dialects will not use this consistently of course so barkha could mean sheep to some, or both.
I did notice that the Modern Assyrian New Testament has lots of errors and I haven’t heard before that it’s the standard. Could you please provide a source? Shuraya (talk) 21:03, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
You man now got ⅔k lemmas in this language, but no terms categorized as borrowed from Classical Syriac bar ܥܪܒܝܐ which is rather doubtful, especially as you even have “learned borrowings” from Akkadian, Sumerian, Latin and Ancient Greek. Could they really inherit a term like ܒܝܠܕܪܐ in three meanings? It looks like them man found it in a dictionary and guessed its meanings (varyingly). @Antonklroberts Fay Freak (talk) 14:30, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
I didn’t put any learned borrowings like the ones from Sumerian Greek and Latin someone else must’ve added that in after me. The thing like I keep stressing, is Assyrian Neo-Aramaic didn’t come from classical Syriac it was just a separate dialect of North eastern Aramaic that developed on its own, obviously quite similar but the grammatical structure has evolved by a lot when comparing both Classical Syriac and Assyrian Neo-Aramaic Antonklroberts (talk) 14:40, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
If you look at the difference between the state of the entry before the edit war began and today, you'll see that some things that were removed have not been restored. I haven't touched the entry myself because there are some things that were wrong with the old version, and I'm not qualified to sort the good from the bad in the current one. That said, having Etymology 2 without an Etymology 1 is a sign that something is still seriously wrong, and I would appreciate it if you would fix it. Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 02:10, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
Hey Shuraya -
I wanted to thank you so much for all the contributions you've made over the past couple of years. Whenever I check the edit histories on the assyrian neo-aramaic wiktionary or even assyrian related articles on wikipedia I often see your name.
Your work has reached so many, I appreciate the sustained, long term effort 💪 ColumbaBush (talk) 19:56, 6 June 2023 (UTC)
(Also @Antonklroberts) What do you think of this category? -- Apisite (talk) 07:11, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
Also, would you like this recently written fairy tale translated into Assyrian Neo-Aramaic?
That could be an interesting way to introduce anyone to the Syriac abjad. --Apisite (talk) 07:18, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
Shlama Shuraya, i just moved a bunch of pages so that the urls won't have markers in them
(no need to reply to this but if you disagree, feel free to revert) ColumbaBush (talk) 22:23, 9 March 2024 (UTC)