User talk:Wyang/Archive4

Hey, I came here to say I saw your bot User:Wyangbot made 調試 redirect to 调试 and 调试 redirect to 調試 back in january. It must be a mistake. If this faulty bot behaviour hasn't been fixed since then, it might still do this. 汤玛斯 (talk) 18:18, 15 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for bringing it to my attention, but this is not the bot's fault: . Wyang (talk) 01:01, 17 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Ah I see. Funny, those human mistakes. 汤玛斯 (talk) 11:56, 27 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Is 場 pronounced cháng in Taiwan? If so we should make it automatically appear at entries like 場地, 收場, etc. ---> Tooironic (talk) 07:30, 31 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Moedict seems to indicate that it is. Could you add it to the script? Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 15:37, 2 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hey mate, thanks for reminding me. Don't think it is used in reality much - if you click on the audios for compounds of this character, they all pronounce it as chang3. Wyang (talk) 22:49, 2 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

@Wyang, Atitarev, Tooironic, and any other ZH / JA / maybe even LA editors --

110.3.37.115 (talk) is a bit of a problem. Some of what they add is of value, and some of what they add is rubbish. The big issue with the rubbish is that it's often close-but-off-target as opposed to obviously wrong. Things like this edit, or this edit, among others. Some of their English terminology is decidedly odd (such as using contemn as a gloss), and they're not aware of current conventions (such as using outdated template arguments).

I'm going through their JA edits, but I don't have a lot of bandwidth to do so. Could you all help out by at least vetting their ZH and other edits? And is the situation bad enough to warrant a block while we get things cleaned up? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 21:21, 12 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Can't speak for the mostly Japanese edits. The handful of Chinese ones aren't too bad. I've made some changes to the respective entries. Good luck. ---> Tooironic (talk) 01:59, 13 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for dealing with this, EU. I don't see much in the way of Latin edits, but if anything questionable comes up LA-wise, feel free to ping me. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 04:29, 13 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

I think you added this to the etymology of 去:

One is that the ideograph represented a man with a hole marked in his crotch, and the inventors of writing had perhaps "anus" (i.e. getting rid of) in mind.

Could you provide a source for this? — Justinrleung ^(t...)⁄_c=› 01:33, 18 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi Justin, this is in Schuessler's "ABC Etymological Dictionary of Old Chinese". Cheers, Wyang (talk) 06:42, 18 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the reply. I couldn't find this explanation anywhere online, so I was just curious where you got it from. — Justinrleung ^(t...)⁄_c=› 07:07, 18 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi Frank,

How are you? Are you able to write the etymology of 한글, please? Also calling @TAKASUGI Shinji, KoreanQuoter. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 21:06, 23 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

한글 is a fairly recent term coined in 1910 by scholars 최남선 and 주시경. (source) It used to be called 언문 (諺文), 조선문자 (朝鮮文字), 언서(諺書), 언자(諺字), 언해(諺解), 암클 (women's writing) and 중글 (Buddhist monks' writing) in the past (extra source) and it was called 국문 (國文) right before the Japanese colonial takeover. --KoreanQuoter (talk) 03:11, 24 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi Anatoli. I hope all is well. Thanks to KoreanQuoter above - I've added etymology there. Wyang (talk) 05:04, 24 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Thank you both! I had to temporarily protect the page since someone started copying stupidities from Wikipedia. Wikipedia's Hangul now shows "韓㐎" and "朝鮮㐎" as hanja for 한글 and "조선글"! --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 07:02, 24 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

When you have time would you mind adding zhí as the Taiwan pronunciation of 擲 for words like 投擲, 拋擲, 虛擲, etc.? Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 07:22, 24 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Sure thing mate, finished. Wyang (talk) 23:53, 24 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Cheers! ---> Tooironic (talk) 07:13, 26 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

無錫 had a Wu pronunciation recording available on Commons so I felt obligated to add it, but I don't know how the tones work (´；ω；`) —suzukaze (t・c) 21:28, 26 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

I'm afraid this is not Shanghainese. I added the theoretical Shanghainese pronunciation anyway. :) Wyang (talk) 10:12, 27 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi Frank,

Do you mind checking two remaining entries Category:Tbot entries (Korean): 어미 and 을 따라서, please? :) --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:16, 27 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

No problem, Anatoli. Wyang (talk) 23:26, 27 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Thank you!-Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 23:32, 27 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi Frank,

I find entries like 弓 (gōng) - a big problem. Not because they don't have definitions but because such entries are not easy to find for fixing. Do you think you can find some time making a list of such entries or run a bot and insert (as a minimum)?:

===Definitions===
{{zh-hanzi}}

# {{rfdef|lang=zh}}

I have asked other Chinese editors not remove {{rfdef}} but they keep doing or they are some old remainders. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 23:29, 30 November 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi Anatoli, here is a list: 㐆, 㐌, 㐱, 㑚, 㑦, 㑮, 㒸, 㒼, 㓁, 㓞, 㔾, 㕚, 㗎, 㘝, 㘞, 㘠, 㘡, 㘢, 㘣, 㘤, 㘥, 㘦, 㘧, 㘨, 㘩, 㘫, 㘬, 㘭, 㘰, 㘱, 㘲, 㘳, 㘴, 㘵, 㘶, 㘷, 㘸, 㘹, 㘺, 㘻, 㘽, 㘿, 㙀, 㙁, 㙂, 㙃, 㙄, 㙅, 㙇, 㙈, 㙉, 㙊, 㙋, 㙌, 㙍, 㙎, 㙏, 㙐, 㙑, 㙒, 㙓, 㙔, 㙕, 㙗, 㙘, 㙙, 㙚, 㙛, 㙜, 㙝, 㙞, 㙟, 㙠, 㙡, 㙢, 㙣, 㙤, 㙥, 㙦, 㙧, 㙨, 㙩, 㙪, 㙫, 㙬, 㙮, 㙯, 㙰, 㙱, 㙲, 㙳, 㙴, 㙵, 㙶, 㙷, 㙸, 㙹, 㙺, 㙻, 㙼, 㙾, 㚀, 㚁, 㚂, 㚃, 㚄, 㚅, 㚆, 㚇, 㚉, 㚊, 㚋, 㚌, 㚍, 㚏, 㚓, 㚔, 㚕, 㚖, 㚗, 㚘, 㚚, 㚛, 㚜, 㚝, 㚞, 㚟, 㚠, 㚡, 㚢, 㚧, 㚮, 㚳, 㚶, 㚸, 㚼, 㚾, 㛈, 㛒, 㛪, 㛰, 㛽, 㛾, 㜀, 㜨, 㜭, 㝁, 㝈, 㝉, 㝓, 㝜, 㝣, 㝦, 㝨, 㝮, 㝷, 㝹, 㞍, 㞎, 㞢, 㞣, 㞪, 㞬, 㞵, 㟄, 㟫, 㟷, 㠀, 㠏, 㠔, 㠭, 㠮, 㠯, 㠲, 㠸, 㡀, 㡎, 㡭, 㡯, 㢞, 㢢, 㢤, 㢱, 㢸, 㣊, 㣛, 㣺, 㤗, 㤝, 㤫, 㤻, 㦈, 㦙, 㦟, 㦠, 㦰, 㦳, 㧊, 㧌, 㧝, 㧞, 㧠, 㧮, 㧳, 㧵, 㨀, 㨁, 㨂, 㨃, 㨆, 㫃, 㬎, 㮇, 㲎, 㳄, 㳬, 㸚, 㿿, 䀇, 䀉, 䀊, 䀍, 䀎, 䀠, 䉲, 䍃, 䒑, 䔆, 䕳, 䞔, 䡘, 䡛, 䤙, 䦟, 䨤, 䫜, 䬼, 䰟, 丂, 丏, 丐, 丒, 丕, 丘, 丟, 丩, 丮, 丱, 丳, 丵, 丸, 丹, 乀, 乁, 乂, 乃, 乍, 乎, 乏, 乑, 乒, 乓, 乚, 九, 乢, 乣, 乨, 乪, 乳, 乴, 乵, 乸, 乽, 乿, 亂, 亃, 亄, 亍, 亐, 互, 井, 亙, 亞, 亟, 亢, 亣, 交, 亥, 亨, 享, 京, 亭, 亮, 亳, 亴, 亶, 亷, 亹, 亼, 仁, 仂, 仃, 仄, 仇, 仈, 仉, 仌, 仐, 仕, 他, 仗, 仚, 仛, 仜, 仞, 仟, 仠, 仡, 仢, 仦, 仧, 仨, 仩, 仫, 仭, 仮, 仯, 仰, 仱, 仳, 仴, 仵, 仸, 仹, 仺, 任, 仼, 仾, 仿, 伀, 企, 伂, 伃, 伄, 伅, 伆, 伇, 伈, 伉, 伊, 伋, 伌, 伎, 伏, 伐, 休, 伒, 伓, 伔, 伕, 伖, 伙, 伜, 伢, 伨, 伩, 伬, 伭, 伮, 估, 伲, 伳, 伴, 伵, 伶, 伷, 伸, 伹, 伺, 伻, 伽, 伾, 伿, 佀, 佁, 佂, 佃, 佄, 佅, 但, 佇, 佈, 佉, 佊, 佋, 佌, 低, 佐, 佑, 佒, 佔, 佖, 佗, 佘, 余, 佚, 佝, 佞, 佟, 你, 佡, 佢, 佤, 佧, 佨, 佩, 佪, 佫, 佭, 佮, 佯, 佰, 佱, 佳, 佴, 佶, 佷, 佸, 佹, 佺, 佻, 佼, 佽, 佾, 侀, 侁, 侂, 侃, 侄, 侅, 侇, 侈, 侉, 侊, 例, 侌, 侍, 侎, 侏, 侐, 侑, 侒, 侓, 侔, 侕, 侖, 侗, 侘, 侙, 侚, 供, 侜, 依, 侞, 侟, 侢, 侫, 侮, 侯, 侰, 侱, 侳, 侴, 侵, 侶, 侸, 侹, 侺, 侻, 侼, 侽, 侾, 俀, 俁, 促, 俅, 俆, 俇, 俈, 俉, 俊, 俋, 俌, 俍, 俎, 俏, 俐, 俑, 俓, 俔, 俕, 俖, 俘, 俙, 俚, 俛, 俜, 俞, 俟, 俠, 俤, 俧, 俬, 俯, 俰, 俱, 俲, 俵, 俶, 俷, 俸, 俺, 俻, 俼, 俽, 俾, 俿, 倀, 倁, 倃, 倄, 倅, 倈, 倉, 倍, 候, 倚, 倫, 值, 偉, 側, 偵, 傅, 傖, 傘, 備, 傭, 傴, 僅, 僉, 働, 僑, 僕, 僥, 僾, 儀, 儈, 儉, 儔, 儕, 儘, 儥, 優, 儱, 儼, 兀, 允, 兄, 兌, 兔, 兟, 內, 兪, 公, 兮, 兵, 其, 具, 典, 冀, 冃, 冉, 冊, 冋, 冏, 冓, 冗, 冘, 冝, 冥, 冧, 冬, 凢, 凸, 刃, 刄, 刅, 刑, 刖, 列, 剅, 則, 削, 剌, 前, 創, 剽, 劃, 劉, 功, 劣, 劦, 劫, 効, 勃, 勇, 勉, 勐, 勖, 務, 勢, 勤, 勺, 勻, 勾, 匃, 包, 匈, 匊, 匝, 匡, 匧, 匪, 匿, 區, 十, 卂, 千, 卄, 卆, 升, 午, 卑, 卒, 卓, 卞, 占, 卦, 卩, 卬, 卮, 卯, 危, 即, 卵, 卷, 卻, 厃, 厄, 厈, 厓, 厝, 原, 厥, 厭, 厲, 厶, 厷, 厸, 厽, 叀, 參, 又, 叉, 及, 叐, 叒, 叕, 取, 叚, 叜, 叟, 叢, 另, 叩, 召, 各, 吅, 吋, 吏, 吝, 含, 吾, 呆, 呈, 告, 命, 咄, 咅, 咎, 咠, 咢, 咼, 品, 員, 哥, 唉, 唐, 唔, 啇, 啊, 啤, 啥, 啼, 喌, 喜, 喦, 喬, 單, 喵, 喿, 嗇, 嗯, 嗰, 嘅, 噸, 嚢, 嚮, 嚲, 嚻, 嚿, 囃, 囊, 囍, 囙, 囟, 因, 囤, 囷, 固, 圂, 圥, 圭, 圼, 坉, 坐, 坒, 坦, 坴, 垔, 垚, 埰, 埵, 埶, 埿, 堀, 堇, 塑, 塞, 壘, 壬, 壹, 壽, 夂, 夅, 夆, 夊, 夋, 夌, 夦, 夨, 夬, 夭, 央, 夲, 奄, 奈, 奉, 奎, 奐, 契, 奔, 奚, 奠, 奢, 奧, 奪, 奴, 她, 奺, 妄, 妍, 妟, 妥, 妳, 妻, 妾, 姑, 委, 姪, 姫, 姬, 威, 娃, 娑, 婉, 媰, 嬦, 嬪, 嬲, 嬴, 孋, 孓, 孖, 存, 孚, 孛, 孜, 孝, 孼, 宀, 它, 宇, 守, 宋, 完, 官, 宛, 客, 室, 宰, 害, 宵, 容, 宿, 寅, 寒, 寔, 察, 寢, 寧, 寮, 寺, 封, 尃, 尉, 尌, 尒, 尞, 尢, 尤, 尨, 尹, 尾, 尿, 局, 居, 屈, 屉, 屋, 屍, 屏, 屑, 展, 屬, 屮, 屯, 屰, 屵, 岑, 岜, 岳, 岷, 峨, 崒, 崔, 嵋, 嵐, 嵬, 嵾, 嶷, 嶺, 巂, 巖, 巛, 巜, 巟, 巤, 左, 巧, 巨, 己, 巳, 巴, 巵, 巸, 巽, 巾, 巿, 帀, 希, 帖, 帚, 師, 帳, 常, 幀, 幵, 幻, 庂, 底, 庚, 府, 康, 庸, 廚, 廴, 延, 廷, 建, 廾, 廿, 弁, 弄, 弇, 弓, 弔, 引, 弗, 弜, 弭, 弮, 弴, 彊, 彌, 彐, 彑, 彖, 彗, 彙, 彡, 彥, 影, 彳, 役, 彼, 往, 徝, 復, 微, 徴, 徵, 忂, 忄, 必, 忈, 忙, 忝, 忠, 忩, 念, 怒, 思, 急, 性, 怨, 怪, 恅, 恍, 恚, 恣, 悉, 悔, 患, 您, 悶, 惝, 惞, 惟, 惠, 惡, 惢, 惣, 惤, 惥, 惦, 惪, 惰, 惲, 惴, 惵, 惶, 惷, 惸, 惹, 惺, 惻, 惼, 惽, 惾, 惿, 愀, 愁, 愂, 愃, 愄, 愅, 愆, 愇, 愈, 愉, 愊, 愋, 愌, 愍, 愎, 愐, 愑, 愒, 愓, 愔, 愕, 愖, 愗, 愘, 愙, 愜, 愝, 愞, 感, 愡, 愢, 愣, 愥, 愧, 愨, 愩, 愪, 愫, 愬, 愭, 愮, 愯, 愰, 愱, 愲, 愳, 愴, 愵, 愶, 愷, 愸, 愹, 愺, 愻, 愼, 愽, 愾, 慀, 慁, 慂, 慃, 慄, 慅, 慆, 慇, 慈, 慉, 慊, 態, 慌, 慍, 慎, 慏, 慐, 慒, 慓, 慔, 慕, 慖, 慗, 慙, 慚, 慛, 慜, 慝, 慞, 慟, 慠, 慡, 慤, 慥, 慦, 慧, 慨, 慩, 慪, 慫, 慬, 慭, 慯, 慰, 慱, 慲, 慳, 慴, 慵, 慶, 慷, 慸, 慹, 慺, 憂, 憩, 憲, 憵, 憹, 憼, 應, 懙, 戊, 戌, 戍, 戎, 我, 戒, 戚, 戛, 戠, 戹, 戾, 扁, 扅, 扊, 才, 扚, 扜, 扝, 扷, 扸, 承, 抇, 折, 抣, 抧, 抲, 拄, 拑, 拗, 拤, 拱, 拶, 拺, 挄, 挅, 挆, 挺, 捫, 捽, 掗, 掠, 採, 掽, 揮, 搜, 搿, 撈, 撐, 撓, 撥, 播, 撰, 擔, 擗, 擦, 攊, 攣, 攬, 支, 攴, 攵, 攸, 敃, 敄, 效, 敎, 敖, 敗, 敝, 敞, 敦, 敫, 敬, 敷, 斏, 斗, 斝, 斢, 斤, 斥, 斦, 斫, 斬, 斲, 於, 施, 斿, 旁, 旅, 旋, 旗, 旡, 既, 旨, 旬, 旭, 旱, 旲, 昂, 昆, 昌, 易, 昔, 昝, 映, 昡, 春, 昧, 昨, 昰, 昱, 昷, 昺, 昻, 晉, 晛, 晜, 晝, 晞, 晟, 晡, 晤, 晥, 晦, 晧, 晨, 晪, 晫, 普, 景, 晰, 晴, 晶, 晷, 晸, 晹, 智, 晼, 晾, 暀, 暃, 暄, 暇, 暋, 暌, 暍, 暎, 暐, 暑, 暖, 暗, 暘, 暝, 暠, 暢, 暨, 暫, 暮, 暴, 暿, 曀, 曁, 曂, 曄, 曆, 曇, 曈, 曌, 曍, 曎, 曏, 曐, 曖, 曗, 曙, 曚, 曛, 曜, 曝, 曞, 曠, 曡, 曣, 曥, 曦, 曨, 曩, 曪, 曫, 曬, 曱, 曳, 曵, 曶, 曷, 曹, 曺, 替, 最, 朁, 朂, 朄, 朅, 朆, 朇, 朋, 朎, 朏, 朐, 朒, 朓, 朔, 朕, 朖, 朗, 望, 朜, 朞, 朠, 朡, 朢, 朣, 朤, 朥, 朦, 朧, 未, 末, 朳, 朽, 朾, 朿, 杅, 杇, 杈, 杌, 杓, 杕, 杖, 杗, 杘, 杙, 杛, 杜, 杝, 杞, 束, 杠, 杢, 杧, 杪, 杭, 杮, 杲, 杳, 杴, 杵, 杶, 杷, 杸, 杻, 杼, 枇, 枉, 枋, 枌, 枏, 析, 枒, 枓, 枕, 枘, 枚, 枛, 果, 枟, 枬, 枯, 枰, 枲, 枳, 枴, 枷, 枸, 枹, 枻, 枼, 枾, 柀, 柁, 柃, 柄, 柅, 柈, 柊, 柎, 柏, 柑, 柒, 染, 柔, 柘, 柙, 柚, 柝, 柞, 柟, 柢, 柣, 柤, 柩, 柬, 柮, 柯, 柰, 柱, 柲, 柴, 柵, 柶, 柷, 柸, 柹, 柺, 柾, 柿, 栂, 栒, 栓, 栔, 栘, 栛, 栝, 栞, 栟, 校, 栢, 株, 栫, 栭, 栰, 栱, 栲, 栳, 栴, 栵, 核, 栻, 格, 栽, 桀, 桁, 桂, 桄, 桅, 框, 桉, 桋, 桎, 桐, 桓, 桔, 桕, 桫, 桬, 桭, 桮, 桯, 桲, 桴, 桶, 桷, 桹, 桼, 梂, 梃, 梄, 梆, 梊, 梍, 梎, 梏, 梐, 梓, 梔, 梖, 梗, 梛, 梜, 梟, 梠, 梡, 梢, 梣, 梧, 梩, 梭, 梮, 梯, 械, 梱, 梲, 梳, 梴, 梵, 梶, 梹, 棅, 棆, 棐, 棑, 棓, 棖, 棘, 棙, 棚, 棜, 棟, 棠, 棢, 棣, 棥, 棨, 棫, 棬, 棯, 棱, 棲, 棳, 棵, 棶, 棸, 棹, 棺, 棼, 椀, 椄, 椈, 椊, 椌, 植, 椎, 椏, 椐, 椑, 椒, 椓, 椥, 椩, 椪, 椬, 椰, 椲, 椳, 椴, 椵, 椷, 椸, 椹, 椺, 椽, 楀, 楂, 楄, 楅, 楊, 楎, 楓, 楔, 楕, 楗, 楘, 楙, 楚, 楛, 楝, 楞, 楟, 楠, 楢, 楣, 楥, 楦, 楨, 楩, 楪, 楫, 業, 榘, 榲, 樊, 模, 樸, 檸, 櫚, 櫪, 欝, 欠, 欣, 欮, 欶, 欺, 欽, 止, 步, 武, 歷, 歹, 殛, 殲, 殳, 殷, 殸, 毋, 毌, 母, 每, 毚, 毫, 氏, 氐, 民, 氬, 氯, 氵, 氶, 永, 氺, 氾, 汾, 沓, 沙, 治, 沾, 泉, 泰, 洲, 涌, 混, 渣, 渥, 港, 湊, 溜, 滕, 滯, 滷, 滿, 漆, 演, 漫, 激, 瀨, 瀷, 災, 炎, 炭, 炯, 烖, 焉, 焦, 焱, 照, 熏, 熙, 燮, 爛, 爪, 爫, 爭, 爰, 爺, 爻, 爿, 牌, 牝, 牟, 牠, 牡, 牢, 犭, 犮, 狂, 狄, 狡, 狮, 狸, 狹, 猒, 猝, 猷, 獐, 獵, 獻, 玄, 率, 玨, 現, 瑞, 瑱, 璽, 瓕, 瓜, 瓦, 甚, 甜, 甡, 甥, 甩, 甫, 甬, 由, 申, 甴, 甶, 町, 甾, 界, 畍, 畏, 畐, 畑, 畝, 略, 番, 畳, 畺, 畾, 疊, 疋, 疌, 疐, 疑, 疒, 疼, 疾, 病, 痛, 瘵, 瘶, 癘, 癥, 癴, 癶, 癸, 登, 皆, 皋, 皐, 皮, 盈, 益, 盍, 盜, 監, 盾, 眉, 県, 眘, 眷, 眾, 睔, 睘, 睪, 睽, 瞠, 瞢, 瞳, 瞼, 瞿, 矍, 矛, 矜, 矞, 矣, 矩, 矴, 研, 硬, 碇, 碰, 磐, 磓, 磬, 礪, 示, 社, 祂, 祟, 祭, 祿, 禁, 禮, 禸, 禹, 禺, 秅, 秉, 秋, 秘, 秩, 稍, 稟, 穌, 穩, 穵, 突, 窊, 窘, 竄, 竇, 竊, 竝, 竟, 笏, 笥, 筄, 筋, 答, 策, 筭, 筴, 箇, 算, 節, 篆, 簡, 籟, 籩, 粟, 粦, 粲, 糲, 糹, 紂, 素, 絝, 絡, 給, 絵, 維, 練, 緻, 縒, 縫, 繷, 繹, 纂, 纇, 纈, 缶, 缾, 罄, 罡, 罩, 罪, 罷, 羔, 義, 羽, 翁, 翅, 翏, 翟, 耂, 者, 耆, 而, 耎, 耑, 耒, 耴, 耶, 聊, 聑, 聱, 職, 聿, 肀, 肅, 肌, 肖, 肘, 肙, 肩, 肯, 肰, 育, 胃, 背, 胥, 脂, 脅, 脊, 腐, 腔, 腕, 膋, 臚, 臣, 臤, 臥, 臨, 臬, 臱, 至, 臼, 臽, 臾, 臿, 舀, 舁, 舂, 舄, 舉, 舋, 舛, 舟, 航, 般, 舵, 良, 艸, 艹, 艾, 芋, 芮, 芻, 苗, 英, 茂, 茢, 茸, 荅, 莪, 莫, 莽, 菌, 菐, 菔, 萎, 萑, 葛, 董, 葵, 蒐, 蒙, 蒦, 蒲, 蔑, 蔡, 蔥, 蕎, 蕓, 蕭, 薛, 藤, 蘘, 蘭, 虍, 虒, 虖, 虜, 虧, 蚤, 蛙, 蜀, 蠡, 行, 衍, 衕, 袁, 裂, 裨, 製, 複, 褭, 褰, 褱, 褻, 襄, 襟, 襯, 襾, 覀, 覃, 覈, 親, 觀, 解, 觿, 訁, 訂, 訇, 計, 訏, 詈, 詛, 試, 誄, 誥, 誰, 諄, 談, 譎, 讌, 讐, 豈, 豕, 豖, 豦, 豪, 豸, 貉, 貍, 貞, 貟, 貢, 貫, 責, 貰, 貽, 賃, 賅, 賏, 賛, 賜, 質, 賴, 贅, 贊, 贛, 赫, 足, 趾, 跨, 跿, 蹁, 蹇, 蹺, 躠, 躣, 身, 軋, 軒, 軫, 較, 輟, 輦, 輩, 輰, 輳, 輿, 轍, 轟, 辡, 辣, 辰, 辱, 辵, 辶, 迢, 逡, 逮, 逼, 遀, 遂, 達, 遜, 邑, 邕, 邛, 那, 邦, 郎, 鄉, 鄭, 酉, 酋, 酓, 酩, 酺, 釆, 量, 釩, 鈞, 鉤, 鉻, 銘, 銜, 錫, 錳, 鍁, 鍘, 鎚, 鏗, 鐸, 閂, 閏, 閒, 間, 閣, 閤, 閫, 閭, 闌, 阜, 阝, 阪, 陀, 隆, 隈, 隋, 隗, 隘, 隸, 隹, 隺, 雀, 雈, 雋, 雍, 雔, 雚, 雩, 電, 需, 霍, 霝, 靂, 靠, 靡, 靿, 鞌, 鞏, 韙, 韭, 韯, 韱, 頁, 頓, 領, 頡, 頤, 顆, 題, 願, 顛, 顬, 飛, 飠, 飩, 飫, 飴, 養, 餛, 餦, 首, 香, 馮, 駝, 騎, 騰, 驕, 驝, 驢, 驪, 骨, 骿, 髁, 髓, 髟, 鬅, 鬆, 鬯, 鬲, 魂, 魯, 鮮, 鯖, 鯡, 鰈, 鰯, 鱈, 鱹, 鳪, 鴛, 鵡, 鵯, 鷹, 鷽, 鸚, 鹵, 鹿, 麇, 麋, 麓, 麤, 麯, 麵, 麹, 麻, 黍, 黧, 黨, 黹, 黽, 鼎, 鼓, 鼡, 齉, 齯, 龐, 龜, 龠, 龢, 龥, 龹. A script is needed to generate those contents on these pages and definitions should be moved from Translingual to Chinese, although I'm a bit short in time to do this. :( Wyang (talk) 00:41, 23 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Great job, thank you, Frank! I'll save the list. Some bot writers might be able to do this. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 00:47, 23 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

IMO the Translingual definitions are too unreliable to be moved to Chinese. Sometimes the defintions' formatting does not conform to Wiktionary standards, such as "㐀" and "𠀒", and other times there are the weirdest things listed. —suzukaze (t・c) 00:49, 23 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

I think most of the translingual definitions come from the Unihan Database, which might isn't always correct and may include definitions for other languages. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 01:01, 23 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi Frank,

There are some problems with {{ja-usex}} (see the bottom of the talk page), re っ, ヶ. Do you mind helping out a bit, if you have time? --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 11:26, 4 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi Anatoli, the little ga should be fixed. Wyang (talk) 00:04, 23 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! Could you also fix っ in あの枝(えだ)に桜(さくら)ん坊(ぼ)が十(じゅっ)個(こ)だけあります。

Ano eda ni sakuranbo ga jukko dake arimasu.

There are only ten cherries on that branch.

, please? --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 00:50, 23 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Done. :) Wyang (talk) 01:17, 23 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

This edit to the Wu pronunciation may need checking. —suzukaze (t・c) 21:45, 6 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

That was my fault. Thanks to the anon for fixing this. Wyang (talk) 23:47, 22 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

It looks like sort key generation for Mandarin needs some work...

• 哪些
• Template talk:zh-see#不可胜计

—suzukaze (t・c) 08:26, 12 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

@suzukaze-c At 哪些 the {{zh-pron}} was misused (fixed), not sure about Template talk:zh-see#不可胜计. It's a mess but why is it there? 不可胜计 looks fine. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 05:30, 21 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

The problem for 不可胜计 is with the automatically generated sortkeys. You can see the generated code here, and the weird sortkey (]) in action here, where 不可胜计 ends up between noi and nong. —suzukaze (t・c) 05:33, 21 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for bringing this to my attention. The problem is at Module:zh-pron function make_cat. Further lines are needed to extract the reading from the parameter 'm'. I don't have the time to fix this at the moment; hopefully someone fixes it, otherwise might come back to this later. Wyang (talk) 00:35, 23 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

It's not too important anyways. —suzukaze (t・c) 00:55, 23 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Is there any way to preserve this information in the unified Chinese format? The infobox does present

, but not "Pertaining to the Chinese civilization". (I'm sorry for bothering you so much >_<) —suzukaze (t・c) 04:54, 21 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

No problem. The link to all the OC pronunciation information is under the editor in the Edit mode. diff. Wyang (talk) 23:59, 22 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi Frank,

Hope you're well. Since you are now working with Nepali, maybe you can improve the transliteration module? There are some guys who can (I hope!) help with both Lua User:Benwing2 (aka Benwing) and transliterations for Devanagari languages User:Aryamanarora and User:DerekWinters. There should only be minor differences, if at all, between Hindi and Nepali. I am sure you can do this yourself, you did many great jobs before. I know Aryamanarora now possesses the new Oxford Hindi-English dictionary, which is very good compared to all previous dictionaries - has genders and standard and detailed transliterations and descriptions. (I didn't get it but I saw it). --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 07:48, 5 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi Anatoli. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! I did some edits on Module:hi-translit (if I understood you correctly) to make the module account for (1) complex consonants, (2) permissible final clusters and (3) nasalised diphthongs. I changed "ḍā'unloḍ" to "ḍāunloḍ" as the latter doesn't appear to be ambiguous. I suggest that Hindi editors adopt a system which readily allows manual transliteration, including in headwords (probably as spelling pronunciation similar to Nepali) and examples. All words can be assumed to be schwa-dropping unless enclosed by <>. This is contrary to what I did to Nepali, where the default is non-dropping and use of <> allows for final schwa-dropping, because schwa dropping is much more common in Hindi. Wyang (talk) 09:57, 5 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you too, Frank! Thank you so much for fixing the remaining failed test cases. I am not always 100% sure about all cases of schwa-dropping. Besides, as I have seen in that dictionary, there are cases of optional dropping of "a" and cases where it's "light". I am not so sure about loanwords like बैटरी (baiṭrī), कंपनी (kampnī), फ़िल्म (film) or अलार्म क्लॉक (alārm klŏk). If the rules were clearly defined and implemented, then manual transliteration won't be required for Hindi, unless there are exception. I only know that Hindi speakers habitually avoid using nuqta and candra ("chandra"), so even when they write फिल्म (philm), they still pronounce it "film" and कॉफ़ी (kŏfī) can be written as काफी (kāphī) without any affect on pronunciation. We can transliterate such words as they are written (without the nuqta and chandra) but keep nuqta-words and chandra-words as lemmas. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 10:26, 5 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

I don't have any Hindi resources at hand so I'm not sure about the pronunciations of these words either. I do have some hard-copy Nepali dictionaries, and Nepali has a lot of words which are exceptions of pronunciation rules, mainly nouns, numerals and adjectives. Hindi and English loanwords often retain their pronunciations in Nepali, becoming exceptions. I would envisage Hindi to be largely the same, considering its large loanword proportion. Wyang (talk) 11:05, 5 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hindi is very phonetic, more than Nepali, AFAIK. The mismatches between written and spoken are minimal. Missing nuqta, candra is like "cafe" instead of "café" or Russian "ребенок" instead of "ребёнок". Foreign words are written phonetically and pronounced in the native way, foreign accent is not standard. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 11:44, 5 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Anatoli, in written Hindi, foreign borrowings are very rare (unless you are writing in a Persianized register, then it's like written Urdu in the Devanagari script), so it's hard to tell how people write English loanwords. Generally speaking, the nuqta and chandra is dropped in writing, but this practice is frowned upon by some. As for spoken Hindi, the nuqta is always pronounced.—Aryamanarora ^{(मुझसे बात करो)} 18:52, 5 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

True but it's the loanwords from Persian, Arabic and European languages (but not from Sanskrit), which are unregulated and can cause some issues in spelling and pronunciation. Google searches show that nuqta are often dropped in writing, despite the pronunciation but dictionaries should include them as lemmas, if they are pronounced. Failure to write nuqta and chandra created alternative or new pronunciations and cases of overcorrection. It's the same with Arabic hamza (over and under alif - أ and إ vs ا) and dots under letter yāʾ ي vs ى) and Russian ё instead of е. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 19:30, 5 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi Frank,

Is धन्यवाद pronounced धन्यबाद in Nepali? Also, there should be a shwa dropping as well in Nepali, AFAIK. Correct me if I'm wrong. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 11:59, 7 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

It's pronounced as धन्नेबाद् or धन्न्यबाद्. Yes, there is schwa-dropping, but it's much less widespread than in Hindi. Wyang (talk) 14:41, 8 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Interesting, thanks. It seems Nepali is much less regular in reading. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:49, 11 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hello Wyang!

What resources are you using for Nepali? I've been seeing you churn out hundreds of entries the past few days and I was just wondering. —Aryamanarora ^{(मुझसे बात करो)} 01:08, 9 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, I had Ralph Turner's Nepali-English dictionary and it was a beauty. Wyang (talk) 15:36, 18 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

This one? Turner also made this cool comparative Indo-Aryan dictionary. —Aryamanarora ^{(मुझसे बात करो)} 00:45, 19 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Don't think that was its name, but the content seems very similar. It was a thick green book. I will check when I return from Nepal. Great work with the Hindi entries by the way! Wyang (talk) 14:39, 19 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! I'll see if I can find it online. —Aryamanarora ^{(मुझसे बात करो)} 18:59, 19 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi Frank,

The capitalisation doesn't work here for some reason (using ^) - 俄羅斯國家杜馬／俄罗斯国家杜马  ―  Éluósī guójiā dùmǎ  ―  Russian State Duma. Could you please fix, when you're free? --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:47, 11 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Atitarev: Fixed in his behalf. --kc_kennylau (talk) 12:31, 14 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Kc kennylau Thanks but why is there an apostrophe - "'Éluósī ..."? --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:38, 14 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Atitarev: It was there before I touched with it, but I'll (try to) fix it now... --kc_kennylau (talk) 12:45, 14 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Atitarev: Done. --kc_kennylau (talk) 13:51, 14 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Kc kennylau Thanks! --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 20:02, 14 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Kc kennylau Another one without capitalisation:

隨著時間的流逝，你有沒有發現身邊的親人越來越少了？
随着时间的流逝，你有没有发现身边的亲人越来越少了？

Suízhe shíjiān de liúshì, nǐ yǒu méiyǒu fāxiàn shēnbiān de qīnrén yuè lái yuè shào le?

Have you found that, with the passing of time, your loved ones have become fewer and fewer?

--Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 01:29, 15 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Atitarev: Sorry, fixed. --kc_kennylau (talk) 01:59, 15 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Kc kennylau Sorry, not fixed.--Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 02:15, 15 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Atitarev: Sorry, fixed. --kc_kennylau (talk) 07:53, 17 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Kc kennylau, Atitarev: I don't think the issue with vowels is solved yet. See the example in 民主 (mínzhǔ) (specifically 奧巴馬). — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 23:40, 17 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ @Justinrleung A null-edit seems to have fixed it.--Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 07:46, 19 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

牛仔毋捌虎一頁中的國際音標有問題：「捌」字的國際音標重複了。(The IPA in that page is in error: the IPA of the word 捌 is repeated.) --kc_kennylau (talk) 09:39, 13 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

謝，已修復。Wyang (talk) 16:14, 18 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

請問你如何修復？--kc_kennylau (talk) 12:14, 23 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Could you please add the non-Mandarin language readings for shīdiào? Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 12:39, 20 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

No worries, Justin seems to have added some. Wyang (talk) 01:57, 21 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Lovely. Thanks everyone. ---> Tooironic (talk) 13:08, 21 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Heya Wyang --

I just added a pronunciation to ディスクジョッキー, and had some fun trying to get things to work correctly. The second mora (ス) is devoiced, but for some reason the template requires dev=3 instead of the expected dev=2. Similarly, the downstep is after the fourth mora, but specifying acc=4 results in (showing the incorrect behavior when dev=2) instead of the expected . Experimenting, I found that acc=5 doesn't work right either, producing , missing the geminate .

I dimly recall somewhere that you (or someone else?) had mentioned that the positional arguments count kana instead of morae. It looks like dev is counting kana, while acc is counting morae, which is an unintuitive and undesirable inconsistency. Sutegana should be consistently counted as part of the preceding regular-sized kana, with the exception of geminate-marking small-っ.

I'd greatly appreciate it if you could look into updating the module code. Pinging Haplology, Anatoli, Shinji as well for your input, and in case Wyang is busy and one of you has the time and coding ability. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 18:02, 22 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi Eirikr, thanks for the heads-up. I fixed the bug in downstep. 'acc' uses morae as this follows the practice in Japanese accent dictionaries, whereas using kana position for devoicing is easier for the inputer. I am happy to have them made consistent if necessary, however time doesn't allow... Wyang (talk) 21:30, 22 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for pinging. Frank, you also promised a while to allow multiple syllables to be devoiced, e.g. すこし and しかし. Do you think you can add it to your list? --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 00:09, 23 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Eirikr: I could take this task. Would you want both to be counting morae or both counting kana position? How do you plan on changing the rest of the entries after the module is modified? Multiple syllables would be devoiced by putting "dev=1,3" for すこし. --kc_kennylau (talk) 12:59, 23 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

• kc_kennylau, ideally, both acc and dev would count morae -- there is never a case where sutegana are treated separately from the mora to which they belong, with the exception of the geminate-marking small っ.

Re: how to change existing entries, one approach would be to define a different parameter name for devoiced vowels for the new approach, then treat the old one as - 1 so they'll appear correctly to readers, and add a maintenance category to flag these for editors (or bots) to go and change them over to the new parameter. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 05:39, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Eirikr: Done. The parameter for mora is "devm". Refer to ディスクジョッキー. --kc_kennylau (talk)

• Thank you, Kenny! I just had a go at ファイバーオプティックス and it looks like the mora counting for devm isn't catching long vowels. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 07:18, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

  @Eirikr: Any other mora count traps? --kc_kennylau (talk) 07:41, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

• That's the only entry I've seen so far. The romanization on that entry is a little weird too -- there's a small ッ showing up in the pitch-accent IPA. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 08:09, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

  @Eirikr: Thank you. Without your example, I would never have known that the current algorithm to count morae was wrong. --kc_kennylau (talk) 13:25, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

  @Eirikr: By the way, the entries that use "dev" are located in Category:Kenny's testing category. --kc_kennylau (talk) 16:27, 24 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Great job, Frank, very impressive! --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 13:54, 29 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

หอย is the first failed xlit test, unfortunately :) Could you please add entries with {{th-pron}} to Category:Thai terms with IPA pronunciation and create a pronunciation test module? --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 14:08, 29 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Cheers Anatoli. Category added. I think you discovered where the testcase page was... that case has been fixed. Wyang (talk) 23:59, 29 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks a lot, Frank! Do you mind if I add more (failed) test cases, if I discover? The last failed case broke the module, though. No rush in fixing, if you're busy, my Thai is poor and I won't be adding hundreds of entries but I'd like to improve my Thai skills and increase Thai contents at Wiktionary. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 00:43, 30 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, that would be great. Thanks! Wyang (talk) 00:44, 30 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

OK! Also, I think we might need Module:th-pron/testcases as well? Shall I invite our Thai editors to test and use the new modules/templates? (You can do it yourself, of course, if you know who I mean). Let me know if you think it's still raw. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 00:46, 30 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Yes, please. They may have some useful insights regarding improvements of the module. I think I have done the work I can do now. That testcase page might be a little hard to generate as the module generates all the formatting too - {{th-pron/documentation}} can perhaps be used. Wyang (talk) 00:57, 30 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

此典藏有閩南白話字條目如hong-bīn，何以待之？--kc_kennylau (talk) 06:36, 30 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

繼續藏著。Wyang (talk) 06:38, 30 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

開玩笑。這個我沒有什麼建議，因為很少碰。Wyang (talk) 06:39, 30 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

是否應該將讀音改用{{nan-pron}}？— justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 07:37, 30 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

該模板為閩南代名詞所用。--kc_kennylau (talk) 08:18, 30 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Kc kennylau 真失禮，應為{{nan-pronunc}}。— justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 08:20, 30 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

You seem to have triggered a module error here by having pi-Latn-translit feed the string "&nbsp;" to {{lang|th}} Chuck Entz (talk) 02:54, 2 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, fixed. Wyang (talk) 03:28, 2 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi Frank,

Do you think you could do another magic for Thai accelerated entry creation? I would appreciate if you could, please :) I'm thinking of using phonemic spelling(s) as a mandatory parameter (comma-separated) for various parts of speech. A simple one would do. @Iudexvivorum would probably be interested in the idea. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 09:30, 3 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

An example noun entry การจูบ - with the code {{th-new|n|กาน จูบ|kiss}}? --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 09:36, 3 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hiya, could you add the Taiwan pronunciation for 鑿 (zuò) when you get time, so it can show up automatically in entries like 確鑿? Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 03:53, 10 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi mate. Are you 100% sure it is pronounced as zuo4? All the audios I could find for 鑿 on moedict.tw pronounce it as zao2, including audio at 鑿 itself. Wyang (talk) 10:03, 10 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Wyang, Tooironic This is one of the many discrepancies between the standard pronunciation in Taiwan (dictated by 國語一字多音審訂表) and the pronunciation provided by 國語辭典 (focused on historical usage). Since 國語辭典 lists it, I usually label these with variant in Taiwan. In addition, zuò labelled as 讀音 in 國語辭典, so it could also have the label of "literary". — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 10:34, 10 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Understood. I'll add the variant pronunciation to the respective entries manually when I get around to it. ---> Tooironic (talk) 03:47, 11 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

I'm quite dissatisfied with my attempt here. Would you kindly assist me, please? --kc_kennylau (talk) 13:16, 11 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Sure. I tried my best. Wyang (talk) 03:09, 14 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Is this edit okay? I noticed line 594 of Module:cmn-pron and thought that it might be appropriate @ 查某, if I understand its purpose correctly. —suzukaze (t・c) 08:41, 20 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

"Min Nan" by itself may be misleading, so I changed it to "imitating Min Nan". Wyang (talk) 11:15, 20 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Is "b+l+ā+s+t+i+k" really pronounced /pʰlaːd.sa.tiɡ/? --kc_kennylau (talk) 10:36, 20 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

I think Anatoli has fixed it. Wyang (talk) 11:08, 20 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Problem 1 (solved)

Sorry to bother you. But there seems to be a module-related error on this page. --iudexvivorum (talk) 16:05, 21 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Problem 2 (solved)

I've also added a new test case to Module:th-translit/testcases. Please fix this too. Thank you so much! --iudexvivorum (talk) 16:28, 21 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Octahedron80 Hi, I saw that you made changes to the Module:th-pron module. Would you mind fixing the module error at จดหมายเหตุ (jòt-mǎai-hèet) and Module:th-translit/testcases? Thanks so much. :) Wyang (talk) 20:56, 21 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

I don't know how it works. I must say that some words have extra vowel at coda without reading, especially at the end of term, for example เหตุ เกตุ ชาติ อาบัติ สมบัติ ปฏิบัติ เมรุ etc. (heet, keet, chaat, aa-bat, som-bat, pa-ti-bat, meen) that will make the 'glide' nil. (?) They are all derived from Pali or Sanskrit. When these words become prefixes, the vowels are mostly read. --Octahedron80 (talk) 02:50, 22 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

We will find out more and more exceptions in the future. How about to make a list module of special cases? Module:th-pron/exceptions --Octahedron80 (talk) 02:50, 22 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Umm. Is this list still needed, considering we don't aim to predict the pronunciation based on orthography directly? Wyang (talk) 06:23, 27 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

For some reasons, the module error on จดหมายเหตุ (jòt-mǎai-hèet) and other pages is now no more. But the wrong pronunciation according to the new test case remains. --iudexvivorum (talk) 02:56, 22 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

The error came from เหตุ and I hardcoded it with tr2=hèet. So the problem is not completely gone. --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:10, 22 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

The pronunciation problem I referred to is another thing. The module renders 'โหน' as 'nǒo', but correctly it should be 'hǒon'. --iudexvivorum (talk) 03:34, 22 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

This problem is like แหน that can be 'haen' or 'nae' at the same time. โหน (hoon) can appear as สะ-โหน (sa-noo) either. I think this can not be fixed. --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:36, 22 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Iudexvivorum, Octahedron80 I think it can be fixed if more strict parameters are used in the phonemic Thai. You guys need to change the module a bit then. E.g. use "หฺ" (with anusvara) when it's silent and is only used to convert consonants to high class, otherwise use normal "ห". Alternatively, parameters could be used, e.g. "|h=y" for "h" reading. {{th-pron|แหฺน}} or {{th-pron|แหน|h=y}} for 'nɛɛ' and {{th-pron|แหน}} for 'hɛɛn' examples --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 05:16, 22 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Modified according to Anatoli's comment. There may be exisiting entries with h+n/ng/m/l/r/y/w respelling sequences which should actually be h+VOWELLESS+n/ng/m/l/r/y/w. We can modify the module to categorise them collectively and track them down. Wyang (talk) 06:21, 27 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Problem 3 (solved)

Sorry to bother you once again. But the module seems to work improperly on this page, as Paiboon and IPA do not show. --iudexvivorum (talk) 15:10, 22 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Octahedron80 Could you please take a look at this? You made a lot of changes at Module:th-pron and I'm not sure I can understand the rationale of each edit. Thank you! Wyang (talk) 20:19, 22 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

When I removed either รา or ราด, it worked. When I put both, it failed. I think there's somthing about letter detection? I didn't edit that part. --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:41, 23 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

ปฺระ-ชา-ชาด (ประชาชาติ) results the same problem either. It has ชา and ชาด in the word. My assumption is right. --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:53, 23 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Yes, the algorithm was affected when part of word 1 is in word 2. Fixed now. Wyang (talk) 06:21, 27 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Is using {{zh-see}} in this way okay? It's completely sensible but at the same time feels so wrong... —suzukaze (t・c) 04:12, 23 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

I think we should add another option for the second parameter for second-round simplified characters (and while we're at it, for the old Singaporean simplified forms as well). — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 04:52, 23 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Just append v parameter in this case. --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:30, 23 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Would you mind checking if the Min Nan is different when used to mean "main points; clues", as it is in Mandarin? Thanks. ---> Tooironic (talk) 09:31, 26 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

I think Justin (who is more competent) has modified the entry to clarify the senses. Wyang (talk) 06:24, 27 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, Frank! Here are the sources if you're wondering:

• bâi-ba̍k (eyes and eyebrows)
• bî-bo̍k (facial features)
• (ū-)bî-bo̍k (main points; clues)

(Suzukaze-c dropped some clues, 我才有點眉目.)

For "sequence of ideas (in an article)", I just figured it probably wouldn't be the vernacular reading, so I just put it under the literary reading for now. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 06:46, 27 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

So I see that you deleted the page titled "䡒䡒". When I created that page, I used this page as a source, which states that "䡘" is only used in "䡘䡘", and that "䡘䡘" is also written as "䡒䡒". So is it okay if I recreate the page, or should I wait until the standard form 䡘䡘 has gotten its own entry? - VulpesVulpes42 (talk) 14:55, 26 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Yes please create the entry 䡘䡘 first. :) Wyang (talk) 06:26, 27 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi Frank,

Thanks for your effort with Thai modules! When you have some time could consider fixing an issue and add one feature to Thai usage examples function, please?

One request is here Template talk:th-usex and another on my talk page, mentioned by User:หมวดซาโต้, see entry เมืองหลวง (mʉʉang-lǔuang). Additional spaces are currently shown as some symbols - commas or ampersands. We also need the ability to suppressing links when needed (like @ with the Chinese module). --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 06:14, 27 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi Anatoli. Replied there. Wyang (talk) 06:27, 27 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Got problem with คืนหมาหอน (คืน-หฺมา-หอน). Error come from หอน. --Octahedron80 (talk) 10:39, 27 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

By the way, looks like big error at Module:th-translit/testcases --Octahedron80 (talk) 10:41, 27 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, both fixed. Wyang (talk) 10:53, 27 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Before the fix, there were 65 module errors from th-pron. Now there 73. I think a little more fixing is in order... Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 11:01, 27 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, separate issue at Module:links. Now fixed. Wyang (talk) 11:47, 27 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

Much better. Now there are three. Chuck Entz (talk) 12:43, 27 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

I'd suggest you try something better, rather than just a Vietnamese-English Dictionary (some quotation for starters?). You probably don't know that lexicographers can go pretty far from the truth to make their dictionaries look "complete" or "correct": for example, some might make up false or unattested readings or senses (for example, "truyến" for 傳 or "mùi" for 未 in Thiều Chửu's dictionary); some may even argue words like "bác sĩ" are used "incorrectly" (as in Nguyễn Quốc Hùng's dictionary). I've been consulting Vietnamese academic sources for quite some time and all I've got is disbelief because of the terrible inconsistency; a Vietnamese-English dictionary couldn't be more unreliable. I'm not convinced that such word as "nhãn kính" has ever been in actual use, unless in some Chinese text in the past (Vietnamese writers did write in Chinese).

As for "misreading", what I mean is non-conventional Sino-Vietnamese readings. Those can be dialectal variants or simply outright misreadings due to confusion with character shapes; unfortunately there's no way to tell which is which so I just had to go with "misreading". ばかFumiko￥^talk 06:15, 3 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Replied on your talkpage. Wyang (talk) 10:33, 3 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Like I said, I'd like to be shown some quotation or the like to prove its practical legimtimacy, whether in the past or present. Thiều Chửu's Hán Việt tự điển and Đào Duy Anh's Hán Việt từ điển are essentially Chinese-Vietnamese dictionaries: even basic entries like nhãn aren't qualified as Vietnamese since we don't say "người có hai nhãn" but we say "người có hai mắt". Sino-Vietnamese elements like nhãn are not used as legitimate words, but only as bound morphemes in a limited number of borrowed compounds as a whole; not all Sino-Vietnamese words are practical words (I'd love to claim *mạn hoạ as a Vietnamese counterpart of manga, manhua and manhwa but I just can't because no one uses it for that purpose); and you might notice that Thiều Chửu's dictionary only cite Chinese text. The article you refered to basically explains Chinese characters; I'd like to know in what period of history people actually used *viễn vọng kính instead of kính viễn vọng.

Even well-known dictionaries like Thiều Chửu's has some questionable information. Like I said, it provides strange readings even for common Han character. 傳 has one (basically) unattestable reading "truyến". It's defined as some sort of "station". But when I searched for it on Google or Google Books, all I got are stupid misspellings like "*truyến thuyết", "*truyến giáo". Another example is 子 which has the reading "tí" considered as Sino-Vietnamese; it is just plain irregular for the MC rising tone to evolve into the Vietnamese sắc tone, and "Tí" is more likely to be an "Old Sino-Vietnamese" or "nativised Sino-Vietnamese" reading just like "Mùi", "Thìn", "Mẹo". mô only occurs in Nam mô so I suspected it was a mere irregular variant of "vô" which was borrowed wholly in the saying Nam mô A Di Đà Phật, and like I said there's no telling what its true nature might be so I went with "misreading". ばかFumiko￥^talk 11:56, 3 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Howdy Wyang! I'm not sure we've spoken before (please correct me if I'm wrong). I was thinking of working on the classification of Sino-Tibetan languages, which can be seen here if you scroll down to Proto-Sino-Tibetan. At first look, I realize we should probably have a Tibetic family that stems from Old Tibetan, but what other major families/proto-languages should I add? Also, whom else should we included in this language discussion? Thanks for your help! —JohnC5 15:42, 7 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi JohnC5, the STEDT database has a neat classification system for Sino-Tibetan languages, which forms the basis of the phylogeny used in Appendix:Proto-Sino-Tibetan pages here (Wiktionary talk:About Proto-Sino-Tibetan). A problem with the proto-languages within the language family is that only a handful were uncontroversial and had been variously reconstructed. A lot of the times researchers disagree on the basic divisions of Sino-Tibetan, for example the placement of Chinese in the phylogeny. An example of a fairly complete page of all currently known languages is *g-sum. User:Angr has been a prolific Burmese contributor on Wiktionary and is probably interested in this topic too. Wyang (talk) 02:35, 8 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

I'm interested in Burmese, but I know absolutely nothing about Sino-Tibetan historical linguistics or how the various languages are related to each other. I add etymologies to Burmese words descended from Proto-ST only if someone (usually Wyang) has created a page for the etymon. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 10:19, 8 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Sorry for the delay and thanks for the advice. In truth, I'm not super worried about proto-languages―more about families. But given this information, I'm not sure I can make much headway without the help of someone more expert. In the mean time, are there any of the languages in this list that should be descended from other members? We can at least get the inheritance of attested language in order. —JohnC5 03:36, 11 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

I've made some changes and categorized some stuff. Please correct me if I've screwed anything up too much. 05:54, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

The basic structure seems good. I think it would be best to follow the STEDT phylogeny, to simplify our tasks a bit. Just one suggestion regarding Chinese: Cantonese, Gan, Xiang, Wu, etc. should descend from Middle Chinese. Wyang (talk) 04:30, 13 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

I've fixed Chinese mostly. I'm thinking of adding Lolish and Bai next. Also, where should Literary Chinese go? Under Middle or Old Chinese? —JohnC5 05:18, 13 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Literary Chinese descends mostly from Old Chinese - the current arrangement is fine. Nice work! Wyang (talk) 05:45, 13 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi Wyang. Could you please check and clean up (as necessary) the Tibetan entries that Special:Contributions/Willy2000 has recently made? Your help would also be appreciated in checking any others you are familiar with. @Atitarev, Stephen G. Brown: Maybe there are others that you can help with as well? Thanks everybody! —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 22:57, 13 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Sure, done. :) Wyang (talk) 11:19, 14 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi Frank,

There are Gan Chinese translations at Gan#translations, which we don't support:

• Gan: ^{(please verify)} 贛語／赣语, ^{(please verify)} 赣语 (gon ua), 江西話／江西话, 江西话 (kong si ua)

Do you have a way of verifying them? I think transliteration "gon ua" looks suspicious and I marked it for verification. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 07:25, 14 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

I don't think these can be verified... Wyang (talk) 11:21, 14 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I thought so. It won't be possible to verify Gan translations or entries. I think they all should be removed as an original research or a copy from Wikipedia. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 12:45, 14 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hello. I see you speak Chinese. Please proofread this notice I merely created earlier with Google Translate: https://meta.wikimedia.orghttps://dictious.com/en/Tech/Server_switch_2016/zh . Thanks. --Octahedron80 (talk) 15:29, 15 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

PS. Don't care about zh-hans page. I just have requested to delete it. --Octahedron80 (talk) 15:29, 15 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

No worries. done. Wyang (talk) 00:45, 16 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hello! There are several issues concerning Thai entries.

1. Certain entries are automatically given Category:Thai terms spelled with รร, a category intended for the terms in which -รร serves as a vowel (e.g. ครรลอง, บรรเจิด, บรรลัย (ban-lai), สรรหา, etc.). But there are terms which do no fall under such category (e.g. นครราชสีมา (ná-kɔɔn-râat-chá-sǐi-maa), นครรัฐ (ná-kɔɔn-rát), etc.), because the letters ร are just together (not serving as a vowel); yet their entries are put into this category. Can you fix any related template or module to allow exceptions?
2. The function "p=" in Template:th-l does not work anymore. For example, the template transliterates ดร. as dɔɔn. ({{th-l|ดร.}} gives ดร. (dɔɔn.)), but the correct pronunciation is dɔɔ-rɔɔ. When we use {{th-l|ดร.|p=ดอ-รอ}} to make it transliterate the term as dɔɔ-rɔɔ, it does not work. This seems to happen with other transliteration-related templates too, such as Template:m ({{m|th|ดร.|tr=dɔɔ-rɔɔ}} gives ดร. (dɔɔ-rɔɔ)) and Template:l ({{l|th|ดร.|tr=dɔɔ-rɔɔ}} gives ดร. (dɔɔ-rɔɔ)). Can you fix this too?

Thanks a million!

@Atitarev, Octahedron80 Let me ping you, as this topic may interest you.

--หมวดซาโต้ (talk) 04:04, 16 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Topic 1 fixed in th-headword. If the same thing occur next time, I must add word exception because it's no better logic. --Octahedron80 (talk) 04:25, 16 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

@kc_kennylau Would you be able to address the second issue since you did subsequent edits on Module:links? Thanks! Wyang (talk) 06:12, 16 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Wyang: I thought your intention is that transliterations given on the page overrides manual transliterations. --kc_kennylau (talk) 13:17, 16 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

@kc_kennylau

You might see that the module/template sometimes gives a transliteration different from that given on the page. An example is ดร. The module/template keeps transliterating it as dɔɔn., despite a different transliteration having been given on the page.

Furthermore, manual transliterations are sometimes needed. For example, the homograph เพลา can be pronounced plao (meaning "wheel") and pee-laa (meaning "time"). At present, the module only transliterates เพลา as plao. And even though different pronunciations have been provided on the page of เพลา, the module will generate a transliteration according to the first pronunciation only. When we need the second pronunciation, a manual transliteration will thus be required.

A concrete example is on the page เวลา, where pee-la is required for เพลา. But the template generates plao for it. And the manual transliteration, such as {{th-l|เพลา|p=เพ-ลา}}, {{l|th|เพลา|tr=pee-laa}}, or {{m|th|เพลา|tr=pee-laa}}, does not work.

--หมวดซาโต้ (talk) 17:49, 16 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Moved from Module_talk:inc-translit ...Also, please address Module:links as requested in User_talk:Wyang#Thai_entries. Thai transliterations worked correctly and overrode manual wrong translits before you made some changes but I don't know what you changed. Sorry, you seem to have stuffed up something. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 01:35, 19 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Atitarev: I am quite confused at the moment. Should I make manual transliteration override or not override? --kc_kennylau (talk) 02:44, 19 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

@kc_kennylau If a term is defined and uses {{th-pron}}, the entry's first transliteration takes precedence over manual. When I asked you to remove italics on Angr's talk page, you did some changes, some users are not happy about, including me ;) --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 02:53, 19 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Atitarev: See the newest comment on that page, by a native speaker (I presume). Should I just ignore his/her suggestion? --kc_kennylau (talk) 03:53, 19 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

@kc_kennylau I saw her comment and I agree with it. (I think she's a woman by Thai particles she used). Where do you find any controversy to what I said, though?

Let's see. ดร. (dɔɔn.) is currently transliterated incorrectly (should be "dɔɔ-rɔɔ"), although it's defined and uses {{th-pron}}. The automatic transliteration didn't use the entry's transliteration but other.

In case of the currently undefined เพลา (pee-laa), which currently shows "plao". Here, the phonetic respelling or manual transliteration should be used. For the reading "plao", the phonemic is "เพฺลา", for the reading "pee-laa", the phonemic is "เพ-ลา". E.g. {{th-l|เพลา|p=เพฺลา}} and {{th-l|เพลา|p=เพ-ลา}} produce เพลา (plao) and เพลา (pee-laa). The phonetic respelling does the trick. Does it make sense? Also, it works for ดร. (dɔɔ-rɔɔ) but a defined term shouldn't need that, in my opinion. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 10:49, 19 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ @Atitarev: So you mean that p should override auto-transliteration, which should override tr. --kc_kennylau (talk) 10:52, 19 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

@kc_kennylau Yes, in this order. (I am moving the discussion here, if it's OK). --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 11:03, 19 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Atitarev: Sorry if I am too stupid. Could you tell me what exactly I need to fix? --kc_kennylau (talk) 13:03, 19 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

They want p= in Template:th-l to work again to be processed with Module:th-pron. It worked for some time until Kenny made change in Module:links. Can you fix that? --Octahedron80 (talk) 13:11, 19 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Octahedron80: I thought it is working. --kc_kennylau (talk) 13:23, 19 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Yes, p= is working, as demonstrated above. Before some change (unknown to me), this code เอเชีย (th) (aychia) would ignore the manual "aychia" and use the entry's transliteration, "ee-chiia". The term is defined and uses {{th-pron}} (these are important conditions), as if it were เอเชีย (th) (ee-chiia)}. It may be easier for Wyang to fix it, as he designed it. It's not easy to explain all details.--Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 15:30, 19 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

There are more cases that is still defective. See Module:th-translit/testcases --Octahedron80 (talk) 02:11, 20 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Octahedron80 I think the automatic transliterations shouldn't be done with consonant clusters. If character pintu - พินทุ (pin-tú) - ◌ฺ were used strictly used for kl, br, etc. (consonant clusters), then แคล (kɛɛl) (should read "kɛɛl") and แคฺล (klɛɛ) (should read "klɛɛ") would never be mixed up. Or default should be "kɛɛl" reading and "klɛɛ" only if pintu is present in the phonemic Thai - "แคฺล". Do you agree that default should be "kɛɛl" for undefined form or you think the automatic trasliteration should be disabled for ambiguous cases with consonant clusters? --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 02:25, 20 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

It should be first result by default (kɛɛl). Until pintu is added, it would be cluster (klɛɛ). --Octahedron80 (talk) 02:42, 20 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the notification. Changed accordingly. Wyang (talk) 08:46, 20 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Could you add exception to เงิน ? This word is special that reads short (ŋɤn˧) but there is no way to express. --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:16, 21 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Sure, please see my change at เงิน. Wyang (talk) 05:48, 21 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Good work. Thanks a lot. --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:51, 21 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thank you both. If I used my paper dictionary (also by Paiboon), I would have noticed that it's romanised with a short vowel - "ngən". --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 06:21, 21 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

It's clever, but is it really safe to do all the time? For example, 漂亮#See_also now shows “(Cantonese, Hakka) 靚／靓／靓 (jìng)”. —suzukaze (t・c) 03:31, 28 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Safe... in most of the usage instances. I've thought about cases like that and how to deal with interdialectal correspondences. My opinion is we need to develop better infrastructure for accommodating these. We need to combine the qualifying tag with the link itself, possibly in the form of a new template along the lines of {{zh-var|c,h|靚}}, or even better, combining all dialectal information e.g. {{zh-var|c,h:靚|mn:媠}}. This template would then grab the pronunciations according to the variant info. Secondly we need to think about where to put all the "see also"-type information such as this. This kind of information is mostly sense-specific. Unfortunately Wiktionary has a poorly designed support for building a clever dictionary, but we can gradually improve the skeleton. Codes such as {{zh-var|c,h:靚|mn:媠}} should be placed immediately after the line of definition that says "beautiful", cf. the format of sense 14 in 個. Wyang (talk) 03:55, 28 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

What about 大#Etymology? —suzukaze (t・c) 05:19, 28 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

If you are sure you would like to get my opinion, then (as the person who wrote it) I think it is ... excellent. Wyang (talk) 05:22, 28 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Do these come from Middle Chinese -i- and -aa-? If so, then where do the -i- and -aa- in Cantonese come from? Are they explained as literary vs vernacular readings? kc_kennylau (talk) 04:54, 29 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi Kenny, I'm short in time - this document may be helpful. Cheers, Wyang (talk) 09:47, 29 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

For 闲, which should we take as the main traditional form and which as the variant? 閑 or 閒? I can't find any conclusive answers online. ---> Tooironic (talk) 12:23, 29 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

From my experience, 閒 is much more common than 閑. 閑 is reserved for literary senses, like these definitions from Chinese Linguipedia:

• 柵欄
• 馬廄
• 比喻法度；範圍
• 防備；阻止. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 13:52, 29 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Tooironic — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 13:56, 29 March 2016 (UTC)Reply

OK. Here's our coverage as it stands:

main: 閒行 variant: 閑行

main: 閒人 variant: 閑人

main: 閒暇 variant: 閑暇

main: 閒話 variant: 閑話

main: 空閒 variant: 空閑

main: 休閒 variant: 休閑

main: 閒談 variant: 閑談

main: 閒聊 variant: 閑聊

main: 悠閒 variant: 悠閑

main: 得閒 variant: 得閑

main: 閒散 variant: 閑散

main: 閒職 variant: 閑職

plus three more that I just swapped around:

main: 餘閒 variant: 餘閑

main: 閒空 variant: 閑空

main: 偷閒 variant: 偷閑

That should be nice and consistent now. Thanks ---> Tooironic (talk) 04:51, 3 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Could you check this edit? —suzukaze (t・c) 19:30, 2 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

I can't seem to verify this. Wyang (talk) 23:46, 2 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Atitarev, Tooironic, suzukaze-c Are we supposed to put glyph origins under Chinese since that's where Han characters came from? The current (albeit outdated) Wiktionary:About Han script page tells us to put glyph origins under translingual, as the translingual section is usually for information about the written character. AFAIK, the current convention is to put glyph origin information under the etymology section in the translingual section. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 21:46, 2 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Convention and that page says it goes under Translingual. (FWIW if there was a vote to move it to Chinese I would support it.) —suzukaze (t・c) 22:08, 2 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Yes, the script as a whole (along with most of its characters) is a Chinese invention, but not all of the individual characters are of Chinese origin. There are enough kanji, hanja and chữ nôm that originated outside of China to make things difficult if everything were moved to the Chinese section. Chuck Entz (talk) 23:32, 2 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

There could be Japanese > Glyph origin too, of course. —suzukaze (t・c) 23:37, 2 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Yes, let's do it. There are characters of non-Chinese origin and the "Glyph origin" should be appropriately placed to make that apparent (e.g. 乭). Wyang (talk) 23:54, 2 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

I'm a little hesistant about this. Take the Latin script as an example. The glyph origins of the letters are not placed under Latin, but under the translingual header. Why would Han characters be different? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 00:00, 3 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

We should look at the rules themselves to assess their appropriateness, not by the fact the rules are implemented without citing the rationales. There are two cons of placing this as etymology in Translingual: first is that this is a misuse of the word "etymology" - "Etymology is the study of the history of words, their origins, and how their form and meaning have changed over time. " (Wikipedia); second is that the origin of a glyph is always language-dependent, and it doesn't make sense to say a character originated as a phono-semantic character Translingually (e.g. 住). Wyang (talk) 00:42, 3 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

IMO, this will make work on single-character entries even more complicated. Even if does make some sense, adding pronunciations and senses is one thing and adding glyph etymologies is much more difficult.--Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 00:56, 3 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

I do agree it is misusing the word "etymology". However, if we are to implement this change, we might have to get the agreement of Japanese, Korean and Vietnamese editors. We can't just suddenly pull everything from the translingual into Chinese. I don't think putting glyph origins in Chinese would make it too much more difficult than what we are doing right now. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 01:03, 3 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Let's get the ball rolling. It has to be raised and changed, sooner or later. Wyang (talk) 02:41, 3 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Why did you remove the etymology for 羊羹 for the yokan sense? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 09:15, 5 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

I didn't remove etymology - I merged the two, as I didn't think it was necessary to separate them. There is no differentiation in pronunciation AFAIK. This may be comparable to 文化 (wénhuà) where the conflation of etymologies is better explained in one place. Wyang (talk) 09:41, 5 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

I guess it's fine to be put together, but it doesn't have an etymology section anymore. Nothing indicates that it's from Japanese (except the note under Hakka). — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 09:54, 5 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Good suggestion. I added a one-sentence etymology there. Wyang (talk) 10:51, 5 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

It looks like the template('s module back-end) needs to be able to tell the difference between , and , ; see 一二三四五，上山打老虎#See_also. —suzukaze (t・c) 10:14, 5 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Damn. Fixed. Wyang (talk) 10:49, 5 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Do you think Chinese etymologies 1 and 2 for 阮 (ruǎn) can be conflated? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 01:02, 7 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Yes I think it is best to merge them, and etymology can describe the evolution of the instrument (maybe also one sentence saying this is now the commonest surname in Vietnam), whereas in definitions the surname sense is put first. Wyang (talk) 01:30, 7 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Octahedron80 Sorry to bother you again. Would you please fix the Thai module, as the vowel "เ-" ("ee" - long) is now rendered as "e" (short)? For example, it renders เดดสะมอเร่ as "dét-sà-mɔɔ-rê", but correctly it should be "déet-sà-mɔɔ-rêe". Thank you very much, sir. --iudexvivorum (talk) 05:05, 8 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

I saw it on ฮ่องเต้, เท่, เท่ห์, เสน่ห์ too. I didn't notice earlier because I was not sure. --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:17, 8 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

เห (hěe) is OK, though. Please add new cases to Module:th-translit/testcases for tracking (phonemic Thai). --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 06:37, 8 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

It seems like the module renders the vowel short if there is a tone mark. For example, เร (ree) vs เร่ (rêe), เห (hěe) vs เห้ (hêe). --iudexvivorum (talk) 08:37, 8 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Guys - what should the rule regarding this be? Vowels@Thai-language says "When any tone mark appears with เ--, or in some rare cases, such as เพชร , the syllable has a short vowel sound". Is this correct? Thanks! Wyang (talk) 10:09, 8 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

1. "เ-" always gives a long vowel sound in open syllables. As for closed syllables, "เ-" + tone marks can give both short and long sounds.
2. This is my suggestion: You may fix the module to let it render "เ-" as a long sound, because (1) whenever a short sound is needed, we can just add the vowel shortener (as in the case of "เพชร", which is respelt as "เพ็ด"), (2) there is no vowel extender in Thai, so if the module automatically produces a short sound, how would we extend it when a long sound is needed? Or you may create a vowel extension parameter or function for the module or related templates.

--iudexvivorum (talk) 11:13, 8 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Easy peasy. Thanks. I followed your advice. Wyang (talk) 11:18, 8 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Gramercy to thee, milord! --iudexvivorum (talk) 11:25, 8 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

How about แต (dtɛɛ)-แต่ (dtɛ̀ɛ)-แต้ (dtɛ̂ɛ), แปฺล (bplɛɛ)-แปฺล่ (bplɛ̀ɛ)-แปฺล้ (bplɛ̂ɛ), แหฺล (lɛ̌ɛ)-แหฺล่ (lɛ̀ɛ)-แหฺล้ (lɛ̂ɛ), แห (hɛ̌ɛ)-แห่ (hɛ̀ɛ)-แห้ (hɛ̂ɛ) ? They are still incorrect. Let's apply above rule on แ too. --Octahedron80 (talk) 03:52, 11 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Sure. Are the current effects correct? Wyang (talk) 04:05, 11 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Those are correct now. Thank a lot. --Octahedron80 (talk) 04:12, 11 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

I have an idea. It would be better if th-pron table can display homophones as another row. There are a lot of homophones in Thai, for example, กาญจน์, กาน, กานต์, กานท์, การ, การณ์, การย์, กาล, กาฬ all are read 'กาน' (gaan). They should display under the pronunciation section. At the first state, we could add homophones by hand. --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:08, 11 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Yes, that is a good idea. I can't think of a way to automatically make the template detect homophones in existing pages. But a workaround is to compile a list of homophones, e.g. Module:zh/data/cmn-hom (effect: 暴利). This list can be produced automatically with a script. Wyang (talk) 05:54, 11 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi. I copy your th-pron module to use on Thai Wiktionary. But I must reduce some functions such as getCharSeq and Paiboon because they are not needed there. I also begin collect Thai homophones and then modify your code to display them later. --Octahedron80 (talk) 06:09, 12 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

PS I don't know what cimenohp is. But I suggest not to use it in id= because id= cannot be duplicated. (The function can be called many times.) Should use in class= instead. --Octahedron80 (talk) 06:27, 12 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Haha certainly, but please make sure the original version is mentioned. I'm glad it is considered useful. I am compiling a list of homophones from current Wiktionary data on en.wikt (which should be done in one hour). Wyang (talk) 06:50, 12 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

I'm collecting from homophone dictionaries at my place. --Octahedron80 (talk) 07:00, 12 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

กด	กฎ/กด
กอ-ทอ-มอ	ก.ท.ม./กทม.
กะ-ลา-โหม	กลาโหม/กะลาโหม
กาน	การ/กาฬ
ก้าว	ก้าว/เก้า
กฺรุง เทบ	กรุงเทพ/กรุงเทพฯ
ขอ	ข/ขอ/ฃ
คอ	คอ/ฅอ
คฺราด	คราด/คราส
คฺริด-สัก-กะ-หฺราด	คริสต์ศักราช/คฤสตศักราช
ฉ่ำ-สะ-มิ-หฺลา สง-ขฺลา ปัด-ตา-นี แฟน-ตา-ซี-พู-เก็ด	ฉ่ำสมิหลา สงขลา ปัตตานี แฟนตาซีภูเก็ต/ฉ่ำสะมิหลา สงขลา ปัตตานี แฟนตาซีภูเก็ต
ชน	ชน/ชล
ช็อก	ชอล์ก/ชอล์ค
เชียง-ไหฺม่	เชยีงใหม/เชียงใหม่
ตุ-ลา-กาน-พิ-วัด	ตุลาการภิวัฒน์/ตุลาการภิวัตน์
ตุ๊ก-ตุ๊ก	ตุ๊ก ๆ/ตุ๊กตุ๊ก
ทะ-เล-สาบ	ทะเลสาบ/ทะเลสาป
ทาน	ทาน/ธาร
ท้าว	ท้าว/เท้า
ทุก ทุก	ทุก ๆ/ทุกทุก
เท่	เท่/เท่ห์
เท่า	เฒ่า/เถ้า/เท่า
โท	โท/โทร
นะ-คอน-ลำ-พาง	ณครรลำภาง/นครลำภาง
นา-ยก	นายก/นายกฯ
บอ-รม-รา-ชา-ทิ-ราด	บรมราชาธิราช/บรมราชาธีราช
บัก-เต-รี	บักเตรี/บัคเตรี
บัว	บวว/บัว
บาด	บาด/บาตร/บาท
ปะ-ระ-โลก	ปรโลก/ปะระโลกย
พอ	พ/พอ
พัน-ลึก	พรรฦก/พันฦก
พุด	พุทธ/พุธ
พูด	พูด/ภูติ
พฺระ-นะ-คอน-สี-อะ-ยุด-ทะ-ยา	พระนครศรีอยุทธยา/พระนครศรีอยุธยา
พฺระ-ราด-ชะ-พง-สา-วะ-ดาน	พระราชพงศาวดาร/พระราชพงษาวดาร
มะ-ขาม	มะขาม/มะฃาม
มัด-สะ-หฺยา	มัตสยา/มัสยา
แม็ก-นี-เซี่ยม	แมกนีเซียม/แม็กนีเซียม
ย่า	ย่า/หญ้า
ยาน	ญาณ/ยาน
รด	รถ/รส
ระ-ดับ	รดับ/ระดับ
ระ-ลึก	รฦก/ระฦก
ราม-เม-สวน	รามเมศวร/ราเมศวร
ลบ-บุ-รี	ลพบุรี/ลพบุรีย
ลิ-เที่ยม	ลิเทียม/ลิเธียม
ลือ-ชา	ลือชา/ฦๅชา
เล้ส-เบี้ยน	เลสเบียน/เลสเบี้ยน
วอก-นัก-สัด	วอกนักษัตร/วอกนักสัตว
วัน-พฺรึ-หัด	วันพฤหัส/วันพฤหัสฯ
วี-ระ-กำ	วีรกรรม/วีระกรรม
สม-เด็ด-พฺระ	สมเดจ์พระ/สมเด็จพระ
สอ	ศ./ศอ
สะ-หะ-พัน	สหพัน/สหพันธ์
สะ-หะ-รัด	สหรัฐ/สหรัฐฯ
สะ-หฺมุด	สมุด/สมุทร
สะ-หฺวัด	สวัส/สวัสดิ์
สับ	ศัพท์/สรรพ/สับ
สี	ศรี/สี
สี-ช็อก	สีชอล์ก/สีชอล์ค
สุก	ศุกร์/สุข
หาน	หาญ/หาร
หำ	หรรม/หำ
หฺมื่น-นะ-คอน	หมื่นณครร/หมื่นนคร
หฺย่า	หย่า/อย่า
อะ-นุ-ยาด	อนุญาต/อนุญาติ
อะ-ลู-มิ-เนียม	อลูมิเนียม/อะลูมิเนียม
อา	อา/อาร์
อี-เมล	อีเมล/อีเมล์

Here is a list of Thai homophones I extracted from current usages of {{th-pron}}. It might be helpful. :) Wyang (talk) 07:50, 12 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

According to above, some of them are collected misspellings or obsolete spellings. I think they should be marked (with daggers for example) if want them to display along with suitable words. My progress is now around 500 homophones. --Octahedron80 (talk) 09:02, 12 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Octahedron80 Excellent work on Module:th-hom. Would you like to make {{th-pron}} automatically detect the homophones (like 暴利 (bàolì))? Wyang (talk) 04:07, 14 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Firstly I thought about it. But there would be following problems about multiple-reading word that homophones not matched, and long list of homophones against short word. They would make the table ugly. So I keep it simply. --Octahedron80 (talk) 04:21, 14 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

I think it is better to incorporate the two into one template. The format change shouldn't be too dramatic and worst case scenario, homophones don't have to be go into the table and be generated automatically under the table. I will try some codes on {{th-pron}}. Wyang (talk) 04:27, 14 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Your table looks good. I'm removing uses of th-hom. However, I'll keep the template; it might be useful in the future. --Octahedron80 (talk) 05:32, 14 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Excellent, thanks! Wyang (talk) 06:45, 14 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

There is something out there. Thwikt really has some words already read to audio files. They must display under the pronunciation section either. I wonder if th-pron can add more parameters for the audio files. I'll leave this to you. --Octahedron80 (talk) 17:03, 15 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

I added the audio file feature. Audio files are stored at Module:th-pron/files so that they can be accessed by all homophones. The audio width is dependent on respelling length. See ญี่ปุ่น (yîi-bpùn), สหรัฐอเมริกา (sà-hà-rát-à-mee-rí-gaa), ประเทศไทย, รัก (rák) and งู (nguu) for some examples. Wyang (talk) 00:22, 16 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Do you have a source for the Dutch etymology? ---> Tooironic (talk) 14:55, 16 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Please see the talk page (the pdf file linked to) and The Chinese Name for Australia. Wyang (talk) 15:11, 16 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

I cannot see anything in that PDF which suggests that 澳大利亞 is a transliteration from Dutch. ---> Tooironic (talk) 16:05, 16 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

It says that Australia was recorded as 奧大利亞 in Wei Yuan's 1852 map in Illustrated Treatise on the Maritime Kingdoms (海國圖志), with the variant name of Nova Hollandia (新荷蘭地亞). A bit of search on the background of Wei Yuan and the previous maps he used as basis for his descriptions, revealed that in fact his was not the earliest use of the word. See this article 近代中国人对澳洲的认识与中澳早期交往 in 《中山大学学报》. The name that Wei had used was first used by Xu Jiyu (徐繼畬) in his 1848 book A Short Account of the Maritime Circuit (《瀛寰志略》). The description was as follows:

其地亙古窮荒，未通別土。前明時西班牙王遣使臣墨瓦蘭由亞墨利加之南西駛，再尋新地。舟行數月，忽見大地，以為別一乾坤。地荒穢，無人跡。入夜磷光亂飛，命名曰火地。又以使臣之名，名之曰墨瓦蠟泥加。西班牙人以此侈航海之能，亦未嘗經營其他。後荷蘭人東來，建置南洋諸島，展轉略地，遂抵此土，於海濱建設埔頭，名之曰澳大利亞，又稱新荷蘭。

Thus it is clear that the name for Australia in Chinese was from Dutch Australië. The phonetics (Lua error in Module:parameters at line 376: Parameter 1 should be a valid language or etymology language code; the value "Nl-Australië.ogg" is not valid. See WT:LOL and WT:LOL/E.) matches better than English Australia (Lua error in Module:parameters at line 376: Parameter 1 should be a valid language or etymology language code; the value "En-au-Australia.ogg" is not valid. See WT:LOL and WT:LOL/E.) too, especially the syllable 大. Hope it helps. Wyang (talk) 01:07, 17 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Help me Wyang, you're my only hope. Johnny Shiz (talk) 22:57, 16 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

I shall endeavour. Wyang (talk) 01:16, 17 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

請問粵語高降高平之分何來？ (I would like to ask, where does the distinction between high-falling tones and high-level tones in Cantonese come form?)--kc_kennylau (talk) 04:25, 17 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

這篇文可能有幫助（結語在最後一頁）。大概地講，起先廣州話陰平調為高降調值，高平調為變調，有特定詞類容易變調。後來兩者分野越來越模糊。Wyang (talk) 04:42, 17 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Do Min Dong and other Min varieties use 食 for "to drink"? I only know it's used in Min Nan (both Hokkien and Teochew). — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 06:04, 17 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Fuzhou dialect does use 食 /sieʔ˥/ for "to drink", e.g. ～薰（抽煙）、～水（喝水）, although it also uses 啜 /ʦʰuɔʔ˨˧/: 水～蜀嘴（喝口水）、藥～裡去（藥喝了吧）. Same situation in Min Bei (Jian'ou dialect): /iɛ˦˩/ (eat, drink) and /ʦʰyɛ˨˦/ (drink). Wyang (talk) 06:32, 17 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 06:40, 17 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Please check CAT:E after you edit a widely-transcluded module such as Module:zh-pron

Thanks, gently fixed. Wyang (talk) 23:25, 18 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

There's still something strange going on. There are now 3 Chinese entries with out-of-memory errors. To save you some time (and out of curiosity), I edited and previewed the different sections to see what was using the memory. Here's what I found:

As you can see, just about everything in the Chinese sections uses lots of memory, which isn't surprising, given the huge amounts of data the modules are working with. Still, something must have changed recently: at 無, for instance, the Chinese section takes all but a MB and a half, and we weren't seeing any module errors like this a couple of days ago.

I hope this helps. Thanks! Chuck Entz (talk) 03:00, 19 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

I don't know if it has anything to do with my recent edits to the Hakka module. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 03:04, 19 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

I changed the require in Module:zh-pron to loadData, and it fixed the module errors on 死 and 無. That is about as much as I can do using my Lua knowledge, unfortunately. Something else needs to be fixed to fix the errors on 水. Wyang (talk) 05:32, 19 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

I wonder if splitting Module:zh into specialized smaller modules would help. It seems like the compound section alone calls on the Mandarin PRC/Taiwan pronunciation difference data as well as homophone data, although it's totally unnecessary. —suzukaze (t・c) 22:01, 19 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

@Octahedron80

Hello!

In general, "ว", when ending a syllable, is transliterated as or as part of the vowel (sometimes represented by "a", sometimes by "o", sometimes by "u", etc.) Examples: กิ่ว (gìu), เกอว (gəəo), แต๋ว (dtɛ̌o), น้าว (náao), สั่ว (sùua), เหี่ยว (hìao), เอี่ยว (ìao).

But there are cases that "ว" serves as an independent ending consonant. And this is still not supported by the transliteration module. For example, หมั่นโถว (respelled as หฺมั่น-โถว) is now automatically transliterated as "màn-twǒo", but it should be "màn-tǒow".

So I am here to beg you to fix it. Thanks a million!

--YURi (talk) 18:48, 20 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hello! I have fixed the issue at màn-tǒow. Fixing the latter would require fixing the linking template. @kc_kennylau could you please take a look and fix the second case if you can? Thank you, Wyang (talk) 01:29, 21 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

The module transliterates a term with the repetition marker (ๆ, called yá-mók) incorrectly, despite the term having been defined. An example is on the page ตุ๊กตุ๊ก, where the term ตุ๊ก ๆ is transliterated as "dtúk yá-mók", but the correct transliteration should be "dtúk dtúk". --YURi (talk) 18:58, 20 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

I could say that ยะ-มก reading must be removed from ๆ because ตุ๊ก ๆ is linked from there. By the way, the mark has no pronunciation by itself; we just call it like that. (I already remove it.) --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:44, 21 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Do you know which one is "correct" (or more common if both are used): 並存 or 併存? AFAIK, in Cantonese, it's most commonly pronounced bing6 cyun4, so 並存 should be the correct one. 並存 is also supported by Guoyu Cidian and Chinese Linguipedia, both of which do not have 併存. Semantically, 並 seems to make more sense, as it means "together; simultaneous", as opposed to 併 "to combine". However, 併存 is given an entry in CantoDict with bing3 cyun4, but I'm quite doubtful of it. What do you think? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 06:02, 23 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

I agree with you Justin - 並存 seems to be the more correct/common form. Wyang (talk) 01:00, 24 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! I moved the info from 併存 to 並存, but took away bing3 cyun4 for now. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 01:40, 24 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Could you check if the senses for 徛 are also used in Min dialects? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 01:51, 27 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

It is used in most Min dialects and is treated as the same as 企 (qǐ) by some. This page has detailed info about the use of various senses in Chinese dialects. Wyang (talk) 03:53, 27 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the resource! I've edited the page accordingly. Could you check the Fuzhou pronunciation I added? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 06:29, 27 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

No prob; seems good. Wyang (talk) 08:23, 27 April 2016 (UTC)Reply

diff; I'm not sure it's entirely "proper" to use fonts technically designated as Chinese for Korean. For example, the Adobe/Google font Source Han Sans specifically has a Korea variant for things like this. —suzukaze (t・c) 04:43, 1 May 2016 (UTC)Reply