Talk:Haus

• "im Hause" is no hyponym
• many hyponyms are also derived terms (in this case all the ATM mentioned correct hyponyms, that are all except "im Hause", are also derived terms)
• "Haus-" is no adjective, it's a 'pseudo-prefix' in terms such as "Haustür" or a short form for another word (like "Haus- und Gartentür" is short for "Haustür und Gartentür")
• "hausgemacht" is a noun, but only in the broad sense and not in the strict sense which is meant here
• plural forms etc. aren't derived terms
• "verbs" like "hausierend" are also "adjectives" (as in "hausierende Bettler")
• technically diminutives (Häuschen, Häuslein, Häusle) are derived terms, but so are words with -in (like "Studentin", cf. en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Student&diff=37051572&oldid=36927551), and then why are they mentioned in the head line?

Furthermore: terms with -in most likely are not derived from this word... -84.161.1.135 07:59, 8 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

• • Correct.
  • I don't understand.
  • Correct.
  • "Hausgemacht" is an adjective, which is not a noun here on Wiktionary. If it's labelled as a noun somewhere, go ahead and correct it.
  • Correct.
  • These are participles. They are both verbs and adjectives, or neither nor. I think Wiktionary's policy is to treat them as a special class "participle".
  • Feminine forms are a case of doubt between derivatives and inflections since their use is often dictated by grammatical agreement rather than meaning: Er ist Student becomes Sie ist Studentin by agreement, in the same way that ein Student becomes eine Studentin. I don't know if a similar case could be made for diminutives; maybe not. At any rate, these forms are given in the head line because it's useful to do so. With diminutives this should be restricted to the standard forms in -chen and -lein; regional forms should be mentioned as derivatives only. — This unsigned comment was added by 84.188.181.3 (talk) at 16:03, 5 February 2018 (UTC).Reply

• (2.) As an example, Wohnhaus is both a hyponym of Haus (a Wohnhaus is a Haus) and a derived term of Haus. Instead of having hyponyms and derivations with many terms mentioned twice, it would be shorter to have terms which are both derived terms and hyponyms (e.g. Wohnhaus), terms which are hyponyms but are not derived from Haus (e.g. Villa) and terms which are derived from Haus but aren't hyponyms (e.g. zuhause).
• (4.) In an old version it was, but it was already corrected.
• (6.) Wiktionary is inconsistent with the treatment of it.
• (7.) Diminutives and gendered terms in -in are derived terms. Studentin is used out of semantic and stylistic reason. Sie [f.] ist Gast [m.] and Er [m.] ist eine Person [f.] are grammatically, semantically and stylistically correct and don't require -in or whatever (-ling, -er, -mann as *Personling, *Personer, *Personmann?).
  But terms in -in aren't necessarily derived from Haus. A clear case is Hauserin = Hauser + -in. In some cases, it could be argued that both is possible: Haushündin = Haushund + -in or Haushündin = Haus + Hündin.

-80.133.96.184 23:14, 17 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

(Notifying Matthias Buchmeier, -sche, Atitarev, Jberkel, Mahagaja, Fay Freak, Fytcha): User:Astova added diminutives Häusli and Häusken. These sound like dialectal forms to me that should not be present here, but I'm not totally sure, so I haven't removed them yet. Benwing2 (talk) 03:12, 7 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Benwing2: Yes, these are dialectal. Häusli in [1] is used in Hochdeutsch but must be rare. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 03:41, 7 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Häusken is also attestable in standard German (as a dialectal form/borrowing), but I wonder if they and many other listed diminutives should be moved to usage notes... they should be mentioned and linked in the entry, yes, but I think we may want to treat "is technically attested, 2,000+ times more rarely than the usual form" as a lower threshold than "is the normal form or a variant so commonly encountered that it needs to be made prominent on the headword line". While I appreciate the benefits to having them in the template (it's machine-readable, findable via TemplateTiger-type tools searching for instances of dim8=, etc), when the headword line already lists many forms, I suspect the rare obsolete/dialectal ones may be better left to usage notes. (I moved rare forms out of the headword of Obolus, though an IP later readded them.) Maybe this is a candidate for WT:HOF for most diminutives, though. - -sche (discuss) 07:43, 7 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

I honestly like having the forms be machine-readable and on a modern-day 2K monitor, that headline still doesn't even take up half of the monitor's width. We should however somehow denote that they're regional/dialectal/rare where appropriate (aren't all forms listed here except for -chen/-lein regional/dialectal?).

Re WT:HOF, there's Romanian brad. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 11:15, 7 February 2022 (UTC)Reply