I do not want to come across as contumelious but please consider casting your vote for the tile logo as—besides using English—the book logo has a clear directionality of horizontal left-to-right, starkly contrasting with Arabic and Chinese, two of the six official UN languages. As such, the tile logo is the only translingual choice left and it was also elected in m:Wiktionary/logo/archive-vote-4. Warmest Regards, :)--_thecurran Speak your mind ^{my past} 03:22, 2 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hello. I made some corrections, hope you don't mind. We use the word ποιήτρια for female poets. --flyax 16:27, 16 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hello. Why you created [[Category:Greek adjective comparative and superlative forms]], instead of simply using [[Category:Greek adjective forms]]? --Daniel. 16:50, 22 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Greek has 3 degrees of comparison

1. Comparative - ομορφότερος = more beautiful

2. Relative superlative - ο ομορφότερος = literally the more beautiful = the most beautiful

3. Absolute superlative - ομορφότατος = exceptionally beautiful BUT without comparison with another.

I created the joint category having looked for the superlative category and not finding one. Since ομορφότερος is the comparative and the major part of the rel superlative it seemed sensible to have a joint one. How do you feel? Should we have 3 (as in 1, 2 & 3 above?) —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 17:04, 22 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

The term "ο ομορφότερος" doesn't merit an entry if it is sum of parts of "ο" and "ομορφότερος". Similarly, we don't define "most beautiful" as an individual term. The three forms (comparative, relative superlative and absolute superlative) may certainly be listed at each Greek adjective lemma entry, but the two categories [[Category:Greek adjective comparative forms]] and [[Category:Greek adjective superlative forms]] are enough and may be found at [[Category:Greek adjective forms]]; therefore, the [[Category:Greek adjective comparative and superlative forms]] will be deleted. Do you agree? --Daniel. 18:36, 22 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Done - but I wasn't suggesting we did have "ο ομορφότερος" as an entry - and I'm not sure that all languages can be squeezed into the English form! —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 06:43, 23 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Good. I also am not suggesting that all languages should be treated equally, under English rules; you might even express different suggestions concerning Greek. Though, particularly in that example, a space lies between "ο" and "ομορφότερος" in a manner similar to English orthography, so a similar scheme of word delimitation is achievable. --Daniel. 14:36, 23 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

The "ο" is the masculine def article, hence the space :) —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 14:39, 23 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi, just wondering why you are creating these metal entries with the first letter capped? They should all be lower case entries Jamesjiao → ^{T ◊ C} 06:24, 28 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Cementite is/was a trade name (I was lead to it via Austenite) which IS named after a person and can be spelt either way. —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 06:27, 28 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

I see. Maybe reinstate the entries and define them as alternative spellings of their lower case counterparts? Jamesjiao → ^{T ◊ C} 06:51, 28 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

I like it. +1 to keep. Showing the endings is good. I'm a bit unsure about losing the information about the lemma form altogether from the page, perhaps it should go somewhere else. -- ArielGlenn 16:15, 28 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

No other comments. Sweet! And hey I noticed you on el recently, feel free to come by more often ;-) -- ArielGlenn 17:46, 28 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

About a week ago [1] :-) As far as other headword lines, it would be useful to be able to put mf for some entries (for example). Can't think of anything else. -- ArielGlenn 18:13, 28 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Ah, I was thinking about the nouns, when you said "other" I took it very literally :-D -- ArielGlenn 19:30, 28 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Ahhh - nouns. Perhaps I can look at those later. BUT please say how they should change or, perhaps better, give an example of how it should be done. —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 07:03, 1 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Vahagn Petrosyan has suggested that since paper dicts have less space than us we can afford to use a full form: τέλειος (feminine τέλεια, neuter τέλειο), rather than τέλειος, -α, -ο. If there is agreement that this is better (I do) what final appearancve do we want? I put forward the following as a suggestion - comment please.

τέλειος m, τέλεια f, τέλειο n (téleios) Template:nominative sg

—Stephen suggested the alternative at fr:bon#Adjectif. I felt that with a declension table to follow (in the fullness of time) this would be a duplication. —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 07:27, 1 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

I suggest to remove the "Template:nominative sg" part. I think it's redundant, because lemmas are presupposed to be nominative and singular. If we remove that part, modern Greek adj inflection lines will look almost like Ancient Greek inflection lines, as in ἀγκύλος, which is a good thing. --Vahagn Petrosyan 09:01, 1 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

I agree. I put it back after ArielGlenn's comments at the top of this subject. so (perhaps) we have:

τέλειος m, τέλεια f, τέλειο n (téleios)

Are there any more comments? —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 12:18, 1 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

The latest version can be seen at άσπρος - are any more changes needed? —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 17:27, 1 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Looks good. --Vahagn Petrosyan 19:32, 1 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Anyone keeping a watch here, please have a look at Template_talk:el-test for set of examples. Please be picky - criticism of spacing and punctuation is allowed! —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 16:37, 3 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

As the current main editor of Appendix:Greek adjectives, can you please remove information on Greek templates from it? For consistency with other lexical appendices, that appendix is supposed to contain general knowledge about Greek adjectives: for instance, declension types, common suffixes or other etymologies, word order, spelling varieties and may have guidelines on how to recognize adjectives out of Greek sentences; and should not include Wiktionary-specific schemes to deal with Greek entries. Templates may be explained at the Wiktionary: namespace. Some intuitive page names are Wiktionary:Greek templates and Wiktionary:Greek declension templates. --Daniel. 07:17, 1 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

I was following the guidance at Wiktionary:Namespace which says: This namespace is reserved for articles that explain the general operation of Wiktionary - perhaps the guidance for editors could be improved/expanded. I currently have the following general areas which I am trying to separate into appropriate places (IF the guidance was clearer) - please make suggestions:

1. Wiktionary namespace: General info about the Greek language for the casual user that is not on Wikipedia.
2. Help namespace: Help for creating/improving Greek entries guidance.
3. Appendix namespace: Info about Greek resources: categories, help, templates (Which is what your complaint refers to), etc.

When I started writing Wiktionary:About_Greek 3 years ago and was told that THAT namespace was the wrong place - there seems to be a diversity of opinion. One tries to do ones best :) —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 07:43, 1 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

(a) At WT:NS, I didn't find any specific guidance on where to write language-specific template descriptions; unless I interpret the "general operation of Wiktionary" in a manner that includes them.

(b) My request to move away template information was mainly based on three facts: (1) I suppose there is plenty of generic facts about Greek adjectives, so they may be grouped into an appendix; (2) the urge to learn about Greek adjectives and the urge to edit Greek adjective Wiktionary entries usually do not occur in the same person, at the same time or for the same reasons, so they don't fit together in one place; (3) such distinction between Wiktionary-jargon and lexical-learning already exists and simply became elegant and intuitive.

(c) The Help: namespace conveys guidelines for new users. Therefore, Greek help pages should have basic information. I can roughly think on subjects like "how-to-write-your-first-Greek-entry" or "ten-reasons-to-contribute-with-Greek-entries-in-the-English-Wiktionary". However, most helpful information is either panlingual (i.e. Wiktionary as a whole) or complex (i.e. template calling, MediaWiki syntax and entry format), so I don't see exactly how any work for language-specific new users would be desirable or even more accessible or more understandable than generic information for new users. All language-specific help pages (for instance: Help:Icelandic declension) were moved to the Wiktionary: namespace.

(d) To reflect current usage, information on Greek categories, templates, etc. belong to the Wiktionary: namespace, regardless of what people from three years ago think. I genuinely find their opinion interesting, though I can safely conclude that any such consensus changed.

(e) I disagree with your proposal "General info about the Greek language for the casual user that is not on Wikipedia" for usage of the Wiktionary: namespage. This is basically saying "I'd like to include non-notable information", because Wikipedia relies on notability. Wiktionary relies on words. If any text helps to define, edit, organize, generalize, control, enforce, discuss, verify, clean up, express or compare words, then it probably merits a place in one of our non-main namespaces. --Daniel. 08:53, 1 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

I have identified your paras above and deal with them one by one. (a) so that's your interpretation? (b) Appendix:Greek_adjectives is a field guide for editors of Greek entries. The declensions do not have convenient names so tables illustrating them are essential, a list is not sufficient. So it is a list annotated with tables. (c) I spent many hours when I started making Greek entries searching for the relevant facts, beginners have to familiarise themselves with the nomenclature before they can find out what to do - hence Greek help (with plenty of links back to ELE) to make sure they dont give up. (for example - the inflection line is also called the headword line, and below that we have the Inflection heading which can also be called the Declension or Conjugation heading. All of this leads to confusion in the beginner). (d) Please don't be patronising "I genuinely find their opinion interesting" Really!! My point was that I need to assure myself that you are reflecting true Wiktionary policy (and I don't mean this rudely) not pursuing one of your own. I don't care where the file is and if the WT:NS was a bit clearer it would make it easier. (e) My point was that I was trying to split the short guide to the Greek Language (which I intended to be Wiktionary:About Greek) from the 'help for Greek editors' information - at present they are jumbled together. By all means they can both be in the Wiktionary namespace - but really Help belongs in help dont it.

It is exceedingly hard to hold a conversation here without getting up someone nose - so nothing I have said above is intended to get up yours! I have limited time to give to Wiktionary. And don't wish to indulge in long discussions, particularly after I have thought a problem through and it would take me many words to put it down in an understandable fashion.

Notwithstanding anything I have said above I am in favour of a rational structure to our pages and will try to follow guidelines. But I felt from you comments that you really didn't understand the purpose of the file originally complained about. —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 12:10, 1 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Well, I'm sorry for exceedingly taking your time here; I'll try to limit the following replies to the essential ideas.

Affirmations such as "I like it!" or "that's interesting!" are obviously my opinions. You seem to dislike such comments, but you may even ignore them in favor of better standpoints.

The information necessary for Greek editors is too limited, when compared to everything people may write and read about Greek adjectives.

I didn't talk anything about wanting an appendix with merely a list of templates; such ever-static "list" is an idea you introduced and both of us clearly oppose, because I think you're right: "the declensions do not have convenient names so tables illustrating them are essential".

"headword line", "inflection heading", other headings and jargon concepts are complex enough to be found at the Wiktionary: namespace. Though Greek help pages would be better discussed if they existed. Please don't worry about namespaces if they prevent you from writing help pages.

See any of these following appendices as you like: Ancient Greek nouns, Russian nouns, English nouns, Swedish adjectives, English articles and Portuguese pronouns. Please note the lack of template information and, if possible, consider it as established practice in favor of non-editors.

I think that there is no policy to enforce namespace usage. WT:NS is not a policy; it was officially nothing but uncategorized text until I've added that blue box up there recently. I prefer to not edit namespace descriptions until our discussion is finished; then I can add the results there. Finally, a VOTE can evolve it into a policy. --Daniel. 17:52, 1 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

You seem to have nothing more to say in this discussion; then, I'm going to try to document common namespace usage by carefully editing WT:NS and subsequently forming a vote to evolve it into a formal policy. If you have time and willingness, please share any new ideas or arguments on this subject; they are welcome, encouraged and possibly very valuable, particularly as you've shown interest in namespace usage and formal policies. --Daniel. 08:40, 7 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Sorry - your raply was rather long and I got diverted on to something else. Should the first place to start be to classify the various document we already have, perhaps you already have this in your head. I got involved in votes a couple of years ago and have since then retired - evryone's views are often put at such length that it is possible to lose the will to live! —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 10:43, 7 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

It's high on the list of wanted pages. TY, Mglovesfun (talk) 16:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Mais oui - but it's not in Greek dictionaries (lots on the net!), so I have chickened out! I'll pass the request on to Jaxlarus! —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 16:33, 2 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

This might be useful. --flyax 19:10, 2 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thanks - done. —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 06:43, 3 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Common mistake, but for categorization purposes we don't go "back a step". For example, instead of {{etyl|it|el}} < {{etyl|la|it}} it should be {{etyl|la|el}}, otherwise it's categorized in Italian words derived from Latin, but it has no Italian section. Cheers. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:24, 23 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

got it! —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 11:44, 23 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi! It is very difficult to distinguish between the two forms of this word. Anyway, it is possible to find the stressed form as an article. See these examples : [2], [3], [4], [5]. --flyax 21:43, 27 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for pointing out my mistake. In support of my action the changes follow the advice of Holton, Mackridge, et al. And the table of μια forms in the English version of Triandaphyllidis shows no stressed μία's - but I should have read the text below it where he says that it can have a stressed form. The nuances of Greek are lost on me - even in English you can find examples of one which is almost being used as an article. cheers —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 05:59, 28 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Holton also says that the the genitive μίας can never be emphatic when used as an article - which I have followed. I have been over all the declination of ένας and tried to make the entries consistent. —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 07:20, 28 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

I have a huge respect for the work of Holton, Mackridge, et al, however in this case I'd dare say that either they've been surprisingly prescriptive or some things have changed over the last 10 years . Ariel Glenn had the patience to search over the Web and found several examples of μίας used as an article. Here are some of them:

[6]: παραπομπής μίας υπόθεσης στη δικαιοσύνη, [7] αντίθετες θέσεις επί μίας υπόθεσης ανταγωνισμού, [8]κάτω από το τεράστιο βάρος μίας υπόθεσης, [9] Ενδιαφέρομαι ιδιαίτερα για την προώθηση μίας περισσότερο στρατηγικής προσέγγισης στις ευρωπαϊκές προσπάθειες. Several other examples from official documents can be found in www.mu.gr. It seems that there is a tendency, especially in formal texts, to use the stressed form. --flyax 22:22, 30 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

You shouldn't have felt it necessary to quote chapter & verse - I only quoted Holton as a reason for my action - I am always happy to accpt a Greek speaker's word!! - as Peter Levy said about Greek, a language unconfined by dictionaries (and of course books on grammar) —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 05:31, 31 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

So are there any differences in declension between the article and the numeral? —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 14:05, 31 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Are these Greek or Translingual? The categories are Greek, but the header is translingual. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:49, 30 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Well - they are called Greek numbers in English - like Roman numerals (VIII, etc) - so they are Greek as a description rather than a language - any thoughts? —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 09:53, 30 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

Well if the header's Translingual, at the very least they should be in one Translingual category. Indeed, Arabic numerals aren't limited to Arabic, and Roman numerals aren't limited to Latin, so I think you're right. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:59, 30 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

You're doing a hell of a job updating our Greek templates and appendices. Pity we don't have more contributors in every language, right now it's often one or two contributors even for the major world languages like Greek. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:05, 11 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

I posted my source on my page. I don't know whether you got notification of that. CMEHalverson 22:32, 21 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

I revised again. CMEHalverson 14:21, 22 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

I urge you to vote. (I don't know which way you'll vote, but I want more voices, especially English Wiktionarians' voices, heard in this vote.) If you've voted already, or stated that you won't, and I missed it, I apologize.​—msh210℠ 17:00, 21 May 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hello there. Which do you think is the correct format for the Greek translation of etc.? Κ.τ.λ./κ.λπ. or κτλ/κλπ? So far, I've came across three versions in writing: κ.τ.λ./κ.λπ., κτλ/κλπ and κτλ./κλπ.; the former two being the most often met ones. Eipnvn 20:19, 6 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

I've just googled 3 web sites - the numbers below show the percentage scores for each site (in the order Athens Uni, Kathimerini, Βημα):

κ.λπ.    35 + 81 + 32 = 148

κτλ.     7 + 1 + 53 = 61

κλπ     32 + 6 + 1 = 39

κλπ.     22 + 6 + 11 = 39

κτλ     3 + 1 + 2 = 6

κ.τ.λ.    1 + 5 + 0 = 6

Its very difficult to pick out much of a pattern in the figures - but I would be tempted to put κ.λπ. and κτλ. as translations of etc (and leave out the expansions και τα λοιπά ...). The data is very rough, but it seems to point out that Greek people usually do their own thing (admirable!)

What do you think? —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 06:27, 7 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

I'm thinking of uniformity, i.e. either κ.τ.λ./κ.λπ. or κτλ/κλπ (re your google results of κτλ./κλπ.; in the case those lie at the end of a sentence, the period marking that end is also taken to account, they are probably cases of κτλ/κλπ). Eipnvn 08:07, 7 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

It would be nice to be uniform, but the data don't say that. Το Βημα seems to be the main culprit - κτλ. is almost their house style. I had allowed for sentence ends in the figures I gave - have a look at Google-βημα.

κ.τ.λ. is definitely bottom of the league (although Καθημερινή does it more than the others) - so perhaps κτλ and κλπ are the best for uniformity ? —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 10:19, 7 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

OK. Eipnvn 15:46, 7 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi Saltmarsh,

I noticed that you are transliterating υ (upsilon) as i. Appendix:Greek transliteration suggests transliterating υ as y. However, this latter transliteration is confusing because, as I understand it, Modern Greek has (phonetically) only five vowels: a, e, i, o, u. Would you endorse modifying Appendix:Greek transliteration so that whenever υ is transliterated to y, it would instead be transliterated to i?   AugPi 15:30, 7 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Sorry to pop in, but there's a reason υ is transliterated as y. It has to do with the rules regarding the romanization of Greek. I think transliterating υ as i will lead to slight incoherence. Eipnvn 16:31, 7 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

(oops I was writing this reply!) Thanks for spotting the error (now corrected) - but it was an error! If you have a look at Eesti Keele Instituut (pdf file), which is one of the sources used for transliterations, you will see that υ > y is what is generally recommended. As is explained there - although the transliteration may be an aid to pronunciation, that is not its primary purpose. Transliteration is (very fallibly) reversible. And it was I who wrote the said appendix :) —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 16:34, 7 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Ok, transliteration is not transcription, transliteration is reversible (sort of): I see. Thanks for clarifying: now I know.   AugPi 16:57, 7 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi Saltmarsh,

Based on your transliteration for βακτηρίδιο, I made an edit to Appendix:Greek transliteration. Is that edit according to your intentions? (i.e. please check it)   AugPi 14:51, 9 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi - thanks for spotting my error in "βακτηρίδιο". I have done transliterated β > b more than once, but usually spot it, I have reverted your appendix edit - "β" is always "v". A software automated transliterator has been worked on and might come to fruition - it might pick out other errors! —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 15:15, 9 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi! I'm curious about ιός meaning rust. Where did you find it? (I've never heard of it). --flyax 11:56, 23 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

"not guilty!" User:Stephen_G._Brown added it back in 2006. When I edited ιός recently I tried to verify the meaning and couldn't - until I got 800+ hits on Greek pages for "ιός + rust". This link is the first - are we talking about Κοινή? Corrosion can be viewed as canker > virus?? - or I can delete that meaning as "obscure" —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 13:22, 23 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

I've just checked ἴος is poison or rust in AGrk. —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 13:25, 23 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Ummm....are you sure you don't mean ἰός? -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 13:34, 23 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

!!!! Oh dear - yes, I try to steer clear of polytonics - thanks for noticing —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 13:39, 23 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thank you both. --flyax 14:57, 23 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

The redirect shouldn't redirect. Also, this has no gender(I'm assuming masculine, but there's no el interwiki for me to check). Please help, ty. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:57, 25 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Πάππας and Παππάς are both surnames (and not created here} I have marked the l/c versions for deletion - native speakers may recognise them as uncommon misspellings. We'll see. —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 13:11, 25 June 2010 (UTC)Reply

Second letter is a Latin 'e'. What should it be? PS from French maisonette I'd say. Mglovesfun (talk) 00:08, 1 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

I've taken the liberty of moving the entry to μεζονέτα. I hope this is correct. The Greek alphabet has the rather singular feature of being entirely different from the Latin character set, and yet, in many cases, looking very similar and sometimes identical to corresponding Latin characters. Especially when you get used to the characters, the mind often does not register the distinction (it took me a full thirty seconds to find the incorrect character after you pointed it out). Consequently, us el and grc folks make these mistakes from time to time. This does not, however, prevent me from pointing and laughing at Saltmarsh for the mistake. :p -Atelaes λάλει ?μοί 00:15, 1 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for spotting that - some of these could lie for years without being noticed! I'm not sure how it got there - since it is in the middle of a word. —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 04:48, 1 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Actually thank Nadando (talk • contribs), not me. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:16, 1 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

[10] Why? --Yair rand (talk) 04:47, 4 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

When I created one of the first "Cakes and pastries" with "topic cat" included - after closure it wasn't a member of "Foods" - maybe I should have waited or maybe I misread - anyway thanks for sorting out the mess. —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 05:01, 4 July 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hello. In this phrase the word πώς needs the accent as it is a question. Writing πώς in any question (Πώς είστε; Πώς είναι η υγεία σας; Πώς πάνε τα παιδιά στο σχολείο; etc etc) without the accent is just a common error. I redirected the entry with πως to the one with πώς, but if you think that it should be treated in another way, please feel free to change it again. Secondly, I don't know if we can consider this question formal or just polite. A more formal way to ask someone's name is Πώς λέγεστε; or Πώς ονομάζεστε;. --flyax 11:18, 8 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

Yes - I understand that the "correct" spelling of interrogative adverbs is the one with a τόνος. However Google counts (a rough tool I know) of πώς σε λένε finds: 497k with πως and only 36k with πώς. Dictionaries are supposed to reflect usage! So I think that while it is incorrect it deserves an entry!

on the 2nd point - this explains why you might use σε with someone who is obviously a stranger! —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 11:30, 8 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

Well, it's correct that many people don't bother about such details while writing informally or in haste. Many people do the same thing with all words. I am not sure that this is "usage". Generally, I have the impression that grammar rules are considered more valuable in Greek than in English. Maybe it's our education system. Still, would you create an entry for its ok? --flyax 11:56, 8 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

(off topic) - I know of a young German whose parents refused to use the familiar du with his girlfriend who they disapproved of - they insisted on using the formal sie. Could this happen in Greece? Is there a move by younger Greeks to use the formal forms less? —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 11:35, 8 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

When I was a kid, I remember addresing my parents using the plural. Of course this doesn't happen with my children. However plural when addressing a teacher or a senior is still in use. It depends on the speaker's character and the relation with the other person. But it would be totally funny to hear a senior addressing a minor with the plural, even if as a indication of disapprovement. --flyax 11:56, 8 August 2010 (UTC)Reply

How do you feel about changing the appearance of Greek declension tables from this to something like this? I find the colours and the indentation from the left ugly. --Vahag 12:00, 4 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Well - beauty is in the eye of the beholder - but I would like to see a common format across Wiktionary. So I'd be happy to go with the flow. I see 3 issues:

1. Pull down table - a good idea, but I've no idea on how it is accomplished - and there are quiate a few tables!

2. Colours - I'm not tied to colour

3. When first developing them I experimented with centred alignment - but this depends upon whether other languages include the definite articles.

I was new to templates when I started these and should have tried a two layered approach with an intermediate template between the calling statement and the formating template (if you understand what I mean) —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 12:18, 4 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

I understand what you're saying: let's implement the two-layered approach now, it has many benefits. I can do that, if you tell me what basic formats there should be. I have counted five: adjectives, comparable adjectives, nouns, uncountable nouns, plural only nouns. Any more? --Vahag 12:33, 4 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

I experimentally switched {{el-nF-α-ες-2a}} to the new two-layer system. Do καμήλα and ασπίδα look nice to you? Do you mind if I switch the rest of the templates? --Vahag 13:18, 4 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

They look good - and I would be only too happy for you to do the work! Thanks.
But could the displayed inflection be changed to declension.
'Some of the 'old' templates have the case labels unnecessarily linked (thus nominative) - the links should go. Adjectives' (a) declined forms and (b) degrees of comparison could be better handled separately, since (a) are more important and easier to check, (b) can be added at a later date. Adverbs have degrees of comparison, but these can follow in due course (and the adjective template may serve the purpose). The ability to add notes as a template argument is good. I hope I haven't overlooked anything (but probably have) —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 14:17, 4 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Let us decide tha fate of comparison degrees before I proceed further. What do you want to do with pairs like {{el-a-ης-ης-ες-M1-Creg}}/{{el-a-ης-ης-ες-M1}}? I can delete the first one (and fix the entries linking to it) if you are going to treat the comparatives and superlatives elsewhere, e.g. in a separate table or in the inflection line. --Vahag 15:35, 4 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

I'm really surprised at how quickly you accomplished the noun declension templates. I am a bit rusty on my Greek adjectives and will need a clear run of a few days to get up to speed - and I need to think this through before I can suggest anything. Could you convert the forms without degrees of comparison (as in {{el-a-ης-ης-ες-M1}}) and leave those with regular and irregular comparisons (as {{el-a-ης-ης-ες-M1-Creg}}). I hope I'm not asking too much. Early next week I can see how best to handle those which you haven't done. And perhaps look at what you've done with those you have converted to see how it's done. Thank you again —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 19:22, 4 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

OK, will do. --Vahag 20:11, 4 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Please, see Έρως and Έρων. --flyax 16:27, 13 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Did you mean to remove the declension nore refering to the alternative vocative?—Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 17:44, 13 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Yes, the declension was incorrect and this altenative vocative is unknown to me. I marked it for deletion, but I'd like to hear your opinion. --flyax 17:56, 13 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Duly deleted, I'll always take your word for it! I had been lokking at Πύλη
έρως, o· αιτιατ. έρων· κλητ. έρων· έρω· έρωτας· γεν. ερώτου
so love rather than Eros.—Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 18:03, 13 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

I'm sorry, I didn't understand. Did you mean that you found this declension at Πύλη; Where exactly? --flyax 18:06, 13 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Try this —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 18:08, 13 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, and thanks!! —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 18:16, 13 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

While your here - is Ααρών invariable? —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 18:09, 13 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for that. It seems that these weird forms are medieval. The declension of the word Έρως is the same for both meanings (god, love). And, oui, Ααρών is invariable. --flyax 18:13, 13 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Why is this Translingual, rather than Greek? DCDuring TALK 18:55, 20 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

I suspect I took the lead from Roman numerals - I certainly wouldn't have a problem with them being Greek - I suspect no one else uses them.
Interesting to note that Roman numerals are variously: Number (M), Numeral (D,C), Cardinal number (X, I) and Symbol (L). I see that Arabic numbers (1,2,3) are Symbols - shouldn't this apply to all such symbols representing numbers? —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 05:04, 21 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

...is wrong (correct form is γεια); forgot what the process is for asking an administrator to delete it. Can you help? Eipnvn 08:41, 23 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

I've been on holiday (to Ιθάκη) - hence the delay —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 05:49, 10 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hope you had a good time there. Eipnvn 12:39, 10 October 2010 (UTC)Reply

This actually failed WT:RFDO. Can we negociate over its name? When have entries not articles, and we use romanization with a 'z', merely for standardization. I'm British, but I use 'z' spellings on Wiktionary for consistency. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:19, 7 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

perhaps it can be called "Category:Greek articles lacking a transliteration"? to satisfy honour/honor (anyway romanization should perhaps be Romanization?) :) —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 15:09, 7 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

done —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 15:14, 7 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

See Category:Russian terms lacking transliteration as an example, any reason this same naming system cannot work for Greek? Mglovesfun (talk) 15:34, 7 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

done² —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 15:40, 7 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

Was nominated for speedy deletion. I'll leave it in your hands, if it's just a missing stress accent, we can rename it instead of deleting. Mglovesfun (talk) 19:46, 19 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

Deleted - not sure where I got the incorrect form from, I had edited the correct one back in August. —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 06:14, 20 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

Google, unfortunately, cannot distinguish typos (I saw many of them) but αμαξιού exists (genitive of αμάξι).--Xoristzatziki 07:08, 20 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

Only written language can be searched, though spoken lemma frequencies maybe slightly different depending on sound of word (άντρας, άνδρας differs in spoken language depending on the speaker independently of how the same person may use it in writing depending on the moment) as well as most of them are multiple copies one from the other and sometimes are simplified forms (for speed on forums or irc) or are typos. examples:

• ανεψία is in Pontian dialect and ανιψία is in some of the pages just a typo for ανιψιά and in some of them maybe the Pontian ανεψία (and there is also the form ανηψιά not compared above). (it is very easy to type ία instead of ιά since accent on a vowel is accepted by the computer and no error beep is produced such as if you try to press accent and then a consonant).
• βαβά is wound in kid language so cannot be compared with βάβα which, in turn, can only be compared with μπάμπω, μπαμπώ, βάβω and βαβώ but not with μπάμπα which maybe also found as a typo for μπαμπά(ς) (father or sweet σαβαρέν). (so how useful can be such comparisons that include other meanings or exclude somes?)
• ακίδα is not an exact alternative spelling of αγκίθα (there is no αγκίθα in ραπιντογράφος or ραπιδογράφος)
• most month names come from programs where the user can do nothing but accept the name (even if he/she will never use or used it in writing or speaking)
• saffron is never called κροκός so comparison with κρόκος is also biased.
• άνω κάτω τελεία, άνω και κάτω τελεία, (τελεία άνω και κάτω, τελεία άνω κάτω, not compared in the lemma) differ slightly in meaning. Adding και sometimes is for intensification (I am not meaning that this any of them is a wrong lemma) whereas omitting it is speeding the writing and spoking.
• σάκχαρο and ζάχαρο are not comparable since φρουκτόζη is a σάκχαρο and not ζάχαρο (so pages referencing any such σάκχαρο are taken into account biasing results)
• γενικά is also two plural forms from γενικός and a speed typo for γενικιά (which in turn is a typo for γενικά -as I now found by doing a simple googling) differing from γενικώς and mixing the result.

etc. etc.

Of course is useful for terms such as πολεμάω-πολεμώ although speeding the typing in forums (or on irc copied to static pages) must be considered but anyway... Or for terms like βελανιδιά-βαλανιδιά which mostly depends on the origin of the writer so a comparison is useful. Comparison between κρόκος and σάφρον or σαφράκι could be useful in case κρόκος-yolk can be excluded. Also κρόκος-κορκός is useful if κρόκος-saffron can be excluded. Most of rest frequencies are only just confusing and for (confusing the?) cryptographic systems not for linguistics or for understanding the language unless an expert system is found that will be used to distinguish the meanings, the copies and the typos. Wikifriendly --Xoristzatziki 21:51, 20 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

(this all is about Template:el-freq sorry for not mentioning it in the beginning. --Xoristzatziki 21:53, 20 November 2010 (UTC))Reply

This is very useful - thanks. I agree that {{el-freq}} is, in the absence of more helpful information, a clumsy means of indicating the more usual form. In his own language the Englishman often doesn't even notice the difference between such forms as spelt/spelled. Likewise I, the ξένος, find difficulty in knowing which form of a Greek word to use or if the difference is of any importance.

Asking my Greek teacher the difference between, for example, επτά and εφτά she would shrug her shoulders and say that she used them both, and wasn't sure what decided her - maybe one sounded better than the other depending on context.

So I would suggest that {{el-freq}} serves a purpose as (1) help with words like the -άω/-ώ verbs and (2) a temporary solution when alternative forms occur - to be followed up later when more time or information is available. It needs to be used with discretion particularly by a someone with insufficient Greek.

Meanwhile I'll deal with your points above - and copy the relevant comments to the word's Talk page. —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 07:02, 22 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

Please have a look at ανιψιά, ανιψία, ανηψιά as a way of handling such words - I assume that ανιψιά and ανηψιά are broadly equivalent. —Saltmarsh^{απάντηση} 08:44, 25 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

FYI: Wiktionary:Beer_parlour#Poll:_Inflection_to_inflection-line. I thought you could be interested, given your comments in Wiktionary:RFM#Category:English inflection templates. Nonetheless, the poll is not about the move of Category:Foo conjugation templates to Category:Foo conjugation-table templates, only about the move of Category:Foo inflection templates to Category:Foo inflection-line templates. --Dan Polansky 08:07, 22 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

There is also "Poll: Inflection to inflection-line 2", asking detail questions in a formally clean way. --Dan Polansky 17:21, 22 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hi! The genitive singular of φως is φωτός. So the entry φώτος must be deleted. --flyax 17:39, 29 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

A Modern Greek declension in an Ancient Greek entry. --flyax 17:34, 2 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

You have voiced your opinion in some of the polls about renaming of categories for what was previously called "inflection templates", templates that are planned to be newly called "headword templates" or "headword-line templates" in the name of their category. I would like to hear your preference in the poll number 3, whatever your preference is, if you would be so kind: WT:BP#Poll: Inflection to inflection-line 3. Thank you for your input and attention. --Dan Polansky 10:13, 9 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

βίδα is definitely any kind of screw. (ξυλόβιδα, λαμαρινόβιδα... ). μπουλόνι is a hex head bolt (mostly bigger ones). And βλήτρο is used in constructions as a "Bit by reinforcing rod used as a coupling between two elements of reinforced concrete."(google translation from http://www.texnikos.gr/glossary/index_b/vlitro.shtml) and I think is not used any more in other conceptions.--Xoristzatziki 19:25, 12 December 2010 (UTC)Reply