text:
Wiktionary talk:Thesaurus considerations

I am going to restructure the page Thesaurus considerations to try to present the comments in some logical form. I will try to preserve all comments and their intentions. My apologies of I don't get it exactly right.--Richardb 11:49, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

State of the WikiSaurus
I am of the opinion (and I am certain that I am not alone here) that the Wikisaurus namespace/project is at present not doing well. The VERY few entries which are thriving are the anatomical ones, and those are dubious at best in nature. I suggest that some radical decision should be made about the direction of the project, something to kick it back into gear and make it into a useful and accurate resource.

Possible directions:
 * 1) WikiSaurus project. - This is certainly the most radical, but arguably the most sound direction.  A WikiSaurus project would make it a much more useful resource (easier to search for one, better non-wikt formatting as appropriate to a thesaurus for another).  The obvious downside is that we would need to develop a new community (somewhat), reestablish leadership and basically start from scratch.  This is certainly not insurmountable.  It would also require some higher-up support.

 * 1) A MAJOR cleanup. - I am envisioning the removal of much content (taboo, I know, but the place is getting ugly) and a new stance of relative prescriptivism on the *saurus namespace.  The current free-for-all stance has allowed many of the entries to degenerate into a "who can think of the most creative word/phrase for penis/breasts" competition and *saurus validity is losing...badly.

 * 1) Ignore the anatomy. - We can attempt to be passive aggressive with it, try and add so much useful content that the junk pages become a minority.  It will take a while, and I think we are early enough in the project that an overhaul is better now than later.

 * 1) Your direction. - The ones I haven't thought about.

If I am in a minority in thinking that *saurus is hurting, I'll go ahead with option 3 and live and let live, but if you take the time to peruse the content of *saurus I think you will find that something ought to be done. - TheDaveRoss 04:21, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

 * I'm glad to see you assuming leadership of this project. ;-) "Ignoring the anatomy" is a safe approach.  If you add enough useful pages it could be seen as putting clothing on that "anatomy".  I would be inclined to draw more links between the WikiSaurus project and Wiktionary:Roget Thesaurus Classification.  Perhaps every item in that list should also have a link to its corresponding WikiSaurus page.  Other items could also be added to the list to reflect the fact that the number of headings has varied over the years.  The latest (6th-2003) has 1075.  It is relatively easy to categorize nouns that represent concrete objects, but abstract ideas are far more problematic. Eclecticology 06:02, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

 * He may need some delete buttons to do this massive cleanup task.
 * (cur) (last) 21:45, December 2, 2005 Eclecticology (→TheDaveRoss - Removed from list without prejudice; inactivity)
 * http://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Wiktionary%3AAdministrators&diff=686848&oldid=686641
 * --Connel MacKenzie T C 02:08, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * No problem with this; all I need is an indication from him that he wants to be anadmin.

 * I agree on #3. I think the Saurus belongs in this project and should not become independent at the moment. I'll help you out whenever I have some material for it. — Vildricianus 09:34, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * The way we use the term "project" here is often ambiguous. I read it as meaning a new project in Wiktionary rather than a whole new wiki. Eclecticology 09:28, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

heading 1- just for breaking up the section
I think it time to do something radical as suggested in #2 but making it a separate project as suggested in #1 doesn't really make much sense. The reason dictionaries and thesauruses are traditionally considered seperate is because of limitations in the technology used. Here on the Internet this is less of a problem. Sure MediaWiki is not ideally suited for this but having two seperate MediaWiki doesn't really make it less limiting.

WikiSaurus is acceptable as the name of subproject. However, as a name for a namespace, or as it currently is a pseudo namespace, it makes little sense. Actually the word thesaurus itself is not really a good word at all. It orginally meant "store-house" or "treasury". There are better words that are more precise like synonyms and antonyms which is incidently what thesauruses normally contains.

It would be better to have namespaces like Synonyms: and Antonyms: used like Synonyms:happy and Antonyms:happy. This incidently allows us to support other semantic relations like hyponyms, meronyms and troponyms. For example Of course in most cases there is really no reason to have it separately at all. But that goes for synonyms and especially antonyms as well. Only words there listing everything would take to much space or would create too much duplication between different words would be separate.
 * Hyponyms:animal could contain a list of animals like cats, dogs etc. OK this is mostly what categories should be used for, so it more meant as a compliment.
 * Meronyms:tree could contain a list of all possible part of a tree like bark, leaf etc. Perhaps even with some sort of clickable drawing.
 * Troponyms:cut could contain particular ways to cut like to trim and to slice etc with a short explaination how they are more particular.

So we would have for example on page happy:

Synonyms

 * Main article: Synonyms:happy

listing only the most common synonyms of each word on its page. --Patrik Stridvall 11:39, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * content
 * satisfied

 * I have no problem with the WikiSaurus [pseudo]namespace. I will have no fundamental objection to that becoming a full namespace shortly after the namespace manager is made a part of the software.  What I most like about retaining the name is that since it is our own invented name there are fewer preconceived notions about what that should be.  That gives us more flexibility to deal with the various kinds of word relationships that have already been mentioned in this thread, particularly those that have not traditionally been part of a thesaurus.  It is conceivable that at some future time "Synonyms:" and "Meronyms:", etc. could become separate namespaces, but at this time there is a strong risk that it could lack focus as editors developed each of these sub-namespaces in individual ways.  Beginning with one namespace, and building scalability into it from the beginning can have long term positive effects.

 * The headings that we now have as "synonyms", "antonyms", etc. could be reduced to "Word relations" which would have a link to the relevant WikiSaurus page for happy this would be to WikiSaurus:pleasure, with that name being chosen because it is the Roget class that contains it. Doing WikiSaurus right will be a complex undertaking. Eclecticology 09:28, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

heading 2

 * I don't see how the WikiSaurus can get the attention it needs as a child-project here. If it were a separate realm, it would have a better chance at getting the momentum it needs.  (Note: I am not volunteering!)  --Connel MacKenzie T C 02:11, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * How much attention do we need at this stage? I would much rather see a few people providing leadership and initial structure to the project than having a lot of newbies bickering about structure.  Remember too that while there4 may be some who would support having WikiSaurus as a separate subject, we also have the WiktionaryZ people wanting to put everything together in one big mish-mash. Eclecticology 09:28, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

 * The problem is that we are already a thesaurus even without the WikiSaurus namespace since we have sections for Synonyms and Antonyms. --Patrik Stridvall 08:46, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

 * I started WikiSaurus just as an experiment, to try and take some heat out of a very cyclic debate that was happening. And, being evil, I populated it with all the kinds of words people look up most often in a dictionary, just to get some interest. Seems to have worked some ways, but not others.

By all means, if you can think of a better way to do it, and give it a decent poulation tof words to get started, then do it.

But the last thing I want to see is someone wasting their time and bowdlerising the WikiSaurus. Leave all the inventive stuff there. Waht harm is there in one line entries anyway. To some extent it avoids them creating new entries to put their little imaginative words into.

And, can we please have discussion of Thesaurus considerations in the place designated, Thesaurus considerations

heading 4

 * Leave all the inventive stuff there. Waht harm is there in one line entries anyway. To some extent it avoids them creating new entries to put their little imaginative words into.

 * To the above anonymous poster (Richardb?). Even though WikiSaurus has thus far been dominated by those with prurient obsessions I have no intention to engage in bowdlerization.  With the addition of more ordinary entries, those pages will diminish in importance.  As for your last comment I don't see why you would want this on the project page instead of this talk page. Eclecticology 09:28, 26 February 2006 (UTC) I didn't want this stuff on the project page. I just moved this discussion from Beer Parlour to here--Richardb 09:50, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

 * You may have created WikiSaurus as an expiriment, but if we are going to be indifferent to it, let's get rid of it altogether. Advocating worthless content to distract vandals is just silly, "what is the harm?" the harm is that Wiktionary purports to be somewhat authoritative, yet we keep content that is utterly wrong, not only that but apparently we advocate it.  If you don't care about WikiSaurus, ignore it.  I think it could be useful, and is a very good potential resource, regardless of your intent.
 * I am willing to work on the namespace, to clean it up and sort it to make it somewhat valid, if you are going to be reverting all my changes that will be very hard. I am not censoring anything, I am attempting to make WS follow the same CFI as the rest of wikt*, instead of having no CFI beyond the limits of imagination. - TheDaveRoss 05:29, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Dave, what you are doing is just being destructive of other people's work, If you don't like what is in WikiSaurus, than just leave it alone and use your enthusiam elsewhere. Or clean up sensibly. Your clean ups were just destructive deletes. You deleted a lot of well used words.

Anyway, even the CFI is not really an agreed policy, still under development. And it applies to the main word space, not the Wikitionary namespace. Otherise you'll be cleaning out a huge amount of unverifed lists etc. It's just not up to you to decide what is "worthless content". As I say, entries like chillaxin with 229,000 hits in Google, or thousands of uses of Jacksie, and you want to just chuck those entries away.--Richardb 09:49, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

If it's a matter of too little content, is there any way to populate the WikiSaurus quickly? Are there any old reference books that can be digitized? Could people establish page names and then have bots populate them semi-automatically by looking at the synonyms already in Wiktionary, from selected senses? Davilla 06:22, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Sounds like someone is being constructive about it anyway.--Richardb 09:52, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

heading 5

 * Why the rush? Simply digitizing old reference works without taking time to proof read what OCR gives would be a hell of a mess.  I very much prefer quality to quantity.  If we as humans can't keep up in applying judgement to what the bots are producing we aren't doing a very good job. Eclecticology 09:44, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

In addition to my suggestion above it could be argued that there ALL relevant information should be in the page for the concerned word. Sure there would be some duplication.

 * It would be MASSIVE duplication, and duplication would mean errors. Just use the technologyy. One click and you get to the word in all it's glory anyway.--Richardb 09:53, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

However it could also be argued that synonyms are really recommendations to other word to be used if you mean something that is almost but not quite what you currently looked up. Alternatively what words you are recommended to use depends on context. If you are in England, Scottland, in the US or are writtening a scientific article there might be other words might be prefered eventhough they mean exactly the same thing. It could also be argued that using slang words are never recommended to use so we should never list them as synonyms. Futhermore unless two words means exactly the same thing they shouldn't really have synonym sections that are exactly the same. So --Patrik Stridvall 08:46, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Is there really any point at all with a WikiSaurus namespace or whatever we choose to call it. Are there really that many words that both means exactly the same thing as another word, are not slang words and have many synonyms?
 * Couldn't we just have use categories for slang words, especially the antomical ones?
 * Have you ever looked at a decent size Thesaurus to see how many entries there are ? And that is when they are limited by paper and contributors. If you used categories you would have literally thousands, hundreds of thousands of catgegories. And would not do as good a job as even the present form of WikiSaurus, where subtle differences in usage can be included. Look at some of the decent WikiSaurus entries, such as WikiSaurus:insane instead of the popular swear words. Then you might get a bit more idea of WikiSaurus can be usefully developed, while accommodating people's need for listing lost of occasionally used words.--Richardb 09:54, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Of course I have. I mostly played the devils advocate to provoke a reaction. Still, I was partly serious. See below. --Patrik Stridvall 11:51, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

 * I agree that it's rare that two words mean exactly the same thing. True synonyms can probably stay on a word's page.  A thesaurus often gives words with similar meanings that fall under the umbrella of a headword.  The writer's judgement is still required to choose the right one.  This is the area in which WikiSaurus would function.  Slang can be included as long as it is suitably identified as such.  Eclecticology 10:07, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

heading 6

 * The point is that I don't really find thesauruses as they are organized very useful. Many word are listed in the same category that are only remotely related to each other and soemtimes only usable in certain contexts. I find myself often more confused than helped. The goal is to try to find a better word to use than the current word you are looking at, right?

 * There are MANY goals to a thesaurus. But one goal is to list a lot of words that are close in meaning to one another. The user than has to look up each word and decide if it is appropriate to their use. Even words that perhaps have strictly the same meaning ([eg:[corpse]] and cadaver), are used in diferent contexts. The truth is that there are probably few true synonyms. There are often very subtle diiferences of meaning, appropriateness of use etc between words that are listed as synonyms.--Richardb 15:43, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Another use that a searchable WikiSaurus provides is a searchable very compact storehouse for all those words and phrases that are in use, but don't (yet) meet the Criteria for Inclusion. eg: WikiSaurus:corpse has the phrase mortal remains. Surely an acceptable phrase for Wiktionary. Yet, so far it doesn't even have an entry, let alone meet the CFI. Yet if someone searches on "mortal remains" they will find the WikiSaurs:corpse entry, and get a pretty clear idea of the meaning of the phrase. If you looked up lung you'd get no idea of what a "healthy pair of lungs is", unless the search also gave you WikiSaurus:breasts. Only place you'll find that great old word bazoomas is on WikiSaurus:breasts--Richardb 15:43, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

 * So, if we for forget about true synonyms and consider the normal case there any alternative carries slightly different denotations and conotations making every word unique and thus it relation with other words. So it would be more useful to on the page for each and ever word specify in what way other words are synonyms. To be more concrete on WikiSaurus:insane there are only two word I would consider using, unless I wanted to be offensive, are mentally disturbed and weird. Of course depending on what I mean I might use retarded, demented or eccentric. So for example on the page insane:

Synonyms

 * eccentric, wierd (by choice)
 * demented (because of old age)
 * retarded (because of low intelligence)
 * mentally disturbed (more clinically)
 * --Patrik Stridvall 11:51, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

heading 7
What now pops up in my mind is the following question: Do we... Like Ec stated, "WikiSaurus" is completely up to our own interpretation. The thing is how do we interpret it then? — Vildricianus 11:35, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) ...work along the lines of a Roget-like structure, i.e. a thematical classification of fewer but longer entries, providing closely as well as remotely related terms (all the "-nyms", all verbs, adjectives, phrases, proverbs etc)? This may indeed create large entries with lots and lots of information.
 * 2) ...work along the lines of an Oxford Thesaurus-like structure, i.e. an alphabetical classification of more but shorter entries, providing only closely related synonyms and a few antonyms with cross-references to more remotely-related headwords?

 * I would clearly support the first option. It would start with the big themes but organized to be scalable.  Much of what is suggested in the second option is already being done in our regular Wiktionary entries.  Patrik's comments are valid too, but does one use a thesaurus just to find exact synonyms?  Generally a person's passive vocabulary is bigger than his active vocabulary; in other words, there are many words that one recognizes while reading that don't come to mind while writing.  A thesaurus helps to bridge that gap.  A thesaurus is really an advanced writing tool, and one advantage that we have is the ability to directly link to the words themselves so that a user can differentiate suggestions more easily than with paper thesauri.

 * I think too, that our initial WikiSaurus headings should conform as closely as possible to the most recent Roget classifications (i.e. the sixth edition). Roget has had an enormous number of editions in the last 150 years, and each tweaks the classes just a little bit.  Using this as an anchor will help us to take things further in a semi-organized manner, but it should not be a hinderance to a further development of these classifications as the need develops.  We currently have WikiSaurus:insane and WikiSaurus:mad person, while Roget has a primary entry under "insanity" and formerly had a primary entry under "madman" that has been merged into the other in recent editions.  I would suggest renaming both to conform, and leaving a note on the latter page about what has happened to that entry.  One of the problems with what we have at Wiktionary:Roget Thesaurus Classification is that the edition is not identified.  Apparently it was copied from what was already in Wikipedia at that time?  Can anybody identify it?
 * That might turn out to be a bit restrictive, as Roget Thesaurus was designed for a paper system, not a hyperlink system. But we could make a start by at least trying to link each WikiSaurus entry to a Roget classification (as done in WikiSaurus:insane). That might help inform us on whether the classification is too restrictive. Plus, I think having to stick to a prescriptive classification might make it very difficult for the general user to add WikiSaurus entries. Whereas an entry like WikiSaurus:chav can be built without this knowledge, and then linked to Roget. In looking for where to link it we might then find a better head word than chav, and move/rename the Wikisaurus entry to there, leaving a redirection in place until we can change all the referring links (may be a job for a bot ?)--Richardb 16:03, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

 * We probably should not be developing WikiSaurus entries for foreign words, at least not in the near future. There have been different suggestions relating to the translations, including hiding them.  My recommendation would be to continue as we have been with translation, and make no drastic changes to that until the Wiktionary2 people have their act tegether enough to let us know what kind of relationship there can be between the two projects. Eclecticology 19:36, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

 * I had missed this discussion before, but I think we ought to combine the two systems somewhat, trying to both have as much information as possible while also making the best use of the hyperlink system and the wiki software. Roget's was geared toward a certain clientelle I think, as was Oxford, as are all Thesauruses, including ours.  I think our goal is to be usable by everyone, and we ought to clearly define what uses we want to provide.  Synonyms and antonyms are obvious to me, as well as idiomatic synonyms and antonyms.  Where we branch off from there is basically only limited by how much we CAN add, the more information about a word as it is semantically related to other words the better, but I want to be sure that that most basic information is there and readily accessible by ANYONE, whether or not they are familiar with how Thesauruses work.  About foreign entries, I think they have merit, and should be included as soon as we figure out what exactly we are going to make this be.  Especially if we can add sesnses to the synonyms and antonyms, this can provide some vocabulary expansion and precision in choice to the people using WikiSaurus. - TheDaveRoss 17:13, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

 * We really don't have that much disagreement. What I mostly support is a go slow approach because this is such a complex task.  It would be too easy to get bogged down in a poorly thought out and premature design for this. Eclecticology 09:07, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

 * We needed a bit of a go at Thesaurus to start sorting our ideas out. My view is we are making progress along that route. I'd only like to encourage Dave to do what he can to take some more steps. I'm not sure that going slower is going to make it any better. But I agree we all need to keep an eye on it and comment on the way it is developing. I 'think' Dave has taken on board my concern about not chucking out the crap words as worthless. There is value in the dross. And he also seems quite aware of the idea of making it very accessible, keeping it simple.--Richardb 12:31, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

heading 8

 * Oh, I admit, I have been helped by a thesaurus from time to time. Still, English is not my native language so I have learned it over time and by now I know most important words at least passively... Many years ago I didn't and I remember being very confused when I looked at a thesaurus. I imagine, I will get the same feeling if a look a German or a French thesaurus today. The point is that we should really try to do something better...

 * Listing a lot of colloquial and slang will only make it less useful for people that does not speak good English. We have categories lets use that for such things instead. Important synonyms with a short explaination can go at the pages of each word. You can always continue clicking on the synonyms for the words you thought were the best alternatives. --Patrik Stridvall 21:41, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Patrick, I don't think you are going to convince us to scrap WikiSaurus at this stage. Those who find it useful and interesting will build it. Those who don't want to use it don't have to. You can stick a huge list of synonyms at the end of many word entries if you want to, though they would tend to clutte rup the entries a bit.

 * Perhaps you can try something out first. Why not start with going to every word listed in WikiSaurus:breasts and in each list all the synonyms fromWikiSaurus:breasts. Along the way create entries and add verifications for all the words listed in WikiSaurus:breasts that don't yet have entries. Then come back and tell us if it's easier to have a WikiSaurus or not. If you still think you can get along without WikiSaurus, then carry on with WikiSaurus:sexual intercourse etc etc. Should keep you busy for a while.--Richardb 15:53, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Few words have very many useful synonyms.
 * Patrick.That is very, very subjective. And who said we should limit the Saurus idea to useful synonyms ? Should we limit Wiktionary only to useful words perhaps ? What might not be useful to you, an obviously serious author, might be extremely useful to someone writing scatalogical poetry, or comedy scripts.--Richardb 13:56, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Subjective, perhaps. I see it more as prioritizing people that write normal texts. There is no point presenting a lot of, for most people, "useless" alternatives. I have no problem with "useless" words having pages and categories of their own. It think it is OK to have a link to such categories at the pages of the "serious" words but no more than that. ---Patrik Stridvall 17:04, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

 * By useful I mean words that you should seriously consider using when you are writing. If you are reading you can just look up the word you have found, you don't need a thesaurus for that.
 * May be partially true, if and when Wiktionary has good entries for all those slang words. But since we have tough Criteria for Inclusion, then a lot of those slang words won't get in, so we need them in WikiSaurus.

 * Words that don't meet our Criteria for Inclusion shouldn't be here at all anywhere unless they are protologisms, neologisms or similar in which case they belong in the appendix. --Patrik Stridvall 17:04, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

 * The only AFAICS useful synonyms listed in WikiSaurus:breasts is mammary glands, udder and teats. The others are not recommended to use if you are writing so they can belong to a suitable category like Category:English slang:breasts or whatever. So that won't be very hard. Have any more difficult challenges? --Patrik Stridvall 21:07, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I haven't noticed you actually try the challenge yet, which would mean actually creating entries, verified, for all those words that are listed in WikiSaurus:breasts but don't yet have entries.

 * As long as a debate it going on it would be impolite to do things others might disagree with. We obviously, whatever we decide to do, can't delete WikiSaurus:breasts until all words are, if they meet the Criteria for inclusion, added and categorized. Don't except me to do anything concerning words that are "useless" for writing though. --Patrik Stridvall 17:04, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

 * "Not Recommended" - not recommended by whom ??Patrick, I think you are just having a lend of us, winding us up. You can't really be serious. Can you ??? --Richardb 13:56, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

 * I'm serious. But yes, I admit that I presented an extreme view, in part to provoke a reaction, in part to provide a contrast to how it is currently done. We obviously have to choose some sort of reasonable comprise. By "not recommended" I mean words that is you shouldn't use if you expect your readers to take you seriously. How serious would you take this post if I had used a lot of slang words? How serious do you think people take WikiSaurus since it mostly contains slang words? Appearance is very important if you are to be taken seriously. --Patrik Stridvall 17:04, 3 March 2006 (UTC)


text:
grunger

Noun

 * 1)  Someone who appreciates grunge culture.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: grunger


text:
Wiktionary:About Japanese

This policy explains considerations for Japanese entries that are not covered by WT:ELE and other general policies.

A very simple example
This is a simple entry for the word, and shows the most fundamental elements of an article:

==Japanese== '' ===Noun=== ''
 * 1) a [ [dictionary]]

Lemma entries
Following are the guidelines for entries for the lemma form of Japanese terms: (vote)
 * As a general rule, the most common spelling is considered the lemma.
 * Rare or archaic terms may use the kana spelling as the lemma, to avoid cramming kanji entries with too many readings. (This does not apply to proper nouns, specialized terms, etc.)
 * When the situation is unclear, editors are advised to use their best judgment on a case by case basis.

For non-lemma entries (e.g. for alternative spellings, rōmaji, and conjugated forms), see for the more abbreviated form to use instead.

Headings before the definitions
For entries with kanji, shows the component kanji in a table floated at the right margin. immediately follows the  language heading, e.g.:

==Japanese==

Etymology

 * For details, see: About Japanese/Etymology.

Japanese is rich in homophones and homographs, so there will often be multiple numbered “Etymology” headers. In this case, can instead be placed directly underneath each etymology:

Etymology 1
Compound of.

Noun

 * 1) duplicity, double dealing, double tongue

Etymology 2
Compound of.

Noun

 * 1) two words
 * 2) repetition

Pronunciation
For the  section, use.

The part of speech or other descriptor
See for the list of standard “parts of speech” for English Wiktionary's Japanese entries.

Headword (inflection) line
The part of speech inflection line should be formatted with one of the following:

 * (including both -i and -na adjectives)
 * for all others
 * (including both -i and -na adjectives)
 * for all others

Definitions

 * For details, see: Entry layout.

Headings after the definitions

 * For details, see: Entry layout.

Conjugation (for verbs), Inflection (-i and -na adjectives)

 * Note: translates to conjugation in English when applied to verbs, and inflection when applied to adjectives and nouns.

Conjugation templates have been created for verbs (ichidan, godan, and suru), and inflection templates for adjectives.

The following templates for modern Japanese are complete:

 * 1) Generic templates which can be used inside all other templates as well as for irregular patterns such as.
 * 2) * Generic verb
 * 3) * Generic adjective
 * 4) Specific templates based on the generic templates
 * 5) Ichidan Conjugation
 * 6) Godan Conjugation
 * 7) * ending with
 * 8) * ending with
 * 9) * ending with
 * 10) * ending with
 * 11) * ending with
 * 12) * ending with
 * 13) * ending with
 * 14) * ending with
 * 15) * ending with
 * 16) Irregular Conjugation
 * 17) * and most verbs ending with
 * 18) * Verbs in entries ending with
 * 19) * and compounds such as
 * 20) * Honorifics, ,
 * 21) * ending with
 * 22) Adjectives (-i inflection)
 * 23) Adjectives (-na inflection)

For classical Japanese, we will need additional templates for:

 * 1) Verb and adjective conjugation (classical)

Considerations about Japanese language entries
Wiktionary may be used by students who are not proficient in Japanese and may be unfamiliar with or unable to type the kanji, hiragana, or katakana versions of Japanese terms. The criteria for inclusion of Japanese entries includes romaji and hiragana entries. A romaji entry satisfies the criteria for inclusion if any of its hiragana, katakana, or kanji transliterations satisfy the standard criteria. Likewise, a hiragana or katakana transliteration of a kanji entry satisfies the criteria for inclusion if that kanji entry satisfies the standard criteria.

Hiragana entries
Hiragana entries with corresponding kanji entries should be formatted like this:

==Japanese== '' ===(part of speech)=== (POS template)   (other parts of speech, in English alphabetical order)
 * 1)  short definition 1
 * 2)  short definition 2

If the hiragana is a pronunciation of a kanji which is only used in compounds, add an  part-of-speech section like this:

===Affix=== ''
 * 1) add senses

Hiragana entries will thus act as the canonical entry for pronunciation and homophones.

Romaji entries
See /Transliteration for the romanization method

Romaji entries serve as soft redirects to hiragana and/or katakana entries, and have no definitions, parts of speech headings, or other information. Such information belongs in kanji and kana entries. Hiragana and katakana entries may serve for disambiguation, while romaji entries do not. The only category romaji entries belong to is "Category:Japanese romanizations" (see Template:ja-romaji). Romaji entries should be formatted as follows:

A hiragana-only example: "tsuku"

Romanization

A katakana-only example: "rūto"

Romanization

A hiragana and katakana example: "ringo"

Kanji entries
Entries for a single Kanji character are formatted as follows:

Kanji

 * 1) meaning 1
 * 2) meaning 2

Readings
Note: Among other things, the ja-kanji template categorizes the Kanji in Category:Japanese kanji which is sorted by radical/stroke (rs). (see template:ja-kanji forms, template:ja-kanji and template:ja-readings for other details.

Parts of speech
Western explanations of Japanese grammar are so varied that none are definitive and no well-known Western methods are consistent with classical Japanese. Thus, the parts of speech should adhere to the common Japanese way of teaching grammar in modern texts, the method with the widest agreement among Japanese scholars. To support such classification, templates for each part of speech will link to an explanatory page with alternatives as to how to classify that part of speech.

Part of speech and conjugation type are to be maintained separately. So, rather than referring to godan verbs, an entry will refer to transitive verbs or intransitive verbs that follow the godan conjugation.

Nouns ()

 * Noun - use L3 or L4 header Noun and
 * e.g. for, use:
 * ...which produces:

 * Note that pronouns should be considered a subclass of nouns, and not a separate part of speech.
 * The count= parameter can be used to identify the counter used with this noun.

Verbs ()
Use L3 or L4 header Verb and

 * Intransitive verb
 * e.g., meaning “change” as in something changing

 * Transitive verb
 * e.g., meaning “change” as in changing something

To indicate transitivity, use the tr= parameter:

Verb conjugation patterns

 * Godan conjugation
 * also known as Type I Conjugation, Consonant-Stem Conjugation
 * e.g.

 * Ichidan conjugation
 * also known as Type II Conjugation, Vowel-Stem Conjugation (includes Kami-Ichidan and Shimo-Ichidan Conjugation)
 * e.g. ,

 * Irregular conjugation
 * Kuru Conjugation
 * also known as KA-hen Conjugation, Type III Conjugation, Irregular Conjugation
 * Suru conjugation
 * also known as SA-hen conjugation, Type III Conjugation, Irregular Conjugation
 * e.g. ,
 * Irregular honorific conjugation
 * e.g. ,
 * e.g. ,

For classical Japanese, the following should also be included:
 * Yodan conjugation
 * e.g.

 * Kami-Ichidan conjugation
 * e.g.

 * Kami-Nidan conjugation
 * e.g.

 * Shimo-Ichidan conjugation

 * Shimo-Nidan conjugation
 * e.g.

 * Irregular K conjugation
 * e.g.

 * Irregular S conjugation
 * e.g. ,

 * Irregular N conjugation

 * Irregular R conjugation

Adjectives ()

 * also known as i-adjectives, true adjectives, verbal adjectives, descriptive verbs
 * e.g.

For classical Japanese, the following should also be included:
 * Ku Inflection
 * Shiku Inflection

Use L3 or L4 header Adjective and.

Adjectives ()

 * also known as na-adjectives, quasi-adjectives, nominals, descriptive nouns, copular adjectives
 * e.g.

For classical Japanese, the following should also be included:
 * Nari Inflection
 * Tari Inflection

Use L3 or L4 header Adjective and. For lemma entries, it is helpful to include L4 or L5 header Inflection and.

Adverbs ()

 * e.g. ,

Use L3 or L4 header Adverb and.

Conjunctions ()

 * e.g. keredomo,  kara,  no ni

Use L3 or L4 header Conjunction and.

Interjections ()
e.g., , ,

Use L3 or L4 header Interjection and.

Particles ()

 * Case particle
 * Sentence-final particle
 * Indirect particle
 * Adverbial particle
 * Binding particle
 * Conjunctive particle

Use L3 or L4 header Particle and.

Auxiliaries ()

 * also known as auxiliary verb

 * Indicate the type of conjugation (e.g. like godan, i-adjective, etc.)

Use L3 or L4 header Suffix and.

Adnominals ()

 * also known as prenominal adjectives, pre-noun adjectives

e.g., , , ,

Use L3 or L4 header Adnominal and. This is a closed-class part of speech with a relatively limited number of terms. Not everything that comes before a noun is an adnominal.

Counter words ()

 * e.g.,

Use L3 or L4 header Counter and.

Do not use a hyphen with kanji, katakana, or hiragana, but do use one with romaji.

Prefixes ()
Use L3 or L4 header Prefix. Do not use a hyphen with kanji, katakana, or hiragana, but do use one with romaji.

Suffixes ()
Use L3 or L4 header Suffix and. Do not use a hyphen with kanji, katakana, or hiragana, but do use one with romaji.

Transliteration

 * See About Japanese/Transliteration.

Verb forms of nouns
Many nouns in Japanese have a verb form that is created by simply appending. Because this type of verb is so closely associated with the noun stem, its entry is considered the plain form minus. There is a special headword template for those verbs:. See.

Note however that some verbs ending in behave differently, such as  and other verbs with one kanji plus. See.

Hiragana entries
Because entries for short hiragana tokens (e.g., しょ, sho) can correspond to so many kanji, it makes sense to have a level 3 section at the bottom called "Hiragana", with level 4 sections for on'yomi readings and kun'yomi readings. It might be prudent to include subtle differences in pronunciation (as exists between hashi "bridge" and hashi "chopstick"), but it is unclear how to indicate such differences using the wiki software.

Compounds
Any Japanese entry that is part of any larger terms that meet the criteria for inclusion should have a level 4 section with a bulleted list of links to the larger terms. That level 4 section should be called "Compounds" in kanji entries and "Derived terms" in non-kanji entries. The bulleted items that begin with the entry should come first.

A level 4 section called "Names" should contain any common names constructed from the kanji, even if such names duplicate a compound word.

Kana, Romaji, English translation
To accommodate the diverse needs and fluency levels of readers, each Japanese phrase or term should be expressed in four forms: a formal Japanese version, a kana version, a romaji version, and an English language translation. The additional verbosity is necessary to produce a general-purpose resource.

-na Adjectives
The main entry for the part of speech sometimes called quasi-adjective and sometimes called adjectival noun ( in Japanese) should be in the form without the な (na), on the same page as the noun form if there is one:

===Adjective===

E.g. has a level 3 section like this: ===Adjective===

This should be followed by the definition(s), and then the inflection table using template. Note that na type adjectives have inflections, so the header should be Inflection, not Conjugation.

List of relevant categories

 * Category:Japanese language
 * The root category in the Wiktionary category tree for Japanese terms. All other Japanese-related categories are ultimately within this category. Most Japanese entries should be categorized in one or more of the more specific categories below. Individual words should only be in this top level category if they are about the Japanese language (e.g. the entry for hiragana).

Words are categorized properly in the Part of Speech and Script form categories automatically by the POS templates (ja-noun, ja-verb, ja-adj, and ja-pos).

 * Part of Speech Categories
 * Category:Japanese nouns
 * Category:Japanese proper nouns
 * Category:Japanese verbs
 * Category:Japanese type 1 verbs - -verbs
 * Category:Japanese type 2 verbs - -verbs
 * Category:Japanese type 3 verbs - Irregular verbs (,, etc.)
 * Category:Japanese adjectives - This category is only ever used if the term is an adjective but not an or a -Adjective. (Very rarely)
 * Category:Japanese い-i adjectives
 * Category:Japanese な-na adjectives
 * Category:Japanese adverbs
 * Category:Japanese particles
 * Category:Japanese counters
 * Category:Japanese prefixes
 * Category:Japanese suffixes
 * Category:Japanese interjections
 * Category:Japanese conjunctions
 * Script form categories:
 * Category:Japanese kanji - individual characters, from
 * Category:Japanese kana - individual characters
 * Category:Japanese hiragana - words in hiragana
 * Category:Japanese katakana - words in katakana
 * Category:Japanese romanizations - words in romaji
 * Category:Kanji readings - hiragana entries only (no romaji)
 * Category:Japanese phrasebook - Useful stock phrases such as and.
 * Category:Japanese proverbs
 * Category:Japanese idioms
 * Category:Japanese onomatopoeia - Use only if unsure which subcategory the word should go in.
 * Category:Giongo - i.e.
 * Category:Gitaigo - i.e.

Sorting
All categories should be sorted by hiragana except Category:Japanese kanji and Category:Japanese romanizations. If the page title is not completely in hiragana, then put the hiragana version of the term as the sort key like this.

A note about hiragana sort keys: In most Japanese dictionaries,, for example, would be listed amongst  words and not separated into its own   section. However, by default Wiktionary does the latter. To fix this, we would give the sort key of. is a word too though, so we would not want to show up before it on the list. To assure it shows up afterwards, we stick  at the end to give it a slightly greater alphabetical order value. For words starting with or any hiragana with the little circle mark, we stick two 's at the end.

Romaji pages usually do not need a sort key, but if for some reason it begins with a capital letter, add a sort key with the lowercase version.

Kanji sortkeys are formatted like so: radical + number of strokes beyond radical (two digits) + the kanji itself. The sort key for would be

Help from the community
Sometimes, we know there is a problem, but don't know what to do to correct the problem. If you should find a Japanese entry with a problem that you do not know how to correct, there are several ways to approach the situation.

 * 1) Mark the page with .  This template adds the entry to Category:Japanese terms needing attention, where another user can then find and correct the problem.  It helps if you include comments on the entry's talk page explaining what the problem is or why you think the page needs attention.
 * 2) Raise the issue on Wiktionary talk:About Japanese.  Note that this approach is primarily for issues of style, formatting, categorization, and not for specifics of content.
 * 3) Mark the page with .  This is a more general cleanup tag that allows the user to include reasons or concerns as an argument in the template.  Be sure to also add an entry to WT:RFC concerning the word so that other editors will be made aware of the problem.

Translations into Japanese
These are basic translation examples. As a general practice, only link to the lemma form of any given term. For instance, for the Japanese translation of the English term, link to the kanji spelling , using. Any further details about alternative spellings should be included in that entry, and not in the translation tables.

* Japanese: 環境

You may find examples of older deprecated formatting, where the  transliteration parameter may have included kana. These might look like:

* Japanese: 環境 Or: * Japanese: 環境

Do not copy this format. If you encounter existing content that includes kana in the  parameter, current best practice is to remove the kana and leave only the rōmaji.

If a term has multiple possible readings, list each reading in rōmaji, separating with commas. For example, may be read as either furusato or as kokyō. When adding this to a translation table, use the following format:

* Japanese: 故郷

In general, list the readings in order from most to least common.

If a word is only, or most commonly, written in kana, link to the kana spelling and add the rōmaji transliteration:

* Japanese: スポーツ

For verb conjugations and other derived forms, link to the lemma forms and use the  parameter to indicate the form to display. For example, the Japanese translation for links to the lemma form, while displaying the conjugated form :

* Japanese: 疲れる

Other Japanese aids

 * Category:Japanese language
 * Category:Japanese templates
 * Wiktionary:Requested entries:Japanese
 * Appendix:Japanese glossary

title: Wiktionary:About Japanese


text:
dhamma

Etymology
..

Noun

 * 1)  The teachings of Buddha.

Etymology
.

Etymology
, from, from.

Noun

 * 1) truth, righteousness
 * 2) doctrine, teachings
 * 3)  teachings of the Buddha
 * 4) morality, goodness
 * 5) causal antecedent
 * 1) morality, goodness
 * 2) causal antecedent

title: dhamma


text:
dialog

Etymology
, from, from , from , from + , from , from  +.

Noun

 * 1) A conversation or other form of discourse between two or more individuals.
 * 2) In a dramatic or literary presentation, the verbal parts of the script or text; the verbalizations of the actors or characters.
 * 3) A literary form, where the presentation resembles a conversation.
 * 4)  A dialog box.
 * 1) A literary form, where the presentation resembles a conversation.
 * 2)  A dialog box.
 * 1)  A dialog box.
 * 1)  A dialog box.

Verb

 * 1)  To discuss or negotiate so that all parties can reach an understanding.

Translations

 * Bulgarian:
 * Catalan:
 * Dutch: dialogeren, ,
 * French:
 * Portuguese:

Noun

 * 1)   / dialogue

Related terms

 * See

Noun

 * 1)   / dialogue

Etymology
, from, from.

Noun

 * 1) A literary discussion or a work written as one.
 * 2)  An organised talk between two people.

Etymology

 * from, from + , from , from  +.

Noun

 * 1)   / dialogue

Etymology

 * from, from + , from , from  +.

Noun

 * 1)   / dialogue

Noun

 * 1)   / dialogue

Etymology
.

Noun

 * 1)   / dialogue

Noun

 * 1)   / dialogue

title: dialog


text:
Help:Appendices

Appendices refers to a series of pages in the form "Appendix:Xxxx". They have their own namespace. They usually treat a common linguistic topic, which distinguishes them from "Wiktionary:" pages which deal with Wiktionary's own operational issues. Appendices should be tagged with  (or the appropriate sub-category). This will cause them to be automatically included in this list.

Appendix pages often provide: In addition, the Appendix is the only place for:
 * grouping of terms by script similarity (e.g. Appendix:Variations of "a" and Appendix:Unicode)
 * grouping of terms by topic (e.g. Appendix:Names)
 * information about a linguistic topic (e.g. Appendix:Welsh pronunciation and Appendix:English adverbs)
 * Terms that aren't allowed by the CFI (e.g. Category:Appendix-only constructed languages, Category:Reconstructed languages, Category:Fictional universes, Category:Appendix-only terms)
 * Terms that aren't supported by the MediaWiki software (Appendix:Unsupported titles)

List of appendices
See Special:Allpages/Appendix:. Or, see Index to appendices.

it:Wikizionario:Appendici fi:Wikisanakirja:Liitteet pt:Wikcionário:Apêndice sl:Dodatek:Vsebina sv:Appendix:Index

title: Help:Appendices


text:
benadrukken

Etymology
From.

Verb

 * 1)  to emphasize

title: benadrukken


text:
User:PolyBot

Description
This is the page for Polyglot's bot.

I have been considering to create a bot for several months now.

I used the pyWikipediaBot framework to finally get around to it.

The primary purpose for the bot is to transfer entries from one language Wiktionary to another. Of course, if/once it can do that, it will also be able to clean up articles on one Wiktionary.

At first it won't be able to do this, but eventually the intention is to start with an article, look whether counterparts for this article exist on other Wiktionaries (if they do exist, Interwiktionary links can be created), follow the links to the translations on the native Wiktionaries and check whether the translations given there correspond.

If they don't, ask the operator (I think it will always be an interactive bot, at least for the purpose I have in mind for it), whether they may be added.

To not overly complicate things, I'm setting the goal to something a little bit less ambitious. The purpose now is to parse an entry, store it in an internal representation and reproduce the entry, all cleaned up. The second part of this already works. This is of course simpler since it's not as open ended as trying to parse entries with wildly diverging standards for editing used. I'm about to start on the parsing part now though. It should be feasible to parse at least the entries that mostly adhere to standards and of course it's always possible to involve the bot operator when it's too hard.

How does it work?
It starts by representing a Wiktionary article as a series of objects:

 * WiktionaryPage -> one page for a particular spelling
 * Entry -> one language block on a page, description of the lemma in a particular language
 * Meaning -> one meaning for this lemma
 * Term -> Terms/Lemmas/Expression in the same or another language that can be referred to (that can become links)

So a WiktionaryEntry can contain many SubEntry objects. A SubEntry can contain many Meaning objects. A Meaning object uses Term objects for synonyms, translations, related words, etc.

A Term object has subclasses for the different parts of speech.

What can it do?
To start I'm working on a way to output these objects according to the proper standards on the different Wiktionaries. (I'll start by concentrating on Dutch and English at first, but I make sure it is easily extensible)

In a later stage I will try to parse actual Wiktionary entries, either directly on line or from an SQL dump.

The first thing I want to do with the bot is to add the names of all the countries with their translations in 6 languages on the Dutch and the English Wiktionaries. I have those in a database of my own right now.

Before I start doing anything, I will have the bot create one or two pages. Then I'll wait for comments and act accordingly to fine tune the bot and what it submits.

Later I want to try and convert an existing entry into the objects described above and then reoutput them (cleaned up and possibly extended with info from other Wiktionaries).

When do I want to start?
It may take me a few days or weeks before I can get started. (OK, it became months...)

Can we see the code?
Everybody can have a look at the code I have so far over here: http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/pywikipediabot/pywikipedia/wiktionary.py?rev=1.10&view=log

I have been doing something similar for the names of the elements. Only there I used a php script. It makes more sense to work together with some bright people on this though and to build upon and extend an existing framework. Python is also great language to be doing this with.

title: User:PolyBot


text:
maka

Etymology
From. , from.

Noun

 * 1)  eye

Verb

 * 1) to give.

Etymology 1
From. Cognates include 🇨🇬 and 🇨🇬.

Noun

 * 1)  eye organ
 * 2) face
 * 3) bud
 * 4) beloved one
 * 5) mesh of a net

Etymology 2
From. Cognates include 🇨🇬 and 🇨🇬.

Verb

 * 1)  raw undercooked

Etymology
From.

Conjunction

 * 1) so
 * 2) therefore

Usage notes
The most often used phrase to mean "therefore" is "maka dari itu".

Noun

 * 1)  snake

Etymology
Borrowing from.

Verb

 * 1) throw, fling, cast, pass (with the hands)
 * 2) place, put, put in

Noun

 * 1) fish hook

Noun

 * 1) mug

Etymology 1
See

Noun

 * 1) female mate

Etymology 1
From, from. Compare 🇨🇬.

Verb

 * 1)  to give
 * 2)  to punish; to hit
 * 1)  to punish; to hit

Alternative forms

 * -ma

Alternative forms

 * mā

Etymology
Compare 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬.

Etymology 1
From, oblique form of , from , from. Doublet of.

Noun

 * 1) spouse; wife; married woman

Etymology 2
From, from , see also 🇨🇬.

Verb

 * 1) To move (slightly) a big, heavy or otherwise difficult-to-move object.
 * 2) To move oneself slightly, for example to make room for someone in a sofa or allow someone to reach objects behind oneself

Noun

 * 1) rock; stone.

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) wound

Noun

 * 1) stomach, belly

title: maka


text:
mahalo

Etymology
From, from.

Usage notes
The word is widely used in public notices in Hawaii, most visibly on trash cans, leading some tourists unfamiliar with the term to infer the meaning as “trash can”.

Etymology
From, from (compare 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬).

Verb

 * 1) to

title: mahalo


text:
makar

Etymology 1
From. .

Noun

 * 1) A poet writing in Scots.
 * 2)  The national poet laureate of Scotland.

Etymology
From. Compare 🇨🇬.

Conjunction

 * 1)  at least
 * 2)  if only, I wish
 * 3)   either... or
 * 1)   either... or
 * 1)   either... or

Interjection

 * 1)  fine!

Noun

 * 1) gum (in the eye)

Etymology 1
From, from. .

Noun

 * 1) deception, cheating, trickery.
 * 2) stratagem, scheme, plan.
 * 3) revolt
 * 1) revolt

Adjective

 * 1) unripe
 * 2) tough

Etymology
From ; equivalent to 🇨🇬.

Noun

 * 1) maker, creator
 * 2) author, writer, poet

Etymology
From.

Adverb

 * 1) at least
 * 2) (usually preceded by conjunctive ) only
 * 3) even if, regardless

Etymology
From, from.

Noun

 * 1) seat; center of power, headquarters, capital
 * 2) * 1936 August 22, caption beside map of Spanish Civil War in Açık Söz:
 * "tr"

- Kara kuvvet ve müttefikleri engizisyonun makarrı olan İspanya'da kiliseleri, manastırları, keşişleri ile birlikte ve bir daha dirilememek üzere gömülüyor!

title: makar


text:
Talk:n-word

I'm not sure that this is ever used in the second sense, at least not in the US, where the first sense is charged enough that it would be poor form to make a joke of it.

Not that poor form ever stopped anyone.

Nonetheless, it might be worth hunting for attestations in this case -dmh 17:31, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * I would be for getting rid of of the second def unless Paul had something in mind. --Eean 20:06, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

RFD discussion: November 2013

 * See Talk:c-word.

RFV discussion: October 2016–May 2017
Rfv-sense

There are no citations for the n-word standing for "The word ."

FWIW, The discussion page also mentions citations needed for this sense since 2004. This sense is also found on the disambiguation page on WP (which states: "Nazi – euphemism for reference to Nazism as broad, political slur by analogy with F-word"), though not on the  article itself.

Sorry all I can do is point this out, but my real-life limitations are acting up so I probably have to leave this to you. Thanks, --Geekdiva (talk) 17:51, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

 * Found a few potential Google Books hits of different spellings. I'm sure it is attestable from Groups, though. – Einstein2 (talk) 18:53, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

RFV-passed Kiwima (talk) 04:15, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:n-word


text:
skijor

Etymology
From, from +  (see ).

Verb

 * 1)  To cross-country ski behind one or more dogs or horses, or a vehicle.

title: skijor


text:
Talk:see the forest for the trees

Surely this the wrong way round: to be "unable to see the forest for the trees" means to be unable to grasp the big picture because of a concern with small (trivial) details. I guess to be "unable to see the trees for the forest" would mean to be unable to focus on (important) details of a situation because of a concern with the big picture 82.41.105.76 18:06, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * First, the idiom here is "see the trees for the forest" (or vice versa). Here are the google hits:
 * "see the trees for the forest": 57K
 * "see the trees for the forest" -"can't see the trees for the forest": 1K
 * "see the forest for the trees": 47K
 * "see the forest for the trees" -"can't see the forest for the trees": 26K

 * Many of the uses I saw for "trees for the forest" seemed to be cute take-offs on "forest for the trees", generally involving literal trees and forests of some kind. Certainly "forest for the trees" is what I've always heard used for the meaning given, and I'm not sure that "trees for the forest" is recognized idiomatically.  Even in one site that compares different modes of perception, "trees for the forest" is defined in opposition to "forest for the trees."

 * I'm going to move this article to "see the forest for the trees". If anyone can find firm evidence that "see the trees for the forest" is consistently used for a particular idiomatic meaning, then the entry should be fleshed out. -dmh 18:47, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Feckless creation...
OMG, I've created an article but didn't pay a lot of attention to it, was concerned about the matter at hand, trying to comprehend the phrase and what to do about all 4 variants, and as a result -- somewhat sophistic incompetence. Sorry!

--

I have only heard this idiom as "see the forest through the trees" but it only gets 5k Google hits. Is that something I can/should add under a Variations or Alternate spellings heading? Mancomb 2004/12/10 2:15 EST

5K? Are you kidding? We should add this entry for sure. Some decide whether to add an entry that has at most ~200 Google hits or not. In such a case, I believe, we had better do that. Maybe just a mere redirect? --Dennis Valeev 19:21, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Who the hell says forest for the trees. This is nonsense. It is through the trees. For the trees doesn't even make sense. I'm not editing the page but someone should.

(Who the hell says, "forest for the trees"?) (Who the hell writes a question without using the proper punctuation marks in the sentence?) Anyway... That urban saying was used in a Hollywood film called "Jack Reacher", and delivered in dialogue by Tom Cruise as the title character. It is a colloquialism used in various discussions, mainly throughout America. -09/25/2017 8:40 am PST.

 * It does make sense. It means you can't see the forest because the trees are in the way. And it's very commonly said. Equinox ◑ 20:28, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Originally it is "Forest through the trees". The saying gets twisted somewhere in the souther states at some point in history (big surprise) and replaces the original "through the trees".
 * Unfortunately, I was taught this idiom had the exact opposite meaning. In my version, "for" does not mean "because of," but instead describes the trees as an unseen characteristic of the forest. So, if you "do not see the forest for its trees," you can see the forest (big picture) but can not see the trees (potentially important details). An unrelated example of how "for" is used might be; I did not see her for her meanness.

Not so about the southern states. I have always heard for (which means "because of") the trees and the people saying it are not southern. If you compare "for," which is a somewhat older way of saying "because of," and "through," I think you'll see that "He can't see the forest because of the trees" makes a lot more sense (for the purposes of the idiom) than "He can't see the forest through the trees." I would imagine the "through" variation came about because people have become less familiar with this meaning of "for" and still want to use the idiom.

What about "can't see the wood for the trees" ? where "wood" means "small forrest". (If you go down to the woods today . . ) - or does "wood" mean the substance that constitutes the "tree". . . ?

Missing Actual Definition
As a "native English speaker" I know the definition/meaning is "being so concerned with the individual/small detail that one fails to notice the bigger picture"... though I don't exactly have any citation I can give. I see a cross link to "bigger picture" and such.. so would it be approprite to put in that definition and [citation needed] myself? DigitalSorceress (talk) 16:26, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

for
What's the meaning of for here? --Backinstadiums (talk) 20:15, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

 * Probably sense 12:
 * In the role or capacity of; instead of; in place of.
 * Therefore, "see the forest for the trees" = "see the forest instead of the trees".
 * Ioaxxere (talk) 21:09, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Therefore, "see the forest for the trees" = "see the forest instead of the trees".
 * Ioaxxere (talk) 21:09, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:see the forest for the trees


text: see the forest through the trees

title: see the forest through the trees


text:
Talk:protologism

While "protologism" seems to get applied in the second sense, this is at least arguably broader than the original definition, and probably broader than the main usage on the various protologisms pages and templates. I'm wondering if it should stay.

It also occurs to me that if we have enough data to argue about usage, we probably have a real word on our hands, indicating that the second sense is too broad. -dmh 20:06, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Hmmm.... yes. Merged the two. I've also moved the quote-unquote usage note since this is apparently not relevent to the usage of the term. DAVilla 00:12, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

So, is protologism a protologism? --80.175.250.218 14:16, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes. Shoof 01:58, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Gosh! This is a most interesting topic. Could you please provide a list of protologisms. I am especially interseted in those that did not become real words.

 * See Category:Protologisms. Mutante 09:43, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

 * A succesful protologism becomes a neologism. Right? Mutante 10:42, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Which begs the question: What is a word before it is a protologism? But seriously, new as in "a new word or phrase" in the definition of neologism already denotes a previous state of non-existence. Proto and neo are synonymous prefixes, and it makes little sense to create a synonym for a word that already exists. JustaAverageJoe 19:34, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

It seems to me there must be a distinction here. It's either an attempt to create a neologism (in which case it's a misnomer) or an attempt to name something currently unnamed (which would fit the word roots better), like when the metal fastener was first dubbed 'zipper.'

Request for verification
An anon. recently restored this page to a full entry. I was about to revert him, but I’m not sure whether I should. kinda looks like it could satisfy the CFI, unless there are some independence issues in re Wiktionary that I’m not considering. What do others think? †  ﴾(u):Raifʻhār (t):Doremítzwr﴿ 23:23, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

 * : No b.g.c. or news-archive hits. Two Scholar hits, but it's not clear to me whether either was in a refereed academic journal, or even durably archived somewhere. Several Google Groups hits, but all are problematic — either mentions, or non-Usenet, or directly quoting from Wiktionary or Wikipedia, or using it in a list, or by our very own . (I guess the one by Language Lover isn't actually problematic, but there's something weird about quoting our own contributors' Usenet posts. I'd really rather not do it without good reason.) —Ruakh TALK 00:04, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

 * I would like to keep it, with the existing warning. An occasional visitor in Wiktionary's discussion pages might want to check what is meant with it. --Hekaheka 01:18, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

 * If it doesn't pass the letter and spirit of CFI, then it doesn't belong in the dictionary. If we invent our own words, and then break our own rules to publish them, then we shouldn't be in this business.  Move it to protologism if you really want to keep it. —Michael Z. 2009-04-03 02:10 z

 * Found what I believe is a durable quote from the April 2007 issue of Prospect. (At least it is in the online version of that British magazine.) I'd say that one likely isn't problematic.  No mention whatsoever about Wiki-anything in the article. — Carolina wren discussió  04:55, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

RFV failed, converted back to . —Ruakh TALK 01:38, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Is this really a word?
This word is defined by means of a "bootstrap" mechanism. If the definition is valid, then it needs be deleted. Victorsteelballs (talk) 22:43, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I have no idea what a bootstrap mechanism is. Mglovesfun (talk) 22:57, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I think it's something like the definition of the word "word", which I'm guessing the original poster would also want to see deleted. Yes, this is really a word, but it's a neologism given that it isn't widely used or accepted, and probably wouldn't be understood. DAVilla 05:31, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

title: Talk:protologism


text:
clothesline

Noun

 * 1) A rope or cord tied up outdoors to hang clothes on so they can dry.
 * 2) A structure with multiple cords for the same purpose, such as a Hills hoist.
 * 3)  The act of knocking a person over by striking his or her upper body or neck with one's arm, as if he or she had run into a low clothesline.
 * 1) A structure with multiple cords for the same purpose, such as a Hills hoist.
 * 2)  The act of knocking a person over by striking his or her upper body or neck with one's arm, as if he or she had run into a low clothesline.
 * 1)  The act of knocking a person over by striking his or her upper body or neck with one's arm, as if he or she had run into a low clothesline.

Translations

 * Azerbaijani: zivə
 * Bikol Central: balaybayan,
 * Catalan:
 * Chinese:
 * Mandarin:, 晾衣繩
 * Danish: tøjsnor,
 * Dutch: ,
 * Finnish:
 * French:
 * Galician: tendal, tarandeira
 * Georgian: სამკერვალო
 * German:
 * Greek: σκοινί για άπλωμα ρούχων
 * Hebrew: חבל-כביסה
 * Hungarian:, ruhaszárító kötél
 * Icelandic: þvottasnúra, snúra
 * Irish: líne éadaigh
 * Italian: linea di vestiti
 * Japanese: 物干し綱, 物干し
 * Kazakh: киім сызығы
 * Kyrgyz: кийим-сап
 * Malay: ampaian baju
 * Maori: tārawa kākahu horoi, tārawa horoi
 * Mongolian:
 * Cyrillic: хувцасны гэц
 * Norman: corde à lînge
 * Norwegian:
 * Bokmål: klessnor, tørkestativ
 * Nynorsk: kledesnor, klesnor, klessnor, tørkestativ
 * Portuguese:, , estendedouro,
 * Russian: бельева́я верёвка
 * Spanish: cuerda para tender la ropa, tendal, ,  ,
 * Swedish:
 * Tagalog: yangyangan
 * Tausug: buwaran
 * Uzbek: kiyim liniyasi
 * Yiddish: גרעטשטריק

Verb

 * 1)  To knock (a person) over by striking his or her upper body or neck with one's arm, as if he or she had run into a low clothesline.

title: clothesline


text:
gilt-head bream

Noun

 * 1) A fish found in the Mediterranean and along the Atlantic coasts of Europe.

Translations

 * Catalan: ,
 * Galician:
 * Greek:
 * Hungarian:
 * Latin: sparus
 * Old English: þunorbodu
 * Polish:
 * Portuguese: ,
 * Romanian: doradă
 * Spanish:
 * Turkish:
 * Ukrainian: спар

title: gilt-head bream


text:
horse mackerel

Noun

 * 1) Any of several large fishes of many species:
 * 2)  (certain scads)
 * 3)  spp. (certain trevallies)
 * 4)  spp.
 * 5)  (Atlantic bonito)
 * 6)  (Australian bonito)
 * 7)  (pilot fish)
 * 8)  spp. (jack mackerels).
 * 1)  (Australian bonito)
 * 2)  (pilot fish)
 * 3)  spp. (jack mackerels).
 * 1)  spp. (jack mackerels).

Derived terms

 * Atlantic horse mackerel

Translations

 * Irish: ,
 * Norman:
 * Turkish:

title: horse mackerel


text:
grey mullet

Noun

 * 1) Any of various edible fish, of the family, found worldwide in coastal waters and rivers.

Translations

 * Basque: korrokoi bizkarbeltz, lazun
 * Bulgarian:
 * Catalan: ,
 * Greek:
 * Italian:
 * Latin: mūgil
 * Romanian:
 * Spanish:
 * Turkish:
 * Welsh:

title: grey mullet


text:
bluefish

Noun

 * 1) A voracious fish  found in waters of the Atlantic and Indian Ocean.
 * 2)  The puddingwife wrasse.
 * 3) A.
 * 4)  A sablefish.
 * 5)  An.

Synonyms

 * golden, brassy,, , ,
 * golden, brassy,, , ,

Translations

 * Bulgarian:
 * Catalan:
 * Chinese:
 * Mandarin: 扁鰺, 藍魚, 藍鯥, 蓝鯥
 * Finnish: sinikala
 * French:
 * Georgian: ლუფარი
 * German: Blaufisch
 * Greek:
 * Hungarian: vérengző makrahal
 * Irish: táilliúir
 * Italian: pesce serra
 * Lithuanian: melsvieji ešeriai
 * Maori: korokoropounamu, karokaropounamu
 * Ottoman Turkish: لوفر
 * Polish: lufar, skrzelołusk, tasergal
 * Portuguese: ,
 * Romanian:
 * Russian:
 * Spanish: anjova,
 * Swedish: blåfisk
 * Turkish:

 * Finnish: pohjanharjus

title: bluefish


text:
large bonito

Noun

 * , a large tropical fish allied to the tunny.

Translations

 * Japanese: ,
 * Turkish:

title: large bonito


text:
chameleon

Etymology
From, from , from , from , from + ; ultimately a calque from. The spelling was re-latinized in the early 18th century. The physics sense was and  in a paper in .

Noun

 * 1) A small to mid-size reptile, of the family, and one of the best known lizard families able to change color and project its long tongue.
 * 2)  A person with inconstant behavior; one able to quickly adjust to new circumstances.
 * 3)  A hypothetical scalar particle with a non-linear self-interaction, giving it an effective mass that depends on its environment: the presence of other fields.
 * 1)  A hypothetical scalar particle with a non-linear self-interaction, giving it an effective mass that depends on its environment: the presence of other fields.
 * 1)  A hypothetical scalar particle with a non-linear self-interaction, giving it an effective mass that depends on its environment: the presence of other fields.

Translations

 * Afrikaans: ,
 * Akkadian: 𒌨𒈤𒊭𒆠
 * Albanian:
 * Amharic: እስስት
 * Arabic: حِرْبَاء
 * Hijazi Arabic: حرباية
 * Moroccan Arabic: تاتة, بوة
 * Aragonese: camalión
 * Aramaic: זָקִיתָא
 * Armenian: ,
 * Assamese: কোকলোঙা
 * Asturian: camaleón
 * Awadhi: गिरगिट
 * Azerbaijani:
 * Basque: kameleoi
 * Belarusian: хамелео́н
 * Bemba: lufwíáññembâ
 * Bengali: ,
 * Breton: gwerlas
 * Bulgarian:
 * Burmese:
 * Catalan:
 * Central Atlas Tamazight: ⴽⴰⵛⵛⴰ, ⵜⴰⵜⴰ, ⵜⴰⵢⵢⵓ
 * Chamicuro: tsenemo
 * Cherokee: ᎤᎵᏑᏫᏒ ᎠᏓᏁᏟᏴᏍᎩ ᏘᏲᎭᎵ, ᎧᎻᎵᎣᏂ
 * Chinese:
 * Mandarin:, ,
 * Czech: ,
 * Danish:
 * Dutch:
 * Esperanto:
 * Estonian: kameeleon
 * Faroese: kamelón
 * Finnish:
 * French:
 * Galician:
 * Georgian: ქამელეონი
 * German:
 * Greek:
 * Ancient: χαμαιλέων
 * Gujarati: કાચંડો
 * Hebrew:
 * Hindi:
 * Hungarian:
 * Icelandic: kameljón, kamelljón
 * Ido:
 * Indonesian:
 * Inuktitut: ᑲᒦᓕᐊᓂ (kamiiliani)
 * Italian:
 * Japanese:
 * Kannada:, ,
 * Kazakh: хамелеон
 * Kikuyu: kĩĩmbu, mũriyũ
 * Korean:
 * Kyrgyz:
 * Latvian: hameleons
 * Lithuanian: chameleonas
 * Macedonian: камелеон
 * Malagasy:, , tarondro
 * Malay: sesumpah, sumpah-sumpah, kameleon
 * Malayalam:
 * Maltese: kamaleont
 * Manx: kameelyan
 * Maori: kamiriona
 * Mon:
 * Mongolian: хамелеон
 * Nahuatl: tepaxin
 * Navajo: naʼashǫ́ʼii łahgo aníʼdoolníiłii
 * Northern Sotho: leôbu
 * Norwegian:
 * Bokmål:
 * Nynorsk: kameleon
 * Occitan:
 * Odia: ଏଣ୍ଡୁଅ
 * Pali: kakaṇṭaka
 * Mon: ကကဏ္ဍက
 * Persian:, خربا
 * Polish:
 * Portuguese:
 * Punjabi: ਗਿਰਗਿਟ
 * Romanian:
 * Russian:
 * Serbo-Croatian:
 * Cyrillic: камелеон
 * Roman:
 * Shona: rwavhi
 * Slovak:
 * Slovene:
 * Spanish:
 * Sundanese: londok
 * Swahili:, lumbwi,
 * Swazi: lú-nwabú
 * Swedish:
 * Tagalog:
 * Tajik: офтобгардон
 * Tamil:
 * Tashelhit: ⴽⴰⵛⵛⴰ, ⵜⴰⵛⴰⵛⵜⵓⵅⵜ
 * Tatar: хамелеон
 * Telugu: ,
 * Ternate: bakebake
 * Thai: คาเมเลี่ยน
 * Turkish:
 * Ukrainian: хамелео́н
 * Uzbek: ,
 * Vietnamese: tắc kè hoa, tắc kè bông
 * Walloon:
 * Wolof: kàkkatar

 * Afrikaans:
 * Catalan:
 * Dutch:
 * Greek:
 * Italian:
 * Japanese: 気分屋
 * Malayalam:
 * Persian:
 * Portuguese:
 * Romanian:
 * Spanish:
 * Tatar: монафикъ, икейөзле, хамелеон

Adjective

 * 1) Describing something that changes color.
 * The wall was covered with a chameleon paint.

title: chameleon


text:
-holic

Etymology
.

Suffix

 * 1) Denotes addiction to the substance or activity of the stem word.

Usage notes

 * The form is usually used with words already ending with vowels. For stems ending with consonants, the phonetically pleasant forms  or  may be more common.
 * In contemporary modern English "-holic" is a suffix that can be added to a subject to denote an addiction to it. The term is derived from alcoholism, one of the first addictions to be widely identified both medically and socially.
 * There are other more formal terms for such addictions, many uncommonly used. For example, dipsomania, a medico-legal term for alcoholism, is used less than 1% as often as "alcoholism" in a large sample of academic writing over the last 20 years; other examples are given in the following table.

title: -holic


text:
gorilla

Etymology
From, described by Hanno the Navigator, a Carthaginian navigator and possible visitor to the area that later became Sierra Leone; the Greek word is likely from , and ultimately from an African language.

Noun

 * 1) The largest of the apes, belonging to the genus Gorilla, native to the forests of central Africa and known for their trait of knuckle-walking.
 * 2) A big and brutish man or a thug; a goon or ruffian.
 * 3)  A powerful person or organization; a heavyweight or behemoth.
 * 1)  A powerful person or organization; a heavyweight or behemoth.
 * 1)  A powerful person or organization; a heavyweight or behemoth.

Translations

 * Afrikaans: gorilla
 * Arabic: غُورِيلَا
 * Aragonese: gorila
 * Armenian:
 * Asturian:
 * Azerbaijani: qorilla
 * Belarusian: гары́ла
 * Bengali:
 * Bulgarian:
 * Catalan:
 * Cerma: worniŋo
 * Cherokee: ᎠᏓᎵᏍᎩᏱᏍᎩ ᎤᏔᎾ, ᎪᎵᎳ
 * Chinese:
 * Cantonese: 大猩猩
 * Mandarin:
 * Czech:
 * Dutch:
 * Esperanto: gorilo
 * Estonian:
 * Finnish:
 * French:
 * Galician: gorila
 * Georgian: გორილა
 * German:
 * Greek:
 * Hindi:
 * Hungarian:
 * Icelandic:
 * Ido:
 * Ingrian: gorilla
 * Irish: goraille
 * Italian:
 * Japanese:
 * Kazakh: горилла
 * Korean:
 * Navajo: mágítsoh
 * Norman: gorille
 * Norwegian:
 * Palauan: korira
 * Persian:
 * Polish:
 * Portuguese:
 * Romanian:
 * Russian:
 * Rwanda-Rundi: ingagi
 * Serbo-Croatian:
 * Slovak:
 * Spanish:
 * Swahili: ngagi
 * Swedish:
 * Tagalog: gorilya
 * Thai:, ลิงกอริลลา
 * Turkish:
 * Tày: căng
 * Ukrainian: гори́ла
 * Urdu: گورلا
 * Vietnamese: khỉ đột, đại tinh tinh (大猩猩)
 * Wolof:
 * Yiddish: גאָרילע

 * Finnish:
 * Greek:
 * Russian: ,
 * Serbo-Croatian: ,
 * Slovak:
 * Swedish:

Etymology
Borrowed from or.

Noun

 * , primate of the genus Gorilla.

Etymology
Borrowed from.

Noun

 * , primate of the genus Gorilla

Etymology
From, from.

Noun

 * 1) gorilla

Noun

 * 1) gorilla
 * 2)  gorilla, muscleman, henchman

Etymology
Borrowed from.

Noun

 * 1) gorilla

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * a

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * a

Noun

 * 1)  gorilla

title: gorilla


text:
thereof

Etymology
From, , , , from ; equivalent to. Compare.

Adverb

 * 1) Of this, that, or it.
 * 2) From that circumstance or origin; therefrom, thence.
 * 1) From that circumstance or origin; therefrom, thence.
 * 1) From that circumstance or origin; therefrom, thence.

Translations

 * Bulgarian: от това
 * Catalan:
 * Dutch:
 * Finnish: ,
 * French:, de , de ,
 * German:
 * Greek:
 * Hungarian:
 * Italian:
 * Portuguese: do mesmo
 * Russian: из э́того, ,
 * Spanish: de esta, de esto, de ella, de ello

 * Dutch:
 * Hungarian: ,
 * Russian: ,

 * Romanian: ,

title: thereof


text:
Martian

Etymology

From. The word is cognate with 🇨🇬,, , 🇨🇬 (modern 🇨🇬), 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬.

Adjective

 * 1) Of or relating to the planet Mars, or  its imagined inhabitants.
 * 2)  Pertaining to the astrological influence of the planet Mars; aggressive, bellicose.
 * 3)  Pertaining to battle or war; martial, military.
 * 1)  Pertaining to the astrological influence of the planet Mars; aggressive, bellicose.
 * 2)  Pertaining to battle or war; martial, military.
 * 1)  Pertaining to the astrological influence of the planet Mars; aggressive, bellicose.
 * 2)  Pertaining to battle or war; martial, military.
 * 1)  Pertaining to the astrological influence of the planet Mars; aggressive, bellicose.
 * 2)  Pertaining to battle or war; martial, military.
 * 1)  Pertaining to battle or war; martial, military.
 * 1)  Pertaining to battle or war; martial, military.

Translations

 * Arabic: مِرِّيخِيّ
 * Belarusian: марсія́нскі
 * Breton: meurzhek
 * Catalan:
 * Chinese:
 * Mandarin: 火星的
 * Dutch: Mars-, van Mars, Martiaans
 * Esperanto: marsa
 * Finnish:
 * French: ,
 * Galician: marciano, marciana
 * German: marsianisch, Mars-
 * Greek:, ,
 * Hebrew: מאדימי
 * Hungarian:, marsbéli , , Mars-lakó
 * Irish: Marsa, Marsach
 * Italian: ,
 * Japanese:
 * Kazakh: марстағы
 * Korean: 화성의⋯
 * Latin: Mārtiānus, Mārtiāna, Mārtiānum
 * Macedonian: марсовски
 * Middle English: marcyan
 * Occitan: marsian
 * Persian:, بهرامی
 * Polish:
 * Portuguese:
 * Romanian:
 * Russian:
 * Serbo-Croatian:, ма̏рсовскӣ
 * Spanish:
 * Swedish:
 * Ukrainian: марсія́нський, марсіа́нський
 * Welsh: Mawrthaidd

Noun

 * 1)  A person under the astrological influence of the planet Mars.
 * 2)  An inhabitant of the planet Mars.
 * 3)  A male Martian.
 * °N, °W
 * 1)  A male Martian.
 * °N, °W
 * 1)  A male Martian.
 * °N, °W
 * 1)  A male Martian.
 * °N, °W
 * 1)  A male Martian.
 * °N, °W
 * °N, °W

Translations

 * Arabic: مَرِيخِيّ
 * Belarusian: марсія́нін, марсія́нка
 * Breton:
 * Bulgarian: марсианец
 * Catalan: ,
 * Chinese:
 * Mandarin:
 * Czech:
 * Danish: marsbo, marsboer, marsmand
 * Dutch:
 * Esperanto: marsano, marsanino
 * Finnish:
 * French:, , ,
 * Galician: marciano, marciana
 * German:, , , Marsbewohnerin,
 * Greek:, , , Αρειανή
 * Hebrew: מאדימי
 * Hungarian:, Mars-lakó
 * Icelandic:
 * Irish: Marsach
 * Italian: ,
 * Japanese:
 * Kazakh: марстағы
 * Korean:
 * Macedonian: Марсовец, Марсовка
 * Norwegian:
 * Bokmål: marsboer, marsbuer
 * Nynorsk: marsbuar, Mars-buar
 * Persian:
 * Polish: ,
 * Portuguese: ,
 * Romansch: Marsian
 * Russian: ,
 * Serbo-Croatian: Марсовац, Марсовка
 * Spanish: ,
 * Swedish: ,
 * Ukrainian: марсія́нин, марсія́нка, марсіа́нин, марсіа́нка
 * Welsh: Mawrthiad

Proper noun

 * 1)  A hypothetical language spoken on Mars.

Translations

 * Chinese:
 * Mandarin: 火星語
 * French:
 * German: Marsianisch
 * Italian:
 * Polish:
 * Swedish:

title: Martian


text:
Venusian

Noun

 * 1)  An inhabitant of the planet Venus.

Translations

 * Arabic: زُهَرِيّ
 * Bulgarian: венериа́нец
 * Catalan:
 * Chinese:
 * Mandarin:
 * Esperanto: venusano, venusanino
 * Finnish: venuslainen
 * French:, Vénusienne
 * German: Venusianer, Venusianerin, Venusbewohner, Venusbewohnerin
 * Irish: Véineasach
 * Italian:, venusiana
 * Japanese: 金星人
 * Polish: ,
 * Portuguese:
 * Russian:, венериа́нка, венериа́не
 * Swedish: venusian

Adjective

 * 1) Of or relating to the planet Venus.
 * the Venusian landscape
 * 1) Of or relating to inhabitants of Venus.
 * a Venusian invasion

Translations

 * Bulgarian: венериа́нски
 * Catalan:
 * Finnish: venuslainen
 * French: ,
 * German:, Venus-
 * Irish: Véineasach
 * Italian:, venusiana
 * Japanese: 金星の (きんせいの, kinsei no)
 * Polish:
 * Portuguese:
 * Russian:
 * Swedish: venusiansk

 * Finnish: venuslainen
 * French: ,
 * Italian:, venusiana
 * Japanese: 金星人の (きんせいじんの, kinseijin no)
 * Polish:
 * Swedish: venusiansk

Proper noun

 * 1)  A hypothetical language spoken on Venus.

Translations

 * French:
 * German: Venusianisch
 * Italian:
 * Japanese: 金星語
 * Polish:
 * Swedish: venusianska

title: Venusian


text:
venereal

Etymology
From, , from , , from (from ) + ,.

Adjective

 * 1) Of or relating to the genitals or sexual intercourse.
 * 2) Of a disease: sexually transmitted; of or relating to, or adapted to the cure of, a venereal disease.
 * a venereal medicine
 * 1)  Pertaining to the astrological influence of the planet Venus; lascivious, lustful.
 * 2)  Of or relating to copper (formerly called Venus by alchemists).
 * 1) Of a disease: sexually transmitted; of or relating to, or adapted to the cure of, a venereal disease.
 * a venereal medicine
 * 1)  Pertaining to the astrological influence of the planet Venus; lascivious, lustful.
 * 2)  Of or relating to copper (formerly called Venus by alchemists).
 * 1)  Pertaining to the astrological influence of the planet Venus; lascivious, lustful.
 * 2)  Of or relating to copper (formerly called Venus by alchemists).
 * 1)  Pertaining to the astrological influence of the planet Venus; lascivious, lustful.
 * 2)  Of or relating to copper (formerly called Venus by alchemists).
 * 1)  Pertaining to the astrological influence of the planet Venus; lascivious, lustful.
 * 2)  Of or relating to copper (formerly called Venus by alchemists).
 * 1)  Of or relating to copper (formerly called Venus by alchemists).
 * 1)  Of or relating to copper (formerly called Venus by alchemists).
 * 1)  Of or relating to copper (formerly called Venus by alchemists).

Translations

 * Georgian: ვენერიული, ავხორცი
 * Icelandic: kyn-, samræðis-
 * Irish: drúisiúil
 * Latin: venerealis, venereale
 * Scottish Gaelic: drùiseil
 * Serbo-Croatian:, венѐричнӣ
 * Swedish: venerisk

 * Azerbaijani: zöhrəvi
 * Chinese:
 * Mandarin:
 * Dutch:
 * Esperanto:, venera
 * Finnish:
 * French: ,
 * Georgian: ვენერიული
 * German:
 * Icelandic: ,
 * Irish: véinéireach
 * Italian: ,
 * Japanese:
 * Macedonian: венеричен
 * Polish: weneryczne
 * Portuguese:
 * Romanian:
 * Russian:
 * Spanish:
 * Swedish: venerisk

title: venereal


text: arrears

title: arrears


text:
diabolo

Etymology
, from older, fancifully altered after cognate and/or their common source,. .

The Latin noun is from, itself derived from the verb. The notion that this literal sense of “throw across” could be applied to the diabolo itself has led some commentators to assume a direct semantic connection, but there is no evidence suggesting that it is anything other than a coincidence.

Noun

 * 1) A juggling apparatus consisting of a spool which is whirled and tossed on a string attached to handsticks.

Translations

 * Chinese:
 * Mandarin:
 * Czech:
 * Finnish: lentojojo,
 * French:
 * Portuguese:, diábolo
 * Russian: диа́боло

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1)  diabolo juggling apparatus
 * 2)  diabolo activity of playing with diabolo
 * 1)  diabolo activity of playing with diabolo

Noun

 * 1) a sort of sugary non-alcoholic drink
 * 1) a sort of sugary non-alcoholic drink

Etymology
Borrowed from, from.

Noun

 * 1)  devil

Etymology
, derived from.

Etymology
..

Etymology
.

title: diabolo


text:
User talk:HippieBot/all langs sorted

Unknown languages

 * 1) Tupinambá:
 * sil:TPN
 * 1) Scottish:
 * ambiguous: could refer to the Celtic language, Gaelic or the Germanic language, Scots
 * 1) Ladin:
 * sil:LLD
 * a mistake for, Czech
 * 1) O'odham:
 * sil:PAP
 * 1) Maricopa:
 * sil:MRC
 * 1) Mandarin:
 * unsure how handle chinese languages and/or dialects
 * iso 639 2-letter:zh
 * iso 639 3-letter:chi, zho
 * sil:CHN
 * ISO code for "sorbian languages", but both upper and lower have their own codes!
 * 1) Bavarian:
 * sil:BAR
 * 1) Flemish:
 * sil:VLA
 * 1) Sotho:
 * northern sotho: iso:nso, sil:SRT; southern sotho: iso:st, sot, sil:SSO
 * 1) Chinese (Traditional and Simplified):
 * this is a variation on a writing system, not a language!
 * 1) Ruanda:
 * iso:rw, kin; sil:RUA, en:Kinyarwanda
 * 1) Svenska:
 * this is the swedish word for swedish
 * 1) Wunese Soochownese (Rúnüt Suodsy-réro):
 * no idea!
 * 1) Dyirbal:
 * sil:DBL
 * 1) Norwegian (Nynorsk):
 * script needs to handle this better
 * iso:nn, nno; sil:NRN
 * 1) Norwegian (Bokmål):
 * script needs to handle this better
 * iso:nb, nob; sil:NRR
 * 1) Chemehuevi:
 * SIL says a dialect of UTE-SOUTHERN PAIUTE. sil:UTE
 * 1) BNS undefined
 * template says "Binisayâ", apparently an umbrella-term for a bunch of languages and/or dialects from the philippines
 * Ga:
 * iso:gaa, sil:GAC (not to be confused with the ISO code for irish gaelic)
 * 1) Tausug:
 * sil:TSG
 * 1) Piedmonteis:
 * possibly the native spelling of "piemontese", sil:PMS
 * 1) Català:
 * Catalan name for Catalan
 * 1) Kyerepon:
 * another name/spelling for "cherepon"; sil:CPN
 * 1) Italiano:
 * native name for italian
 * 1) Portugese:
 * misspelling of portuguese
 * 1) Ligurian:
 * sil:LIJ
 * !Xũ:
 * also known as "!Kung" etc but better check further. sil:KNW
 * 1) Waray Waray:
 * iso:war, sil:WRY, en:Waray-Waray
 * 1) Surigaonon:
 * sil:SUL
 * 1) Tzotzil:
 * sil:TZU
 * 1) Binomial name:
 * not a language but perhaps can occupy a level-2 heading much like "translingual"
 * 1) Sorbian:
 * ambiguous: could be upper or lower sorbian, each with their own codes too
 * 1) Cantonese:
 * sil:YUH (iso 2- and 3-letter codes are all ambiguous for 13 chinese languages and/or dialects)
 * 1) Chinese character:
 * should be merged with "Chinese characters" / "CJK characters"; not a language but a level-2 heading and translation label
 * 1) Meryam Mir:
 * sil:ULK; en:Meriam, Miriam-Mir, Mer, Mir
 * 1) Yucatec:
 * yucatecan is a branch of mayan which covers 5 languages according to sil
 * 1) Interlingue Occidental:
 * seems to be called just "interlingue" or just "occidental" too, but can't be sure; iso:ie, iso:ile
 * 1) Indonesia:
 * a mistake, probably should be "indonesian"
 * 1) Judeo-Spanish:
 * en:Ladino, iso:lad, sil:SPJ
 * 1) Chamorro:
 * iso:ch, iso:cha, sil:CJD
 * en:Middle English (''script mistakenly has frm=middle english!')
 * 1) Cheyenne:
 * iso:chy, sil:CHY
 * 1) Galego:
 * alternate name/spelling for galician, iso:gl iso:glg sil:GLN
 * 1) Yup'ik:
 * iso:ypk but actually 5 different languages according to SIL
 * this is the iso code for tok pisin
 * Ibo:
 * 1) seems to be used as a language name but ethnologue only lists it as a code for "igbo" or "ibilo"
 * 2) Kikuyu:
 * iso:ki, iso:kik, sil:KIU
 * 1) Verlan:
 * not a language but a french language game as pig latin is for enlgish
 * 1) Fulani:
 * 2) according to sil this is an umbrella term for about 8 separate languages
 * 3) Potawatomi:
 * sil:POT
 * 1) Mayan:
 * according to SIL this is an umbrella term for almost 70 languages!
 * 1) Alabama:
 * sil:AKZ
 * 1) Deutsch:
 * this is the german word for german
 * 1) Português:
 * this is the portuguese word for portuguese
 * 1) Gaelic:
 * this term is ambiguous, usually means scottish or irish gaelic but possibly even manx etc
 * 1) Malagasy:
 * iso:mg iso:mlg sil:MEX
 * 1) Paakantyi:
 * seems to be an australian aboriginal language
 * 1) Portuguese(Brazil):
 * should be merged with plain old "portuguese", but there's not even a space between the words!
 * 1) Swazi:
 * iso:ss iso:ssw sil:SWZ en:swati en:isiswazi en:siswati
 * 1) Hawai'ian:
 * should be merged with "Hawaiian"
 * 1) Swazi:
 * iso:ss iso:ssw sil:SWZ en:swati en:isiswazi en:siswati
 * 1) Hawai'ian:
 * should be merged with "Hawaiian"

title: User talk:HippieBot/all langs sorted