text:
Wiktionary:Grease pit/Customization templates to provide both UK and US spellings

Customization templates to provide both UK and US spellings
Here's an idea I've had for a while, and I think it may have come up on Wikipedia once upon a time.

We could have a template which takes both the UK and US spellings of a word and gives each a CSS class. In the gobal (not just monobook) CSS file we would make probably the US spelling the default just for numbers. In the how to customize page we show how to make UK the default. We hope and pray for a way to have a real prefs setting for this so that regular people don't have to get dirty and touch their CSS file themselves.

The template would never be ok to use in sections like headword, alternative spellings, etc - it only belongs in places such as the definition and usage notes where the spelling of a word not under the scope of the article is not important.

Adding a 3rd variant will not be easy since then a decision must be made about which to use when the preferred one is absent. Any ideas?

Doing the same for other languages, ie Portuguese for Brazil and Portual would be easy.

Both templates and CSS class names must clearly indicate their function - 3-letter names for either is almost always a bad idea.

I'm going to implement a first version to encourage discussion... — Hippietrail 20:37, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

 * I think \Mike knew of a way to honor the &lang= url parameter. en-us vs. en-uk could conceivably just come from user preferences.  Having a bureaucrat add those two options to en.wiktionary's LocalSettings.php file would then tell the MediaWiki software to look for (to use Main Page as an example) either Main Page/en-us or Main Page/en-uk and default to Main Page if the preferred page did not exist.  That was my understanding of how that setup ("the MediaWiki way") would work, anyhow.  Could someone confirm or deny this theory for me please?  --Connel MacKenzie T C 21:21, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Another thoughts is whether the same templates should be used for regional synonyms as well as regional spelling such as UK shop and US store. Or an similar template could be made with  in place of   — Hippietrail 22:48, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

1st draft
The template name indicates it's for spelling variants, that it's for the English language, and that it allows a 2-way choice between UK spelling first, and US spelling second.

There are 3 CSS classes. A wrapper class  takes the same name as the template and allows the contained classes to be manipulated only in certain contexts if that's what the user wants. The two options have class names  and. Their names indicate that they belong to the surrounding class, that they deal with English, and that deal with a specific national variety.

To use: I want the in the.

results in:

I want the in the.

US spelling is the default. To choose UK spelling, put this in your CSS file:

.spelling-var-en-uk-us .var-en-uk { display: inline !important } .spelling-var-en-uk-us .var-en-us { display: none !important }

— Hippietrail 20:53, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I've made the one I just mentioned for regional synonyms such as spanner/wrench, shop/store, tap/faucet etc now too:

To use: I bought a from a  so I could work on my.

results in:

I bought a from a  so I could work on my.

The US word is the default. To choose the UK word, put this in your CSS file:

.regional-syn-en-uk-us .syn-en-uk { display: inline !important } .regional-syn-en-uk-us .syn-en-us { display: none !important }

NOT ACCEPTABLE !!!
So now you seriously expect us to live with US spellings for everything ! Unless we happen to be a tech head who understands (or even has the time and inclination for) CSS ! I don't think so. This is a TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE approach. . Expect to be ambushed constantly if this is implemented in this way. It is just not acceptable! (Is my position clear enough ?)--Richardb 11:43, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Hey I don't like US spelling either but I'd get the same reaction if I made UK spellings the default. Teh "tech head" problem is solvable if we can get the devs to give us a setting on the preferences page. Or is a user setting via the standard GUI still too technical? I would like to hear your proposal for a non-technical solution that satisfies both groups. Your emotion is clear enough, your understanding is not clear enough. — Hippietrail 20:35, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I am from the UK. If someone here writes color or faucet, I want to see it! I don't want it ‘translated’ into British for me. We have to acknowledge and deal with all spellings, not find a way to remove one or the other depending on where we're from. Widsith 13:24, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

 * I saw this as a way to "acknowledge and deal with all spellings". It might be possible to expand on the idea with "always show me the first option". I know how to do this quite easily. Also with a "show both options" option that would display "color / colour" and "faucet / tap". I am curious to know why you prefer to see an arbitrary spelling or word even on unrelated articles though. Also this would not be automatic at all - it requires a page to be edited - there is no proposal to make them global. — Hippietrail 20:35, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

 * I tend to agree with Widsith here. I don't think it's a problem to anyone whether color or colour is used in a definition line or explanatory note (or, for instance in . The compromise there is that it is Template:colour but Category:Colors. I'm sure such compromises will be sufficient for reasonable folks. Aren't the shared contents (whichever they are, I tend to agree with Connel that it is only the translations) of color & colour and friends the real problem? —Vildricianus 14:05, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Perhaps you haven't seen some of the emotional yelling in various fora of Wiktionary? There are some very vocal people who are not happy at all. — Hippietrail 20:35, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

 * HALLELUJAH! The Brits finally see that it is a POV issue!  Took what, three years?  I'm going to go do a little happy dance now.  Yes, both en-GenAm and en-Brit (and en-Can, en-Australia, en-India, etc.) all need to be broken out and distinguished!  The interplay of which are considered valid where, need to be spelled out somehow on individual entries!  Even though it is only two Brits so far, I am very encouraged to finally see progress!  --Connel MacKenzie T C 18:07, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Do you call me a Brit? Even though I drink a lot of tea, that doesn't make me a Brit! :-) I use British spelling yes, but surely you know that I'm the main proponent of de-POVing US vs. UK issues! —Vildricianus 18:40, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I was under the assumption that "Brit" is the friendly way to say "one of British origin or nationality", and no, I was referring to Richardb and Widsith admitting that they see the light. --Connel MacKenzie T C 20:53, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Mmm, I thought Rich was an Aussie. Must have skipped the UK bit. —Vildricianus 20:58, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Or more simply, my mistake, regarding Richard's origin. --Connel MacKenzie T C 22:10, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Please Connel, this isn't about Brits vs Yanks. In response to Hippietrail – yes, there has been yelling, but I think it's better to create the site with reasonable folk in mind rather than creating policies to appease the shouters.  The reason I favour ‘arbitrary’ spellings is that I like to see what people have actually written.  There may be little difference between color and colour, but tap and faucet could have different connotational shades of meaning, as may spanner/wrench.  They certainly do to my ears.  They are only tiny differences but they are important – different words have different sounds, impacts etc....I know I'm talking about tiny differences but they're an important part of language and if any site should be concerned about them it's this one.  The nice thing about the internationalism of the Internet is that we all gain exposure to, and familiarity with, different kinds of English, and the proposed policy would neuter that diversity.  Widsith 20:54, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

 * A few responses:
 * "I think it's better to create the site with reasonable folk in mind rather than creating policies to appease the shouters"
 * I think we can please both the reasonable people and the shouters. I for one want the shouters appeased because they sometimes get me angry and I do not like losing sleep over Wiktionary.
 * "I like to see what people have actually written". This seems to be a non-dictionary taste. You might be interested in the writers but the majority of people are interested in the definitions. It would seem quite a shame to rob the larger group of an improvement due to the tastes of a much smaller groups.
 * "tap and faucet have different connotational shades of meaning". When you find somebody blurs these shades in an article then you edit it and leave only the specific word. The proposed solution is not intended for such cases and that would need to be stressed in the documentation. — Hippietrail 22:28, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

 * I'm glad to hear that the US vs. UK template proposal is not about "Brits vs Yanks." Um, what?  If the British contingent hadn't been so overwhelmingly intent on thwacking GenAm entries, there would be no color/colour debate; they would simply co-exist, as they should.  --Connel MacKenzie T C 22:10, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Please Connel (and others), I hope it's only by accident that this sounds like the kind of language sometimes labelled here as "attacking" or "fighting" or whatever. It certainly doesn't seem to helping the discussion along. Can we stick to technical stuff. — Hippietrail 22:28, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Did it sound like I was fanning the flames? If so, then I am sorry.  That was not my intent.  --Connel MacKenzie T C 01:26, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

 * (Side comment from the peanut gallery: it would have been better, then, if you had left out the words "If the British contingent hadn't been so overwhelmingly intent on thwacking GenAm entries". –Scs 03:07, 31 May 2006 (UTC))

 * There is no ‘British contingent’, there are only individual contributors. Widsith 07:26, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Apparently, you missed the last several flame wars. The fact that the very real "British contingent" exists is masked by their relative silence recently.  I assure you, I have good reason to assume the relative quiet is temporary.  --Connel MacKenzie T C 07:03, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

 * This individual has personal tastes on the matter similar to Widsith -- If I want important information from a book, and I can understand the language of the original, I prefer to read that rather than a translation. Indeed, perhaps stupidly, I've consulted the Hebrew version of the Bible on occasion, even though I only know Hebrew from a dictionary.
 * I've no objection in principle to WT providing translations to the en used in US, Can, Jam, UK, SAfrica, many other Af countries, India, Aus, and any of the other places I've left out, provided an untranslated version remains available for those who care about accuracy more than politics. I know the difference between Jamaican en or Indian en and Brit en is in many ways much larger than US - UK. It's merely that there are numerically more argumentative/bigotted users in US & UK (and I suspect a higher proportion too). Why not more users from the one billion plus in India many (over 100M and growing fast) of whom speak en -- because we don't serve their needs? Frankly, I would have more patience if it was the Js & Is who were complaining, but so long as what we do is generalisable to them, I think it will be a good thing. (If it was purely UK/US, I would say only do it if the time taken is less than the aggro saved, but we ought to address India, etc before too long, so UK/US could be a good test bed.)
 * I would suggest that we start with spelling differences rather than tap/faucets, that/which, wrench/spanners, machine/plant rooms, &c/etc ;-) as I think it will give more bangs per buck (well there's some things, as also the apocryphal headline Nut bolts, screws washer that just can't be said as well in UK en!). I suppose I mean that I foresee loads of edit wars as I revert items which people have changed inappropriately (possibly in bulk by bots). None come immediately to mind, but to take examples from gender issues, there are such beauties as personholes, Personchester, singing hyrs and karels, Awomen.
 * At least we already give pronunciations, so we don't have to worry about visitors to US heading for Ark-cans-as or San Joe's, or to Europe heading for K-nares-bor-oogh (in Yorkshire) or the Champ's Ailie-says (in differently-oriented Paris) [honestly, those were from a friend's father and another friend's mother, so they must be true]. I do worry about equally ignorant people translating between US & UK, but hey, it's a wiki, and it's survived well so far.

--Enginear 01:48, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Regarding your last paragraph, Wow! I was shocked by the three-syllable Wiktionary, but those examples are incredible.  If the majority of British English speakers really mangle pronunciations that badly (worse than the mostly-fictional/ joking/ stereotypical Texas accent) then perhaps it is a good thing we have seen so few en-uk-*.ogg files!  :-)     Joking aside, it would be good to have more uk audio files.  --Connel MacKenzie T C 07:03, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

 * I think the pronunciations of Knaresborough and Champs Élysées are urban myths, and though they were attributed to Americans (by a Yorkshireman and a Parisienne) it could just as well be Brits. Indeed, I have heard the CÉ from an English teenager who knew no French. The Arkansas, San Jose, and indeed the Sea Ooks native Americans and co-lor/col-lor, I made up about 3 years ago for use the next time an American told me that their spelling was better because it was phonetic. :-)  But no one ever has.  Having said that, I can imagine quite a lot of Brits using them -- after all, the change from Kansas to Arkansas is almost as unfair as the Scottish trick used against primary school children: "Pronounce MacKenzie, Macauley, mackintosh,... macadam, machine". It doesn't help that there are many Londoners, including professionals, who cannot understand broad Scotish Highlands/Islands, Glasgow, Black Country or Geordie accents -- I don't know whether there is such a range of US accents.  Maybe, one day, we'll give regional accents too in pronunciation, but as a Londoner who can (usually) understand them, it's not my bag!

 * I will learn one day how to do .ogg files but it's not a priority for me. --Enginear 23:09, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[Talk re display of IPA characters broken out to a new thread below (Grease pit) for convienience.]

 * I have mislaid a long ?80 line bit of doggerel containing a few hundred non-homophonic homonyms, said to have been issued by a British embassy for advanced TEFL, but did find the attached, which may amuse you []. --Enginear 12:14, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
 * For anyone that still reads this, I did find the aforementioned doggerel English is tough stuff at some point, but checking just now, the site is unavailable. But now knowing the name and Googling it, I see the rhyme is now at MIT, amongst other places  and on YouTube, someone has made a reasonable attempt at reading it. --Eng in ear 13:38, 14 April 2023 (UTC)


text:
Wiktionary:Grease pit/2-level dictionary

History
It seems that all along there have been 2 camps of people working on Wiktionary. a) Those who wanted to build a free open online dictionary of all words in all languages that works just like a traditional dictionary such as those produced by Oxford, Websters, or The RAE; and b) Those who wanted to build a free open online dictionary of all words in all languages that is not constrained by tradition in any way shape or form and wants to broaden the scope to include inflections, misspellings, word combinations that might be too transparent for traditional dictionaries, video game characters, etc.

I've been thinking of such a dictionary for years before somebody came along and created Wiktionary. All along I thought the world needed a free OED or Webster's that they could add to and improve. While I expected that contributors to such a free project would be amateurs untrained in lexicography or linguistics, I also thought they would fall mostly into camp a) with another groups who wanted to promote their own invented words (protologisms) who we would need to dissuade. Somehow though I never invisaged camp b).

It's only in the last couple of days after fighting with various degrees of energy since the time I discovered Wiktionary that the majority of contributors, at least up till now are actually in camp b). How foolish I was!

So now I will no longer fight against entries that I wouldn't accept in a traditional dictionary, indeed I will mostly stay out of debated on RFD. But what I will do is mention the benefits of becoming a 2-level dictionary that works for both camps since I feel there is a very large camp a) out there who have never looked at Wiktionary but will in the course of time.

 * I think I've been pretty vocal about my opinions for inclusion... I hope not too much so, though the CFI talk page could almost be construed as yelling. I'm interested in knowing which camp you think I fall under, or which one I'm closer to anyways. Davilla 14:15, 3 June 2006 (UTC) (re-signed)

What the Grease pit can do
So the job for me and anybody who understands the point I'm trying to make, is to come up with the technical ways of bringing about a 2-level dictionary so that tradition users can either see just what would be in a traditional dictionary or at least be able to tell visually which entries and which senses would be in a traditional dictionary and which are part of the extended scope of Wiktionary.

Here are some of my ideas:

 * Come up with a set of templates, or something else, which can be inserted into an article at the language entry level, to mark the whole entry as an extended entry.
 * As above but to mark individual senses.
 * As above to mark entries or senses by type: encyclopedic, misspelling, transparent combination, fictional character, etc.
 * The default behaviour of these should be to do nothing at all. The typical user will see just what they always saw. But there will be a CSS class which can be accessed by some new skin or by people who choose to customize. They can be used to show types of entries by colour, or to hid types of entries (or senses)
 * More difficult problems include how to handle links to these in Related terms or the disambiguation see also section at the top of pages, or how to improve search results to indicate which results would be for extended entries. These could be solved with more advanced methods such as toolserver with its own database of which articles are marked in which way - in some ways similar to Connel's Random article by language work.

Rough poll
It might help to get an idea of how people feel about these issues:
 * a) I think it's all stupid and want nothing to do with it
 * b) I've always been in camp b and didn't know there was a camp a
 * c) I've always been in camp a and never understood camp b
 * d) I'm in camp a personally but always understood that most Wiktionarians were in camp b
 * e) I'm firmly in one camp but can see that Wiktionary would be much better if it worked for both camps
 * f) I'm firmly in camp b and don't want Wiktionary to change but I'm still interested in what you guys think
 * g) all kinds of other positions that haven't come to mind right now

Ok. So let's hear peoples' thoughts... — Hippietrail 22:40, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Vild's thoughts
I'm for option h): I oppose polarization and antagonism, and would like to single out any attempt at moving towards such status. Besides, none of your poll's points apply to me. I'm not certain everyone here - apart from the most idealist among you - feels they are 100% in one camp. At least, I'm not in any, and I'll always refuse to think in such terms.

I do understand your position, Hippietrail, and of course you have way more experience here, but one thing I'd gladly avoid is creating "camps" of ideologically different contributors. Such differences, of course they exist, but do we really need to encourage and endorse them? Why can't we have a unified purpose, with one set of criteria and one set of guidelines? Sure both parties will have to give in some of their ideas, and both will have to conform. That's no big deal, is it? It has worked for a couple of years now without too many problems, and even though it's becoming obvious that we'll need some adjustments to our systems somewhere in the near future, there's no reason to overhaul the most basic and fundamental reasoning behind Wiktionary.

I don't think your proposals will solve anything. I could be wrong, but I expect them to divide the community to a great extent. Fine, there may be two camps. Let's make one dictionary for both. Don't get me wrong, if it seems that such a solution is beneficial, then by all means good luck with it. But I'm highly sceptical. —Vildricianus 23:45, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

 * I was under the impression that Hippietrail's proposal is to quell the opposition between the two camps. There may not be a clear dividing line between the two camps, but at the very least we can say that some contributors are more inclusive than others. By allowing purists to mark terms "not fit for inclusion" as such, they can have their voice and can filter the resulting Wiktionary without being bothered by seeing anything "brillig" to "undigital". Others, likewise, can enter terms that they feel are vital to define here without getting their good faith efforts trampled over. I don't see how the proposal is divisive. Rod (A. Smith) 00:06, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

 * I agree with Vild. In essence, this is a political problem much not a technical one...technical remedies sometimes help, but not without TREMENDOUS amounts of PR and cheerleading.  --Connel MacKenzie T C 14:31, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes please
I am very strongly in support of this proposal. I want wiktionary to provide me with both kinds of dictionary. For example "owl" means "message" in the Harry Potter books. This is way too much information if I wasn't looking for it, and when I saw it I thought "Yuck, get this fancruft out of my face". However, if I was trying to read a HP book in a foreign language, this kind of thing would be incredibly useful to me. One reason I almost always vote with camp b is precisely because it is possible to create two-level dictionary which caters to almost any kind of need, so no-one has to be let down. Another point it that it should be very easy to get concensus on most terms and thus not require any actual voting, which is divisive and seems to have semi-random results. Kappa 01:20, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Two-level too arbitrary, I think
My goal (though I tend to be somewhat blue-sky on this sort of thing) would be to try to describe an entire continuum of word/term notability, from absolutely-accepted to jargon to fancruft, with all sorts of gradiations in between.

And, in fact, there's not a single axis here; but several:

 * technicality : from "every English speaker knows" to "particular to a field" to "very specific jargon or techspeak known only within a field"

 * formality : of usage: stilted, formal, normal, informal, slang, vulgar slang, unacceptable

 * regionality : how widely is the term known or used: worldwide, national, regional

 * notability : what group considers this term important: everyone, those in some field or large community, those in some small or very specialized community

 * minutae : whether every derived and inflected term exhaustively, explicitly listed (or only the "interesting" ones)

Obviously, we capure many of these characteristics already, in somewhat ad-hoc ways, generally with tags such as or  or  (which of course is just what real dictionaries tend to do, too). Me, I'd rather be more systematic about this sort of thing, but the ad-hoc tags do work pretty well. My holy grail (which may be exactly what Hippietrail was getting at) would be, not a two-tier system, but one in which rather than deleting terms which failed to meet some arbitrary, binary threshold of "notability", we could instead tag and then filter things so that the horrendously obscure or "non-notable" terms are effectively invisible to those who don't care about them.

–Scs 13:50, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Minor gripe: We don't speak of notability here, except to point out to Wikipedians that this is not Wikipedia...attestation is our rule here, not notability. (More relevant comments later, when I've digested this more properly - looks good, though.)  --Connel MacKenzie T C 14:23, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
 * The CFI is an arbitrary limitation, arbitrarily set by an arbitrary group of people. It is far from immutable. It is precisely to overcome these arbitrary limitations that we are discussing these ideas.--Richardb 10:47, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

 * A few terms that I've added to Wiktionary are non-standard interpretations of English words, labeled as such. So when I first read this, tagging was an immediately obvious way that we already make some of these distinctions. Thank you for spelling out the idea more fully. -Davilla 59.112.52.124 17:20, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Here's another big distinction I forgot:
 * reality : real-world terms versus terms from fiction (e.g., the recent debate over veritaserum)
 * Yet another one is
 * status : archaic / obsolete / current / neologism / protologism
 * –Scs 14:02, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

 * See also Beer_parlour. —scs 00:29, 10 September 2006 (UTC) (That's as of 9/2006; eventually it'll be archived and that link will stop working.)

How is progress on the next version of Wiktionary software going?
Some of these ideas would be so much easier to implement if we have a proper database version of Wiktionary. It might be worrth waiting for that next version if it's really in prospect.--Richardb 10:47, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
 * See reply below. —Vildricianus 14:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Connelthoughts
I like all that I've read here, so far. I confess that when I found Wiktionary, I assumed it was a "camp A" type dictionary. After a short time, I learned it was a "camp B" dictionary, and got with the program. (I didn't think of it in those terms, then, of course.)

I do strongly agree with Eclecticology's disproval of the vulgar nonsense that often creeps in. The more ridiculous stuff we allow, the less likely it is that Wiktionary will ever be considered a "respectable" resource. To me, the problem has always been one of distinguishing between "valid camp B stuff" and vandalism/peruile nonsense.

OTOH, we already have branched out far away from traditional dictionaries. To a newcomer, there may be little distinction. That is why I find myself falling into "camp A" on occasion, even though I know that "camp B" is the goal that Wiktionary is heading towards.

Reading Scs's thoughts, I really like the multi-level approach. But that is clearly me thinking as a bit-head, and not as a dictionary user.

I guess the biggest problem I have, is that "All Words In All Languages" is inherently incompatible with "camp A". Due to the unrecognized camp A/camp B conflict that has gone one for the past couple years, we don't do "camp B" properly either.

I think that no matter where this conversation goes, Wiktionary should address the "All Words In All Languages" paradox. That is, if we were to ever get to that point, we would be so far from what people expect when finding a dictionary, the effect might be the same as if we included all Urbandictionary vulgarities. (And recently, even Urbandictionary seems to have expunged much of last year's nonsense.)

I don't know what the "right" answer is. Throwing up my hands and saying "time will tell" may be true, but not very helpful. I'd like to see how Scs' ideas pan out, as I think they hold the most promise.

I recognize the danger that Vild pointed out regarding the use of "camp foo" vs. "camp bar" labels, but I hope it is clear that no one falls 100% into one abstract concept nor the other. It may be worthwhile to drop the labels.

--Connel MacKenzie T C 15:48, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Richardb view
I must admit that as a non-linguist I am somewhat despairing of Wiktionary progressing anywhere positive for the "general public" user. It has a huge volume of words, but does not cover the basic words well (Many of the most basic words are barely improved from the Webster importation), becuase everyone follows their special interest, which is not often around the most basic words. Nor does it handle the capture of new words/meanings well (variously deleting them, consigning them to a list of Protologisms etc). But it does have a huge number of totally obscure words in obscure languages (Old English). WikiSaurus is not exactly a roaring success yet, though it would seem some form of Word-Relationships capture is needed. --Richardb 11:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I guess one reason for the "neglect" of the basic stuff is because it's more difficult to describe accurately? I don't think it's a big problem, though, it'll get fixed over time. Remember there's only a handful of contributors here. —Vildricianus 13:51, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

So, somehow, we need to capture everything we can (be totally inclusionist), but categorise what we capture (technicality, regional etc), so that users can tailor their view to limit the content to what they want to see normally. I don't think we can do that realistically with the current software. How close is the next version, with full database capabilities, where we can apply all these different types of dimensions to words, spellings, meanings, relationships etc ? --Richardb 11:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
 * What is that, "inclusionist"? Allowing things like big red bus? Or all the dubious content and spam we get daily? I believe that we can work this out, provided we put a lot of effort in it, and that a unified CFI is possible. —Vildricianus 13:51, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

In the absence of new, purpose built software, I think we will be defeated. If the new software is not really going to happen, perhaps we need to form some sort of relationship with another online dictionary which can better support our efforts. My view is that the software used by www.thefreedictionary.com would be a better starting point for us. Perhaps we could form a relationship with them (as Wikipedia seems to have done), so that we get free use of their software, and they get free use of our content. Are there other candidates we should consider ? --Richardb 11:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
 * The new software (you might want to take a look at (http://wiktionaryz.org) is under development, yes, but I don't think it'll soon replace en.wiktionary completely. It might take over our non-English content, yes, but I don't recommend counting on it for a big solution for our internal problems. Not yet, that is. I'm not sure whether we should count on yet another new software proposal, though. —Vildricianus 13:51, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I also feel we are going to end up needing some sort of voting software (which I think Urban Dictionary has) to vote on the applicability of the various tags we put onto words. eg: Is "gay = happy" a current usage or not. But even this would be complicated - A vote of 10-20 year olds would probably be 99% saying it's dated. A vote of over 65's would be probably be 75% or more still saying it's current. --Richardb 11:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Then just make sure everyone's complete information is entered, including age, and the system will churn out the perfect tag, in this case somewhere between "dying out" and "outdated". Like "fogly" or something. :-P Davilla 13:11, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Voting? No thanks! Honestly, I can't imagine anything worse than that. You want to let people decide how language is used? That's not very far from prescriptivism, right? Unless I'm mistaking, that's not what Wiktionary is about. It would be too easy for one group to dominate the other. Whether gay means happy is not up for decision or voting; it has to be examined "in the field" and proven. —Vildricianus 13:51, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Sorry if I missed your joke, but to me, allowing "voting" sounds very much like descriptivism, not prescriptivism!
 * Seriously, one kind of "voting" I've thought about would be not for definition accuracy, but rather, simply for notability/usefulness/reality/existence of an entry. It would be an implicit kind of voting, based just on... hit counts.  Pages that never get viewed in N months might not be words and so might be candidates for automatic deletion or relegation to some less-visible category of "really obscure" words.
 * (With that said, I certainly concede that there would be significant difficulties. It would be easy for suupporters of favorite nonce words to keep their word supported through false clicks.  There might be genuine words which are so obscure that they never happened to get a visit in N months.  But it's interesting to think about all the same.)
 * –scs 21:43, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Pardon me if this sounds as POV pushing from my part, but I don't have the slightest idea of how this would work. Neither by means of voting nor by counting page views. The proposed system would be highly susceptible of real POV pushing and, contrary to how you view it, would be prescriptivism incarnate. I wasn't joking this time - I try to limit that to my signature. Heck, voting is such a controversial issue for policies and proposals, so let's please not consider this as a means to attest a word's usage. Contrary to what often is displayed at WT:RFV, we do have our methods and means of doing so properly, it's just that we still need to shape it and fix it according to what suits best for Wiktionary. I guess we will forever be refining it, and it'll never be completely error-free, but at least it'll be a working system. —Vildricianus 21:58, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

But, in the end, maybe Wiktionary will never really work perfectly. Wikipedia works because on each topic the "experts" eventually take over and win the debates. But in Wiktionary we are all "experts" on current usage of words, and are not going to easily agree on common definitions, synonyms, even pronunciations. We can't even agree on spelling half the time! Maybe a dictionary still does need an editor/publiosher, to be the final arbiter, if it is going to have consistency. --Richardb 11:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
 * What's perfect? Do we need it to work perfectly? Do you think Wikipedia works perfectly? Far from! I dare say we're on tracks - we still need to work out a huge number of bugs and hitches but the concept is working, albeit slowly. —Vildricianus 13:51, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

 * I view WZ as a branch, not a continuation. The goal seems to be quite different.  The emphasis is in translations, not so strong on description in a given language.  Wiktionary has instead the ability to describe terms in the reader's language of choice, with language-specific subtleties emphasized.  I hope I am ultimately wrong about WiktionaryZ, but it will take a lot more software development to get there.  The notion that a word can be described in localized terms only makes the ultimate goal of WZ laudable.  But for 10,000+ languages, it may be a little too "pie-in-the-sky."

 * Yes. And very long-term. Did you know, the biggest dictionary in the world is the "Dictionary of the Dutch language" (way bigger than OED), and it took 147 years to complete. For one language. —Vildricianus 20:28, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Partnerships with entities are great, but I think the notion of using software from http://www.thefreedictionary.com/ is silly. They have amalgamation software, not data-entry/data-conversion software.

 * My long term goal for Wiktionary has been to consolodate the level three headings. If we can come up with a finite set of "valid" third level headings, the ability to convert our plain-text representation to a data model are greatly improved.  (Level two headings are currently language headins, barring the occasional newbie mistake.)  If we ever *do* come up with a finite set, we can then use Javascript to enforce "better" data entry (to combat the "garbage-in; garbage-out" syndrome.)  So far, the thorniest issues I've seen are with things like "Gismu" (in the Lojban language,) "Romaji" (Japanese) and "Letter"/"Character"/"Symbol" (Interlingual.)

 * Add to the confusion the assinine practice of using different levels depending on the number etymology descriptions, and it gets much messier. (My philosophical POV regarding etymology sections is that they should have the same style "disambiguation" as translation sections.  They should also be relegated to secondary headings, in my opinion.  Currently, Wiktionary gives them superior status, even when "unknown.")

 * Will language Wiktioanry content ever be used in WZ? I don't know.  I do hope so, but then, I see the current formatting problems as being insurmountable for automated import issues there.

 * Similarly, I don't think the emphasis on POS is beneficial at all. In my philosophical POV, a ===Definitions=== section is all that is needed, with individual meanings described by tags like, , , , , etc.

 * Taking that one step farther, it would be nice to have software do the "dismabiguation" of all the various other third level headings. Maybe a mechanism similar to the "references" keyword used in Wikipedia.  The ultimate goal would be to have just the definitions appear, with links to all other information being in collapsed/hidden "collapsible" sections, linked to each definition (not to a spelling.)  E.g. "(etymology +)", that when clicked would display that meaning's etymology.  Or "(translations +)" which when clicked would expand the translation for that meaning.
 * Again, I don't that is the direct that WZ is headed in. Again, I hope I am wrong, thinking so.

 * I think our best bet for developing the next generation of Wiktionary software is something that will be done, right here; not on WZ, not using freedictionary, nor anything else.

 * I think Richardb's goal of focusing on "Basic" words and drastically improving them is laudable, but is not something that I am particularly good at, myself. On one hand, all entries need improvement.  On the other, the most commonly viewed entries should be "improved" first.  It is very reasonable to assign priority to which entries to target, for that improvement.

 * --Connel MacKenzie T C 20:09, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Widsith thoughts
The only way for a dictionary to be respected and respectable is to cite usage. That is the levelling criterion which does away with debate over what is and isn't proper or vulgar or whatever. If a word can be seen to be used we should include it and define it – and otherwise we shouldn't. Hippietrail, you want to retire from RFD discussions, but I wish you wouldn't.  I think by and large the community works well here. Debate is important and if decisions have not gone the way you would have liked, I don't think it's a good response to walk away and suggest splitting the dictionary in two. Although we argue over details, most people accept the CFI and we should use that as common ground for moving forward, not start talking about dividing content. Personally, I have my own ideas about what things should not be part of a dictionary (video game characters among them), and I will continue to argue that way in RFV discussions, and I invite those of you who disagree to argue back. I have conceded many points in the past and had my opinion changed on several matters, and I hope I've changed other people's minds about things too. We have to work towards consensus, and not abandon it in favour of division. Widsith 13:48, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Well said. I think, though, that the major points of disagreement for Hippietrail are the vintage cars and such. It's not easy to determine to what extend we can/can't/should/shouldn't include such terms, but difficult is not impossible. —Vildricianus 13:56, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Widsith, I think you misunderstand me. I don't at all want to "divide" Wiktionary in two. What I want is to make everybody happy and still keep it in one place. If I fail in this then the only solution will inevitably to really "divide" Wiktionary by forking the database to some other site and removing all but the "conservative" entries and stating policies to match. That would be a bad bad thing. My proposal is about "tagging" content, not about division. Division is what I don't want. But sooner or later, especially when we have decent browsing features, the number of people unsatisfied with all the "cruft" in the index when they're just looking for plain old everyday words, will get to the point where somebody will say "We need another free dictionary without all this stuff in it". That would be division. It has happened to Wikipedia in the past and it can happen here too. Also, I'm sick of arguing. — Hippietrail 22:45, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Well said, too. However, you're going to have to argue much more if you want this made clear to the broader public outside of the Grease pit. This is not "arguing", by the way, it's discussion and feedback, which is what you wanted. Your idea is quite revolutionary and may have many consequences and implications. People are conservative and afraid of drastic changes. That rule applies to Wiktionary as well. In my initial comments I was sceptical - I still am, but also see the benefits of your proposal and the possible solutions it may offer. I'm willing to experiment with it to prove its values, but will keep in mind what I've said above. —Vildricianus 10:20, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Couple comments:
 * I'm not suggesting throwing open the floodgates to any and all contributions, and dismantling RFD, but as a thought experiment: how big a problem is it if there's "cruft in the index"? Under what circumstances would people be dissatisfied with this?  Simplistically, it seems to me that an entry for some hopelessly obscure term is either useful to a user who does happen to search for it (and to whom it is therefore, almost by definition, useful), or is effectively invisible to everyone else.  By "decent browsing features" do you mean ways of scrolling through alphabetical lists of all our entries?  That seems unworkable even if we don't have cruft!  (But it is true that people might be bothered by cruft if it happened to be spelled the same as the real word they were looking for, or nearby and shown to them by some automatic "did you mean?" function.)
 * At any rate, this seems very much like a Beer Parlour topic, not one to have off in this nuts'n'bolts gearhead room, where presumably we'd talk about how to implement new mechanisms after the policies which required the new mechanisms had been decided. Trying to invent the mechanisms first, or having the mechanisms drive the policy, is arguably wrong (though of course it happens all the time, because having the tail of implementation wag the dog of policy is sometimes the best one can do).
 * Anyway, all armchair philosophizing aside, I'm in complete agreement with you, HT, that some solid tagging mechanisms will be vital so that users can get useful views into some subset of an otherwise overwhelming corpus. –scs 22:30, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Mmm, I followed this reasoning a couple of days - when I was only starting out here. Many reasons, here are a few:
 * Respectability - what sort of dictionary would we be? We're trying to become a reliable source.
 * Random paging - would lose its function; cruft would quickly outnumber the good stuff.
 * Space - wiki is not paper, but wiki is not just a storage for random strings of words either, which it would become if we started to allow all this nonsense.
 * Honour! - I wouldn't feel comfortable among the cruft, but that's probably more personal. Still, I guess the majority of regulars thinks this way.
 * And many more reasons, probably Wikimedia policy as well. Your idea is really a non-starter, but I guess it has to be spelled out from time to time.
 * Besides, it's very much Grease pit talk - working out a concept, predominantly technically. Presenting it on the BP is for a later stage, I guess. Also, from what I've learned here, policy comes after the solutions and decisions have been made. First comes the technical bit, a thought or two, then someone is bold; see for instance the creation of the Grease pit. If it appears to work, it will become common practice, and in a later stage, someone writes it down as policy. I know things are done completely different at Wikipedia. —Vildricianus 22:59, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Widsith and would also welcome Hippietrails input which I feel is very valuable. I am developing a proposal at present not fit for public consumption yet which can be seen in my playpen (if anyone can find it - I think there is a link from my talk page) If anyone is really upset with what I am proposing please let me know. Andrew massyn 20:19, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

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


text:
reord

Etymology 1
Of uncertain origin. Other Germanic cognates suggest descent from, from. However, the required sound changes to develop the present spelling indicate a reflex of. Attested neuter forms also suggest.

Cognate with 🇨🇬 and 🇨🇬.

Noun

 * 1) voice
 * 2) speech, language
 * 1) speech, language

Usage notes

 * is the more commonly used version of the word.

title: reord


text:
prob

Noun

 * No prob, I'll fix it tomorrow.
 * #firstworldprobs
 * #firstworldprobs

title: prob


text:
Wiktionary:Grease pit/template

[[ history] ] [[ watch] ] [[ edit] ] Grease pit/

title: Wiktionary:Grease pit/template


text: prev

title: prev


text:
hriþer

Etymology
From. Cognate with 🇨🇬.

Noun

 * 1)  cow; bull; ox; head of cattle any bovine animal

title: hriþer


text:
risan

Etymology
From, see also 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬.

Verb

 * 1) to rise

Etymology
From, see also 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬.

Verb

 * 1) To rise.

Descendants

 * German (dialectal):

Etymology
From, see also 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬.

Verb

 * 1) To rise.

title: risan


text:
rísa

Etymology
From, from , from.

Verb

 * 1) to rise

Etymology
From, from , from.

Verb

 * 1) to rise

Etymology
From, from.

Verb

 * 1)  to rise
 * 2) to get up
 * 3) to come into existence, arise
 * 1) to come into existence, arise

title: rísa


text:
ritan

Etymology
From, from , from. Cognate with 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬.

Verb

 * 1) to ride

title: ritan


text:
compatibility

Etymology
..

Noun

 * 1) The state of being compatible; in which two or more things are able to exist or work together in combination without problems or conflict.
 * 2)  the capability of two or more items or components of equipment or material to exist or function in the same system or environment without mutual interference.
 * 3)  the ability to execute a given program on different types of computers without modification of the program or the computers. See backward compatibility and forward compatibility.
 * 4)  the capability that allows the substitution of one subsystem (storage facility), or of one functional unit (e.g., hardware, software), for the originally designated system or functional unit in a relatively transparent manner, without loss of information and without the introduction of errors.
 * 5)  the continuity or good fit of material or members or components while being deformed.
 * 1)  the capability that allows the substitution of one subsystem (storage facility), or of one functional unit (e.g., hardware, software), for the originally designated system or functional unit in a relatively transparent manner, without loss of information and without the introduction of errors.
 * 2)  the continuity or good fit of material or members or components while being deformed.

Translations

 * Finnish:
 * Icelandic: samhæfni
 * Swedish:

 * Bulgarian:
 * Catalan: compatibilitat
 * Chinese:
 * Mandarin:
 * Czech: slučitelnost,
 * Dutch: ,
 * Esperanto: kongrueco, interkonformo
 * Finnish:
 * French:
 * Galician:
 * German: ,
 * Hebrew: תאימות
 * Hindi:
 * Hungarian:
 * Italian:
 * Japanese: 親和性,
 * Korean: 호환성
 * Polish: kompatybilność
 * Portuguese:
 * Romanian:
 * Russian:
 * Spanish:
 * Tagalog: kaakmaan

 * Finnish:
 * Maori: hototahitanga

title: compatibility


text:
rida

Etymology
Of Finno-Samic origin. Cognate to Sami.

Noun

 * 1)  (of items)
 * 2) many, much
 * 3)  straight

Noun

 * 1)  tongue

Etymology
From, from. Akin to 🇨🇬.

Verb

 * 1) to ride an animal

Etymology
.

Verb

 * 1) to wrinkle

Etymology
From, from , from.

Verb

 * 1) to ride, as on a horse or other mount
 * 2) * 1942, Vilhelm Moberg, novel title, translated to English in 1943 by Henry Alexander
 * "sv"

- Rid i natt

Etymology 1
From. Related to 🇨🇬.

Noun

 * 1) trap, snare

Etymology 2
From. Related to 🇨🇬.

Noun

 * 1) discord
 * 2) dispute, quarrel
 * 3) scandal

title: rida


text: solfara

title: solfara


text:
sacu

Etymology
From. Cognate with 🇨🇬,, (🇨🇬), 🇨🇬 (🇨🇬), 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬 (🇨🇬), 🇨🇬 (🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬), 🇨🇬.

Noun

 * 1) dispute, strife, contention
 * 2) crime, sin

title: sacu


text:
sadol

Noun

 * 1) urge, encouragement
 * 2) coaxing, cajole
 * 3) wheedling
 * 1) wheedling

Etymology
, from.

Noun

 * 1) saddle

Etymology
See.

title: sadol


text:
sadolian

Etymology
From.

Verb

 * 1) to saddle

title: sadolian


text:
zolfara

Noun

 * 1) sulfur mine (underground)

title: zolfara


text:
Talk:compatibility

Transwikied
The content here was originally transwikied from Compatibility, a disambiguation page. - Tangotango 13:56, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

title: Talk:compatibility


text:
User:Tangotango

Hello. Please see my user page on Meta for my user pages.

title: User:Tangotango


text: Category:User bn-2

title: Category:User bn-2


text:
sarig

Noun

 * 1) firmness, securement, sturdiness, steadiness

Etymology
From salig, compare 🇨🇬.

Verb

 * 1) to depend on
 * 2) to trust

Etymology
From.

Adjective

 * 1) sad, sorrowful

Usage notes
Sāriġ does not mean "sorry" in the sense of apologetic. To express an apology, (in the imperative form) or  (in either the imperative form, or in the indicative with a reflexive pronoun of the one apologising) can be used: ''Forġief þū mē lēof! Þæt nis ġiet ġearu.'' ("Forgive me, sir! That's not ready yet."). Alternatively, may be used: Mē ofþyncþ þæt wē fliton ("I'm sorry that we quarrelled", literally "It displeases me that we quarrelled").

title: sarig


text:
sénéchal

Etymology
, from, from +.

Noun

 * 1) seneschal; guardian; protector

title: sénéchal


text: sénéchaux

title: sénéchaux


text:
sénéchaussée

Etymology
From earlier, from +.

Noun

 * 1) a seneschalty: a district governed by a seneschal, particularly:
 * 2)  the seneschalties of southern France and Normandy during the late medieval and early modern periods.
 * 3)  the capital of a seneschalty; the seat of a seneschal
 * 4)  the royal court headed by a seneschal

title: sénéchaussée


text:
Congregationalist

Noun

 * 1) A member of a Congregational church.

title: Congregationalist


text:
Congregational church

Noun

 * 1) Any Protestant church run independently by its own congregation, especially one in the Reformed (Calvinist) and/or Dissenter traditions, such as the, the , or the.

Translations

 * Galician: Igrexa Congregacional
 * Icelandic: safnaðarkirkja
 * Indonesian: Gereja Kongregasional
 * Maori: Hāhi Whakaminenga

title: Congregational church


text:
Talk:meadow

Definition
Is this definition accurate? I thought a meadow could be an area naturally covered with grasses and flowers, not neccessarily low-lying, a field (artificially bounded) or a pasture (for grazing). But I am not a native english speaker.

Erl 15:01, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

 * Copied to WT:TR. Rod (A. Smith) 01:05, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

vega
I'm not familiar enough here with the conventions to make the change myself, but I have always understood that meadow best translates into Spanish as vega (as in viva Las Vegas, long live the meadows). --Allamakee Democrat 23:01, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

 * Since vega and prado are both pretty good synonyms, just add vega before or after prado, separating them with a comma. Rod (A. Smith) 00:29, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Etymology
The mǣdwe form would have been influenced by the possible Proto-Germanic form[6]; but the other forms infiltrated[7] into Germanic are oblique semantically, and MǢD directly answers to Welsh MEDI[7], MAES[7] and Cornish MĒS[6] (field) >AVĒS (away, afield). Earlier origins are dubious, as especially with Finnish MAA[2] (land, et cetera), is very dubious. Its connection with MOW[4] is considerably more likely, but still unattested. Andrew H. Gray 23:46, 2 December 2015 (UTC) The West Frisian, German and Low German forms all appear to be borrowed from either the Middle English or the Old English form(s)[6].

[0] means 'Absolutely not; [1] means 'Exceedingly unlikely'; [2] means 'Very dubious'; [3] means 'Questionable'; [4] means 'Possible'; [5] means 'Probable'; [6] means 'Likely'; [7] means 'Most Likely' or *Unattested; [8] means 'Attested'; [9] means 'Obvious' - only used for close matches within the same language or dialect, at linkable periods. 19:07, 2 December 2015 (UTC) Andrew (talk)

pronunciation
The pronunciation in the recorded ogg is most certainly incorrect.

title: Talk:meadow


text:
connecting rod

Noun

 * 1) Any rod, in an engine, that transmits power or motion, especially one that connects a reciprocating shaft to a rotating wheel, in reciprocating engines connecting piston to crankshaft

Translations

 * Czech: ojnice
 * Dutch:
 * French:
 * German: ,
 * Hebrew:
 * Norwegian:
 * Bokmål:
 * Nynorsk: råde
 * Polish: korbowód
 * Romanian:, bară de conectare, bară de legătură
 * Serbo-Croatian:
 * Spanish:
 * Tagalog: panikad

title: connecting rod


text:
connoisseuse

Noun

 * 1)  A female connoisseur.

Usage notes

 * The word connoisseur applies to both sexes.

title: connoisseuse


text:
conjuration

Etymology
From, from , from , from.

Noun

 * 1) Conjuring, legerdemain or magic.
 * 2) A magic trick.
 * 3)  The act of calling or summoning by a sacred name, or in solemn manner, or binding by an oath; an earnest entreaty; adjuration.
 * 4)  A league for a criminal purpose; conspiracy.
 * 1)  The act of calling or summoning by a sacred name, or in solemn manner, or binding by an oath; an earnest entreaty; adjuration.
 * 2)  A league for a criminal purpose; conspiracy.
 * 1)  A league for a criminal purpose; conspiracy.
 * 1)  A league for a criminal purpose; conspiracy.

Translations

 * Bulgarian:
 * Russian:

 * Russian:

Etymology
.

Noun

 * 1) conspiracy

title: conjuration


text:
consonantal

Adjective

 * Of, relating to, or functioning as a consonant.
 * 1) Containing one or more consonants.

Translations

 * Armenian: բաղաձայնային
 * Belarusian: зы́чны
 * Catalan: consonàntic
 * Cornish: kessonennel
 * Czech:
 * Finnish: konsonantti-,
 * French:
 * German:, Konsonanten-, konsonantig
 * Polish: ,
 * Romanian:
 * Russian: ,
 * Ukrainian:

 * Finnish: konsonantin sisältävä, konsonantteja sisältävä

title: consonantal


text:
conspirational

Adjective

 * Of, or relating to, or involving conspiration; conspiratorial.

title: conspirational


text:
constitutively

Adverb

 * 1) in a constitutive manner
 * 2)  at a constant rate regardless of physiological demand

title: constitutively


text: co-opetition

title: co-opetition


text:
woestijn

Etymology
From, from , from. Cognate with 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬.

Noun

 * 1)  environmental area with very little precipitation

title: woestijn


text:
corybantic

Adjective

 * 1) frenetic, ecstatic and orgiastic
 * 2) of or pertaining to a Corybant

title: corybantic


text:
crack seed

Noun

 * 1) Any of a variety of Hawaiian snacks made from preserved fruit.

title: crack seed


text:
crambo

Etymology

 * Perhaps related to (adjective).
 * Perhaps from.

Noun

 * 1)  A guessing game in which players guess words that rhyme with a clue word, seeking a word that is kept secret or concealed.
 * 2)  A word rhyming with another word.
 * 1)  A word rhyming with another word.

title: crambo


text:
crimethink

Etymology
, in his novel .

Noun

 * 1) The crime of having unorthodox or unofficial thoughts (thoughtcrimes).

Verb

 * 1) To think in an unorthodox or unofficial manner (to commit a thoughtcrime)

title: crimethink


text:
cubeb berry

Noun

 * 1) A berry of the tailed pepper, eaten as a fruit.

Translations

 * Swedish:

title: cubeb berry


text:
cubeb

Etymology
From, from , , from. The current form is remodelled after modern 🇨🇬.

Noun

 * 1) A tailed pepper plant, an Indonesian plant cultivated for its berries and essential oil.

Translations

 * Acehnese:
 * Arabic: كَبَابَة, حَبّ الْعَرُوس
 * Aramaic:
 * Classical Syriac: ܟܒܳܒܳܐ
 * Armenian:
 * Middle Armenian: քապապայ
 * Balinese:
 * Buginese:
 * Chinese:
 * Mandarin: 蓽澄茄
 * Czech: pepřovník kubebový
 * Danish:
 * Dutch: staartpeper
 * Finnish: kubebapippuri
 * French:, archaically
 * German: Kubebenpfeffer
 * Hindi:
 * Hungarian: kubébabors, jávai bors
 * Indonesian:
 * Italian: cubebe
 * Javanese:
 * Kannada:
 * Madurese:
 * Malay: kemukus, lada berekor
 * Malayalam:
 * Middle English: quibibe
 * Persian: کبابهٔ چینی, rarer
 * Romanian:
 * Russian:, пе́рец кубе́ба
 * Sanskrit: गन्धमरिच
 * Shan:
 * Sinhalese:
 * Sundanese: rinu
 * Swedish:
 * Tamil:
 * Telugu:
 * Thai:
 * Tulu: ಕಂಧಮುಣ್ಚಿ
 * Turkish: kübabe
 * Urdu: کباب چینی

Etymology
.

title: cubeb


text:
culture jamming

Etymology
From, coined by sound collage band in their album  (1984), by metaphor to jamming a radio signal.

Noun

 * 1) Any of various methods of modifying mass media (especially advertisements) to convey a different message.

title: culture jamming


text: shilled

title: shilled


text:
spiritual leader

Noun

 * 1) a person who gives religious or sacred leadership, though not necessarily the leader of a religious organization

Translations

 * Maori: pā whakawairua

title: spiritual leader


text:
E620

Noun

 * 1)  glutamic acid when used as an flavour enhancer

title: E620


text:
E621

Noun

 * 1)  monosodium glutamate when used as an flavour enhancer

title: E621


text: flavour enhancer

title: flavour enhancer


text:
flavor enhancer

Noun

 * 1) Any substance added to a food product to enhance its taste, especially to make it taste more savoury or to add umami

Translations

 * French:
 * German:
 * Russian:
 * Swedish: smakförstärkare

title: flavor enhancer


text:
panentheistically

Etymology
From.

Adverb

 * 1) in a panentheistic manner

title: panentheistically


text:
E622

Noun

 * 1)  monopotassium glutamate when used as an flavour enhancer

title: E622


text:
E623

Noun

 * 1)  calcium diglutamate when used as an flavour enhancer

title: E623


text:
E624

Noun

 * 1)  monammonium glutamate when used as an flavour enhancer

title: E624


text: msg

title: msg


text:
E625

Noun

 * 1)  magnesium diglutamate when used as an flavour enhancer

title: E625


text:
panentheistical

Alternative forms

 * sometimes hyphenated: pan-en-theistical
 * sometimes either the P or both the P and the initial T are capitalized: Panentheistical, PanenTheistical
 * variations of capitalization and spacing may be combined: Pan-en-theistical, Pan-en-Theistical

Adjective

 * 1) of or relating to panentheism

title: panentheistical


text: agnostics

title: agnostics


text: haz-mat

title: haz-mat


text:
hazmat

Noun

 * 1)  Hazardous material(s).

title: hazmat


text: MediaWiki talk:Accesskey-diff

title: MediaWiki talk:Accesskey-diff


text:
predisposition

Noun

 * 1) The state of being predisposed or susceptible to something, especially to a behavior or a health condition.

Synonyms

 * ,, see also Thesaurus:predilection

Translations

 * Bulgarian:
 * Catalan: predisposició
 * Chinese:
 * Mandarin: or
 * Czech: predispozice
 * French:
 * Georgian: მიდრეკილება
 * German: ,
 * Greek:
 * Italian:, ,
 * Japanese:
 * Latin: praedispositio
 * Macedonian: предрасположе́ние, скло́ност, предрасполо́женост
 * Polish: ,
 * Portuguese: predisposição
 * Romanian:
 * Russian: ,
 * Spanish:
 * Swedish:
 * Turkish: yatkınlık; eğilim

Noun

 * 1)  (to a behavior or health condition)

title: predisposition


text:
hazardous material

Noun

 * 1) A material, natural or man-made, which is intrinsically dangerous or otherwise poses a safety hazard, such as materials which are explosive, poisonous, chemically active (including acids and other corrosives), radioactive, or biologically active (including human blood and other medical waste).

Translations

 * Chinese:
 * Mandarin: 危險物質
 * Finnish: vaarallinen aine
 * French:
 * German:
 * Portuguese: material perigoso

title: hazardous material


text:
dangerous goods

Noun

 * 1) Substances, natural or man-made, which are intrinsically dangerous or otherwise pose a safety hazard. Examples include explosives, poisons, and corrosives.

Translations

 * Chinese:
 * Mandarin: 危險物品
 * Dutch: gevaarlijke stoffen
 * Esperanto: danĝeraj materialoj
 * Finnish: vaaralliset aineet
 * French: marchandises dangereuses, produits dangereux
 * German:
 * Polish: towary niebezpieczne

title: dangerous goods


text:
memory lane

Noun

 * 1)  A nostalgic or sentimental journey through one's memories of an experience or other time in the past.

Usage notes

 * The term is often used in the expressions and, and the metaphor of a journey is frequently extended in some way using words like , , , , and , for example, “a walk down memory lane”.

Translations

 * Chinese:
 * Mandarin:
 * Finnish: muistojen polku
 * Galician:
 * German: (Schwelgen in) Erinnerungen
 * Hungarian: ,
 * Irish: bóithrín na smaointe
 * Polish: powspominać
 * Portuguese:
 * Serbo-Croatian: staza uspomena
 * Swedish: minnenas allé

title: memory lane


text:
sæ

Verb

 * 1) ; “[you] know (singular)”

Etymology
From.

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) sea

Usage notes
This word, like several locations and abstract concepts, almost never uses the definite article.

Declension
Occasionally it occurs as masculine:

Derived terms

 * cockle
 * cockle
 * cockle

title: sæ


text:
sæd

Etymology 1
From, from.

Noun

 * 1) seed, semen, sperm
 * 2) seed fertilized grain

Etymology 2
From.

Noun

 * 1) custom

Derived terms

 * ("chaste", "moral")

Etymology
From, from.

Noun

 * 1) semen, sperm
 * 2)  seed

Synonyms

 * (semen)
 * (semen)
 * (seed)

Etymology
From, from.

Noun

 * 1) semen, sperm

Etymology 1
From. See there for more.

Noun

 * 1) seed

Etymology 2
From. See there for more.

Adjective

 * 1) full, sated
 * 2) weary
 * 1) weary

title: sæd


text:
sælig

Etymology
From.

Adjective

 * 1) lucky, fortunate, prosperous, happy

title: sælig


text:
scafan

Etymology
From. Compare 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬.

Verb

 * 1) to shave

title: scafan


text:
sceafa

Etymology 1
From. Cognate with 🇨🇬 (🇨🇬), 🇨🇬 (🇨🇬).

Noun

 * 1) shave (tool), plane, paring knife

Etymology 2
From.

title: sceafa


text:
borotvál

Etymology
. First attested after 1416.

Verb

 * 1)  to shave

title: borotvál


text:
scathe

Etymology 1
From, , from , from (whence 🇨🇬, ), from.

Noun

 * 1)  Damage, harm, hurt, injury.
 * 2)  Someone who, or something which, causes harm; an injurer.
 * 3)  An injury or loss for which compensation is sought in a lawsuit; damage; also, expenses incurred by a claimant; costs.
 * 4)  Something to be mourned or regretted.
 * 1)  Someone who, or something which, causes harm; an injurer.
 * 2)  An injury or loss for which compensation is sought in a lawsuit; damage; also, expenses incurred by a claimant; costs.
 * 3)  Something to be mourned or regretted.
 * 1)  Someone who, or something which, causes harm; an injurer.
 * 2)  An injury or loss for which compensation is sought in a lawsuit; damage; also, expenses incurred by a claimant; costs.
 * 3)  Something to be mourned or regretted.
 * 1)  An injury or loss for which compensation is sought in a lawsuit; damage; also, expenses incurred by a claimant; costs.
 * 2)  Something to be mourned or regretted.

Translations

 * Catalan:, ,
 * Danish:
 * Dutch:
 * German:
 * Latin: damnum
 * Malayalam:
 * Polish: ,
 * Russian: ,
 * Spanish:, ,

Etymology 2
From, , from , from (whence 🇨🇬, ), from ; see further at etymology 1.

Sense 2 (“to harm, injure, or destroy (someone or something) by fire, lightning, or some other heat source”) appears to derive from  by the English poet (1608–1674), perhaps influenced by : see the 1667 quotation.

Verb

 * 1)  To harm or injure (someone or something) physically.
 * 2)  To cause monetary loss to (someone).
 * 3)  To harm, injure, or destroy (someone or something) by fire, lightning, or some other heat source; to blast; to scorch; to wither.
 * 4)  To severely hurt (someone's feelings, soul, etc., or something intangible) through acts, words spoken, etc.
 * 1)  To cause monetary loss to (someone).
 * 2)  To harm, injure, or destroy (someone or something) by fire, lightning, or some other heat source; to blast; to scorch; to wither.
 * 3)  To severely hurt (someone's feelings, soul, etc., or something intangible) through acts, words spoken, etc.
 * 1)  To cause monetary loss to (someone).
 * 2)  To harm, injure, or destroy (someone or something) by fire, lightning, or some other heat source; to blast; to scorch; to wither.
 * 3)  To severely hurt (someone's feelings, soul, etc., or something intangible) through acts, words spoken, etc.
 * 1)  To severely hurt (someone's feelings, soul, etc., or something intangible) through acts, words spoken, etc.
 * 1)  To severely hurt (someone's feelings, soul, etc., or something intangible) through acts, words spoken, etc.
 * 1)  To severely hurt (someone's feelings, soul, etc., or something intangible) through acts, words spoken, etc.
 * 1)  To severely hurt (someone's feelings, soul, etc., or something intangible) through acts, words spoken, etc.
 * 1)  To severely hurt (someone's feelings, soul, etc., or something intangible) through acts, words spoken, etc.
 * 1)  To severely hurt (someone's feelings, soul, etc., or something intangible) through acts, words spoken, etc.

Translations

 * Danish:
 * Dutch:
 * Finnish:
 * Italian:
 * Malayalam: ക്ഷതപ്പെടുത്തുക
 * Persian:
 * Portuguese:
 * Russian: причиня́ть вред
 * Spanish:

Adjective

 * 1) Unfortunate, a pity, a shame.
 * 2) * 14th c., . General Prologue: 445-6.

title: scathe


text:
sceaþian

Etymology
From, from. Cognate with 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬.

Verb

 * 1) to hurt, harm, injure
 * 2) to spoil, rob

title: sceaþian


text:
sceaþa

Etymology
From. Cognate with 🇨🇬 (🇨🇬), 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬 (🇨🇬), 🇨🇬 (🇨🇬).

Noun

 * 1) one who injures; enemy, ravager
 * 2) (heroic) warrior
 * 3)  injury

title: sceaþa


text:
sceadan

Etymology
From. Compare 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬.

Verb

 * 1)  to separate, divide, make a line of separation between
 * 2)  to separate, divide, part
 * 3) to distinguish, decide
 * 4) to shed

title: sceadan


text:
sceadu

Etymology
From.

Cognate with 🇨🇬 (🇨🇬), 🇨🇬. The Indo-European root is also the source of 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬 (🇨🇬, 🇨🇬).

Noun

 * 1) shadow
 * 2) shade

title: sceadu


text:
sceadwian

Etymology
From. Compare, , ,.

Verb

 * 1)  to overshadow, cover with shadow

title: sceadwian


text:
scearp

Etymology
From, from , from , from.

Cognate with 🇨🇬,, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬.

Adjective

 * 1) sharp

title: scearp


text:
sceaþ

Etymology
From, from , possibly from a root , based on the notion of a split stick with a sword blade inserted; compare.

Compare 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬,, 🇨🇬,.

Noun

 * 1) sheath

title: sceaþ


text:
sceawian

Etymology
From, from. Cognate with 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬 (🇨🇬), 🇨🇬 (🇨🇬).

Verb

 * 1) to watch or look at
 * 2) * c. 992, Ælfric, "Midlent Sunday"
 * "ang"

- On ōðre wīsan wē sċēawiaþ mētinge and on ōðre wīsan stafas. Ne gǣþ nā māre tō mētinge būtan þæt þū hit ġesēo and herie. Nis nā ġenōg þæt þū stafas sċēawiġe būtan þū hīe ēac rǣde and þæt andġiet understande.

 * 1) * c. 992, Ælfric, "On the Nativity of our Lord"
 * "ang"

- We mihton eow secgan ane lytle bysne, gif hit to wáclic nære; Scēawa nú on anum æge, hú þæt hwite ne bið gemenged to ðam geolcan, and bið hwæðere án æg. Nis eac Cristes godcundnys gerunnen to ðære menniscnysse, ac he þurhwunað þeah á on ecnysse on anum hade untotwæmed.

 * 1) to examine, scrutinize
 * 2) to show (+accusative)
 * 3) * late 9th century, King Alfred's translation of Saint Augustine's Soliloquies
 * "ang"

- ...Gyf ðū ēnigne gōdne heorde hæbbe þe wel cunne healdan þæt þæt þū gestrēone and him befæste, scēawa hyne me;

title: sceawian


text: masculinities

title: masculinities


text:
Talk:masculinities

Wikipedia Edit History
* (cur) (last) 04:44, 14 June 2006 GregorB  [rollback] [proxycheck] * (cur) (last) 17:01, 20 July 2005 Sophie1975 (Created page, explained point of saying 'masculinities' instead of 'masculinity')

title: Talk:masculinities


text:
scinu

Etymology
From, from. Cognate with 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬 (🇨🇬), 🇨🇬 (🇨🇬).

Noun

 * 1) shin

title: scinu


text:
scyttan

Etymology
From, from , , from.

Verb

 * 1) to shut

title: scyttan


text:
scort

Etymology
From, from. Cognate with 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬.

Adjective

 * 1) short

title: scort


text:
scrud

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) garment

title: scrud


text:
scur

Noun

 * 1)  A distorted horn, regrown after the disbudding operation of a goat, sheep, or cow.

Etymology 2
Compare.

Verb

 * 1)  To move hastily; to scour.

Etymology
Probably ultimately from, perhaps through the intermediate of.

Adjective

 * 1) dark brown (usually of hair)
 * 2)  sombre

Etymology
Akin to 🇨🇬, from Latin obscurus.

Adjective

 * 1) dark

Etymology
From, whence also 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, from.

Noun

 * 1) shower

Etymology 1
From, from , whence also Old Saxon , Old English scūr, Old Norse skúr.

Noun

 * 1) shower

Etymology 2
From.

Noun

 * 1) shelter

title: scur


text:
skúr

Etymology 1
From, from.

Noun

 * 1) rain shower

Etymology 2
From.

Noun

 * 1) shed, shack

Etymology
From, whence also 🇨🇬 (🇨🇬), 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬.

Noun

 * 1) shower (of rain)

title: skúr


text:
Schauer

Etymology 1
From, from , from , from. Cognate with 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬.

Noun

 * 1)  shower brief period of precipitation
 * 2)  shower instance of something bursting forth like a rainshower
 * 3) shudder, shiver, sudden thrill
 * 1) shudder, shiver, sudden thrill

Derived terms

Etymology 2
From, from , northern variant of , whence.

Noun

 * 1)  roof or open shed for taking shelter

Etymology 3
From, from. Equivalent to.

Noun

 * : one who looks
 * 1)  inspector, one who inspects (e.g. the quality of goods)

Etymology 4
19th century, from, from , derived from , from.

Noun

 * 1)  dock worker who loads and unloads ships, lumper

Etymology
From, from , from , from. Cognate with 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬.

Noun

 * 1) shower brief period of precipitation

title: Schauer


text:
sceot

Etymology
From. Cognate with 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬 (🇨🇬), 🇨🇬. Compare 🇨🇬.

Noun

 * 1) shot, act of shooting
 * 2) missile, shot
 * 3) darting, rapid movement

title: sceot


text: solfare

title: solfare


text:
solforare

Verb

 * 1)  to sulfur

title: solforare


text:
sciozzan

Etymology
From, whence also 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬.

Verb

 * 1) to shoot

Descendants

 * Viennese:
 * Viennese:
 * Viennese:

title: sciozzan


text:
sceabb

Etymology
From, from. Cognate with 🇨🇬 ( > 🇨🇬).

Noun

 * 1) scab
 * 2) scabies

title: sceabb


text:
solfidrico

Etymology
From.

Adjective

 * 1)  hydrosulfuric

title: solfidrico


text:
hydrosulfuric

Adjective

 * 1)  Derived from hydrogen sulfide considered as hydrosulfuric acid.

Translations

 * Italian:
 * Romanian: hidrosulfuric

title: hydrosulfuric


text: hydrosulphuric

title: hydrosulphuric


text:
hydrosulfuric acid

Noun

 * 1)  hydrogen sulfide

Translations

 * Italian:
 * Romanian: acid hidrosulfuric

title: hydrosulfuric acid


text: hydrosulphuric acid

title: hydrosulphuric acid


text:
acido solfidrico

Noun

 * 1)  hydrosulfuric acid; hydrogen sulfide

title: acido solfidrico


text: appetizers

title: appetizers


text:
cold cuts

Noun

 * 1) Cooked, sliced meat served cold, as in a sandwich or a tray of finger food.

Translations

 * Chinese:
 * Mandarin:
 * Finnish: leikkeleet
 * Galician:
 * German:
 * Hebrew:
 * Italian:
 * Polish:
 * Portuguese: ,
 * Spanish:, companaje, ,
 * Swedish:

title: cold cuts


text:
toiled

Etymology
Borrowed from, from.

title: toiled


text:
toiling

Noun

 * 1) Hard work.

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1)  A fight; strife deadly discord between two parties
 * 2)  The manufacture of leather using a person's teeth to draw on it.
 * 3)  The initiation of a lawsuit.

title: toiling


text:
wait up

Verb

 * 1) To stay awake waiting for somebody to return.
 * 2)  To wait.
 * Hey, wait up! I forgot my umbrella.
 * We have to wait up for Steve.
 * 1)  To wait.
 * Hey, wait up! I forgot my umbrella.
 * We have to wait up for Steve.
 * Hey, wait up! I forgot my umbrella.
 * We have to wait up for Steve.

Translations

 * Swedish: vänta uppe, stanna uppe

 * Japanese:

title: wait up


text:
linking

Adjective

 * 1) Serving to connect other things together.
 * Conjunctions frequently function as linking words in a sentence.

Noun

 * 1) Linkage.

title: linking


text:
User:IByte

My user page is on Wikipedia.

title: User:IByte


text: subdivisions

title: subdivisions


text: no-one

title: no-one


text:
capitalisation

Noun

 * 1) The act or process of capitalising.
 * 2) Choice of case (when writing a word); the act or process of writing a word in a particular case, such as ALL CAPS, Title Case, CamelCase, Sentence case, or all lowercase.
 * English and French have different rules for the capitalisation of the names of the days of the week.
 * 1)  The act or process of writing (something: either an entire word or text, or just the initial letter(s) thereof) in capital letters.
 * The capitalisation of all nouns is a distinctive feature of German.
 * 1) The act or process of seizing (an opportunity) and profiting or obtaining an advantage (from it).
 * 2) The state of being capitalised.
 * 3) The state of having a particular case, such as ALL CAPS or all lowercase.
 * His capitalisation was erratic: sometimes he wrote "British", sometimes "british", sometimes "briTish"...
 * 1) The total value of all outstanding shares for a publicly-traded company
 * 1) The total value of all outstanding shares for a publicly-traded company

Translations

 * Catalan: majusculació
 * French:
 * Greek: (kefalaiopoíisi)
 * Indonesian: kapitalisasi
 * Portuguese: maiusculização
 * Russian:
 * Spanish: mayusculación
 * Swedish:

 * French:
 * German:
 * Swedish:

 * Catalan: capitalització
 * French:
 * German: Kapitalausstattung
 * Indonesian: kapitalisasi
 * Polish: kapitalizacja
 * Portuguese:
 * Spanish: capitalización

Etymology
From.

title: capitalisation


text: capitalized

title: capitalized


text:
תפוח

Etymology
Related to and 🇨🇬; the word is not attested in. Sometimes claimed to be from the roots or.

title: תפוח


text:
spiritualist

Noun

 * 1) One who professes a regard for spiritual things only; one whose employment is of a spiritual character; an ecclesiastic.
 * 2)  One who maintains the philosophic doctrine of spiritualism.
 * 3) One who practises spiritism (a.k.a. spiritualism); a believer in the possibility of communication with the dead; one who attempts to communicate with the dead.

Translations

 * Finnish:

 * Finnish: spiritualisti
 * Greek: ,

 * Esperanto: spiritualisto
 * Finnish: spiritisti
 * French:
 * German: Spiritualist, Spiritualistin
 * Hebrew:
 * Japanese:, 神媒
 * Portuguese: espiritualista
 * Romanian:
 * Russian: ,

Adjective

 * 1) Pertaining to spiritualism; spiritualistic.

Translations

 * Finnish: spiritualistinen, spiritistinen, ,
 * French:
 * German: spiritualistisch
 * Portuguese: espiritualista
 * Russian:

Etymology
Probably borrowed. Equivalent to.

Noun

 * 1)   dissident Christian stressing communion with the Holy Spirit and moral improvement through sanctification while rejecting the outwardly church, without necessarily separating from the Roman Catholic Church

Etymology
.

title: spiritualist


text:
Kisi

Proper noun

 * 1) An African language of the Bantu family spoken in Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone.

title: Kisi


text: Kivinza

title: Kivinza


text: greenbacks

title: greenbacks


text:
pleochroism

Noun

 * 1)  The optical phenomenon in some coloured, transparent crystals (such as tourmaline and opal) in which the colour changes when viewed from different directions.

Translations

 * Azerbaijani: polixroizm
 * Catalan: pleocroisme
 * Chinese:
 * Mandarin:
 * Japanese:
 * Kazakh: плеохроизм
 * Korean: 다색성(多色性)
 * Malayalam: ട്രൈക്ക്രോയിസം
 * Spanish: pleocroísmo

title: pleochroism


text:
pneumatolysis

Etymology
From +. .

Noun

 * 1)  the alteration of rocks and minerals by gases or magmatic fluid within volcanos etc

title: pneumatolysis


text:
magmatic

Etymology
From (the stem of), from , from.

Adjective

 * 1) Pertaining to magma or magmatism.

Translations

 * Czech: magamatický
 * French:
 * German:
 * Greek:
 * Ido: ,
 * Italian:
 * Portuguese:
 * Russian: ма́гменный, ма́гменная, ма́гменное
 * Spanish: magmático

Noun

 * 1) A rock formed from magma

Etymology
. Equivalent to.

title: magmatic


text:
donkey's years

Etymology
1876 or earlier. Possibly chosen because donkeys can be long-lived animals. Despite the similarity, pre-dates and likely not directly related to, a less frequently used term for.

Noun

 * 1)  A long time, years and years.
 * 2) * 1876, :
 * Didn't you ask him how long it had been in his possession? I can't recollect that. I might have done so. Didn't he say for years and years and donkey's years?

title: donkey's years


text:
poison gland

Noun

 * 1) Any specialized gland in some fishes and amphibians that secretes a mucus-like substance containing venomous or acrid material.

Translations

 * Finnish:
 * Irish: faireog nimhe

title: poison gland


text:
myocarditis

Noun

 * 1)  Inflammation of the myocardium.

Translations

 * Catalan: miocarditis, miocarditis
 * Chinese:
 * Mandarin:
 * Czech:
 * Finnish: sydänlihastulehdus,
 * French:
 * Galician:
 * German:, , Myokardentzündung, , Riesenzellmyokarditis
 * Greek:
 * Kazakh: миокардит
 * Persian: میوکاردیت
 * Portuguese: miocardite
 * Romanian:
 * Spanish:
 * Turkish: myokardit

title: myocarditis


text:
polaron

Noun

 * 1)  The object (a quasiparticle) that results when an electron (or hole) in the conduction band of a crystalline insulator or semiconductor polarizes the lattice in its vicinity.

Translations

 * Chinese:
 * Mandarin: 極子
 * French:
 * Italian:
 * Khmer: អក្ខោសានណូ
 * Portuguese: polarão
 * Russian:

title: polaron


text:
Talk:androgynous

is this or androgenous the correct spelling?

Google hits.

androgenous 98,800

androgynous 1,970,000

 * It has to be kept in mind that androgenous is an existing word with a completely different meaning. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 20:38, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:androgynous


text:
salchicha

Etymology
Borrowed from.

Etymology
.

Noun

 * 1) sausage

Etymology
, variant of, derived from.

Noun

 * 1) sausage
 * 2) hotdog
 * 3)  penis
 * 1)  penis
 * 1)  penis

title: salchicha


text: 熟语

title: 熟语


text:
妙方

Noun

 * 1) ingenious method

title: 妙方


text:
detour

Etymology
Borrowed from, from.

Noun

 * 1) A diversion or deviation from one's original route.
 * 2)  The diversion of the flow of execution for debugging or similar purposes.
 * 1)  The diversion of the flow of execution for debugging or similar purposes.
 * 1)  The diversion of the flow of execution for debugging or similar purposes.

Translations

 * Bulgarian:, ,
 * Catalan:
 * Chinese:
 * Cantonese: 彎路,
 * Hakka: 彎路
 * Mandarin: ,
 * Czech: zajížďka
 * Danish: omvej
 * Dutch:, ,
 * Finnish: kiertotie
 * French: ,
 * Galician:
 * German: (diversion),  (deviation)
 * Greek:
 * Hebrew: מעקף
 * Hungarian:, ,
 * Irish: malairt slí, athbhealach, cúrsa timpill, cor bealaigh, seachród
 * Italian:
 * Japanese: 迂回路
 * Latin: dēvortia
 * Maori: autaki, ara autaki
 * Norwegian:
 * Bokmål: omkjøring
 * Persian:, مسیر انحرافی
 * Polish:, nadłożenie drogi
 * Portuguese: ,
 * Russian:, , око́льный путь,
 * Spanish:
 * Swedish:
 * Ukrainian: об'їзд

Verb

 * 1)  To make a detour.
 * 2)  To direct or send on a detour.
 * 1)  To direct or send on a detour.

Translations

 * Bulgarian:
 * Chinese:
 * Mandarin:
 * Dutch:, etc.
 * Finnish: mennä kiertotietä, tulla kiertotietä, käyttää kiertotietä
 * French:
 * German:
 * Hungarian: kerülőt tesz
 * Japanese:
 * Portuguese:
 * Russian: ,
 * Ukrainian: об’їжджа́ти, об’ї́хати

 * Bulgarian: карам да заобиколи
 * Dutch:
 * Finnish: ohjata kiertotietä
 * German:
 * Hungarian:, kerülőútra terel
 * Japanese:
 * Portuguese:
 * Spanish:

title: detour


text:
User talk:Exe

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wiktionary. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
 * Wiktionary Tutorial
 * Community Portal
 * Entry layout explained
 * Criteria for inclusion
 * FAQ
 * How to edit a page
 * How to start a page
 * Wiktionary Sandbox (a safe place for testing syntax)

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk (discussion) and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~, which automatically produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the beer parlour or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --Connel MacKenzie T C 22:34, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:Exe


text:
adeptness

Noun

 * 1) The quality of being adept.

Translations

 * Dutch:

title: adeptness


text:
adequacy

Noun

 * 1) The quality of being sufficient, adequate or able to meet the needs.

Derived terms

 * capital adequacy
 * delusion of adequacy

Translations

 * Bulgarian:
 * Dutch:
 * Finnish: ,
 * Georgian: ადეკვატურობა, შესაბამისობა, შესაფერისობა, სათანადოობა, საკმარისობა
 * German:, ,
 * Irish: leorgacht
 * Japanese:
 * Polish:, ,
 * Portuguese:
 * Serbo-Croatian:
 * Spanish: cantidad suficiente
 * Turkish:

title: adequacy


text:
adequateness

Noun

 * 1) The quality of being adequate, of meeting needs or expectations.

Translations

 * French:
 * German:
 * Polish: ,

title: adequateness


text:
adhesiveness

Noun

 * 1) the quality of being, or the degree to which a thing is, adhesive

Translations

 * Irish: greamaitheacht
 * Italian: adesività
 * Polish: adhezyjność
 * Portuguese: adesividade
 * Romanian:

title: adhesiveness


text:
adjacency

Noun

 * 1) The quality of being adjacent, or near enough so as to touch.

Translations

 * Bulgarian:, непосредствена близост
 * Catalan: adjacència
 * Czech: sousednost
 * Finnish: viereisyys,
 * French:
 * German:, , Benachbarung ,
 * Italian: adiacenza
 * Persian:
 * Portuguese:
 * Russian:, ,
 * Serbo-Croatian: susjedništvo,
 * Spanish:

title: adjacency


text:
User talk:Wild.mind

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wiktionary. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
 * Wiktionary Tutorial
 * Community Portal
 * Entry layout explained
 * Criteria for inclusion
 * FAQ
 * How to edit a page
 * How to start a page
 * Wiktionary Sandbox (a safe place for testing syntax)

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk (discussion) and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~, which automatically produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the beer parlour or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --Connel MacKenzie T C 23:49, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:Wild.mind


text:
center field

Noun

 * 1)  The part of a baseball field which is beyond the infield and straight ahead left if you stand on home plate and face the pitcher.
 * 2)  The defensive position in the outfield in the middle, typically played by a player that can run fast.
 * 3)  A central role in some activity that requires speed.
 * I'd be happy to play center field on this proposal. I can cover a lot of ground.

title: center field


text:
right field

Noun

 * 1)  The part of a baseball field which is beyond the infield and to your right if you stand on home plate and face the pitcher.
 * 2)  The defensive position in the outfield to the right, typically played by a player who can throw well.
 * He's got a cannon out in right field.

title: right field


text:
giugno

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) June

Etymology
From. Cognate with 🇨🇬.

Noun

 * 1) June

title: giugno