Module talk:etymology languages/data

Specifying scripts
It would be useful if I could specify a script specific to etymology lect. , is that in the realm of possibility? --Victar (talk) 20:43, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Currently, etymology language objects have a subset of the methods found in full language objects, and they don't have all the methods that the linking and tagging modules need. Even though etymology templates like accept etymology languages, Module:etymology "redirects" them to the full "parent" language, and sends that to the linking and tagging modules. So your idea would require the etymology language object to be restructured, perhaps so that it inherited some of the methods of the full language object, while being able to supplant these methods if necessary (in this case, the   method), and then require some modifications of the etymology, linking, and tagging modules. I imagine it would be possible, assuming people agree to it and someone (perhaps me) actually wants to work on it. — Eru·tuon 21:48, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Module:languages/data
, shouldn't this really be under Module:languages/data/etymology, or somewhere? --Victar (talk) 01:05, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Then where would Module:etymology languages, which provides the interface to access the data, go? — Eru·tuon 01:50, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * , my point is we have 3 dialect databases that should be somehow united into one, 1. this, 2. Category:Dialectal data modules, and 3. Module:labels/data/regional. Under Module:languages/data might make the most logical sense. --Victar (talk) 02:07, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it is confusing how many modules have dialect-related data. I don't know how to organize it better so that it makes sense taking into account how the data is meant to be used.. — Eru·tuon 02:18, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * , it seems to be just a matter of unifying the database formats. They all appear to have several common datapoints. I personally like the formatting of Module:etymology languages/data best, which is also closer to Module:languages/data3/a. --Victar (talk) 02:27, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Well, maybe you should come up with a proof of concept then: say, a sandbox module with a copy of the etymology language data and the data with a representative selection of the label data from the  or  modules merged in, and perhaps a sandbox version of the template functions that uses this data. For instance, what would you do with the location-related Armenian-script labels from Module:hy:Dialects, or the various phonetics- or phonology-related labels in the various  modules? I can see plenty of difficulties and do not know how to best overcome them. — Eru·tuon 02:42, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * , just to be clear, I'm just talking about the lect data here, which would have language codes. Labels like archaic would have their own database. Combining that lect data into a single database doesn't seem too much problem to me -- it's getting the modules using those databases. Like I wrote in the other thread, I made Module:User:Victar/lectlabel to start. Perhaps you might want to have a look at my broken loop code. --Victar (talk) 03:39, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Well, I looked at that module and fixed some problems. As for getting modules to use a common dialect data module, I don't have a lot to say until I know what it's going to look like. — Eru·tuon 04:07, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * There is also Module:labels/data/subvarieties. — Eru·tuon 02:28, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Yup! --Victar (talk) 02:35, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Also Module:accent qualifier/data... --Victar (talk) 05:40, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Changes to Occitan codes
Hi. Just wondering why the Occitan codes were changed. The new codes are actually close to what I originally proposed, but I then switched to using ISO 639-3 codes. Benwing2 (talk) 00:22, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I replied about that . If you want to make aliases to the ISO codes, go for it, but etymology codes should be easy to remember and often don't correlate to their ISO counterparts. -- 00:32, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

What codes for Northern and Southern Ryukyuan?
What codes should we use for the Northern and Southern Ryukyuan proto-languages? MiguelX413 (talk) 21:59, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

American Spanish
regarding Special:Diff/59354954/59356594, I don't think "American Spanish" is a great choice as canonical name, easily confused with Latin American Spanish. – Jberkel 08:50, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
 * We've had Category:American Spanish since 2010 (which means US Spanish) so I was changing it to match that, but I agree that it is confusing. It's populated by a /regional label, so I can add a /subvariety label for "United States Spanish" and manually change all the labels later today. Julia ☺ ☆ 15:26, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I also think that would be preferable. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 18:20, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Do you think it makes sense to add "Latin American Spanish" as etymology language? It seems a bit too broad, but I've seen it referenced in entries like . – Jberkel 11:47, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Indian English
Indian English should be added to this page Amshik G. A. (talk) 14:51, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Why would it be needed? —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 20:02, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Missing Slavic ancestor codes
I propose to add the following Slavic etymology codes: The Slavic denotation for 'mushroom consumed roasted or dried' has no common Proto-Slavic form, it is *pečera in East Slavic languages, *pečura in South Slavic and *pečara in West Slavic. — The Balto-Slavic unity is a questionable hypothesis and a considerable number of Slavic etymologies have no cognates in the Baltic languages. In fact, the Proto-Slavic reconstructions reflect the Late Proto-Slavic forms in Wiktionary, i.e. the forms just before the dissolution of the Proto-Slavic unity. But there are different forms in the Early Proto-Slavic before the palatalisation and the open syllable tendency. If there is no Proto-Balto-Slavic form, the Early Proto-Slavic reconstruction can link the etymology to the Proto-Indo-European. E.g. the above East and West Slavic words have a common North Slavic reconstruction in Early Proto-Slavic *pekērā. — LvT (talk) 16:40, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) Proto-East Slavic or Common East Slavic, zle-pro or PES. or CES.
 * 2) Proto-South Slavic or Common South Slavic, zls-pro or PSS. or CSS.
 * 3) Proto-West Slavic or Common West Slavic, zlw-pro or PWS. or CWS.
 * 4) Proto-North Slavic or Common North Slavic (unity of East and West Slavic), PNS or CNS.
 * 5) Early Proto-Slavic, sla-pro-ear or sla-ear or EPS.

Cypriot Turkish
Can anyone add Cypriot Turkish here? Thanks. ToprakM (talk) 13:26, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

EML.
Hi @Theknightwho. Would it be possible to add Early Medieval Latin (EML.) as an etymology-only language? Nicodene (talk) 02:50, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Varieties of Old Swedish
@Surjection Could you also add the Early Old Swedish variation? It's very useful in some examples I'm in need of Stríðsdrengur (talk) 00:44, 22 August 2023 (UTC)


 * @Surjection Stríðsdrengur (talk) 15:25, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Please raise it at WT:BP - I don't have any interest in adding it currently &mdash; S URJECTION / T / C / L / 15:26, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I need to complement some etymologies Stríðsdrengur (talk) 18:12, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Scythian and Mitanni
Can codes for the Scythian language and for Mitanni (or Mitanni-Aryan?) be added to the etymological languages? Antiquistik (talk) 04:35, 25 September 2023 (UTC)


 * @Surjection Is this the right place to request these additions? Antiquistik (talk) 04:21, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
 * A more centralized forum like WT:BP or WT:ES may be better. Mitanni appears to already exist with the code, while we have Scythian as a language family rather than as a language. &mdash; S URJECTION  / T / C / L / 06:03, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
 * @Surjection I need a code for the Scythian language proper itself in addition to the already existing one for the language family. I'll see if I can request it as WT:BP. Antiquistik (talk) 23:38, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
 * The WT:BP discussion went nowhere because victar and I have two completely incompatible understandings of the relationship between the various Scythian languages. What should I do if I still need that etymological code? Antiquistik (talk) 02:36, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
 * If there's no consensus to add the code, then that means you'll have to find some other solution that doesn't need it. &mdash; S URJECTION / T / C / L / 06:22, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Antiquistik (talk) 08:25, 6 October 2023 (UTC)