Module talk:grc-conj

Movable nu
Forms with movable nu don't show up in search results. Searching e.g. "ἐποίησεν" yields nothing, whereas "ἐποίησε" or "ἐποίησε(ν)" does. I suggest that instead of parentheses fully expanded spelling is used, i.e. "ἐποίησε, ἐποίησεν". --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 07:37, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Done. (Sorry it took so long... for some reason this wasn't on my watchlist.) ObsequiousNewt (ἔβαζα|ἐτλέλεσα) 19:38, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

In irregular verbs like, can the module be made to recognize the forms with movable nu (ν) such as and give a link to the form with movable nu on the nu, as in  (for instance, with αἰξῐ́(ν) in ? At the moment, εἶσι(ν) just links to the nonexistent page εἶσι(ν). The alternative is to say εἶσι/εἶσιν (basically as is done in the table in ). — Eru·tuon 22:57, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Hmm, never mind. Per @Ivan Štambuk's comment above, the table should have expanded spelling. — Eru·tuon 23:00, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * There is a distinct problem with this, however: certain forms vary in multiple ways. Namely, the perfect active subjunctive 3pl, which can be -ότες ὦσῐ(ν) or -ωσῐ(ν). Similarly, the Epic present active indicative, which may vary between as many as five forms: -ειν, -μεν(αι), -έμεν(αι). This is all to say nothing of the fact that one cannot find λύουσιν by searching anyway, because the form displayed in the inflection table would be λῡ́ουσῐν. Which is why my prescribed solution is to actually make an inflection bot. —ObsequiousNewt (εἴρηκα|πεποίηκα) 17:36, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Handling πλέω
The template documentation says to use pres-con-em and imperf-con-em for the present and imperfect of, but when I tried to do so I got a module error:. Any ideas? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:31, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * In all honesty, either code it as pres-con-e, or just leave it for now. I'm actually working right now on recoding the entire module (partly because it's kludgy, and partly so I can add diacritic support like in grc-decl.) —ObsequiousNewt (εἴρηκα|πεποίηκα) 22:19, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Actually, from I learned that what works is pres-con-e-mono. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:10, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
 * ...That would work. Note to self, put more descriptive error messages in the module. —ObsequiousNewt (εἴρηκα|πεποίηκα) 15:46, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

The above comment thread from 2015 leaves me unclear about what's up with this. The documentation gives πλέω as an example of pres-con-e-mono, but in fact that isn't how the entry for πλέω is coded right now. There is also a line in the Lua code that is commented out, in which there is a local variable called "mono" that is set ...? From the documentation, it looks like this is meant for the following six verbs, θέω νέω πλέω πνέω ῥέω χέω, referred to in Smyth 607. I haven't checked all six, but for the ones I checked, none use the "e-mono" stuff. Is there actually any wiktionary entry that does use one of the e-mono conjugation types? If not, then maybe it should just be removed from the documentation.--2607:FB91:1B9C:13B4:B8F3:A642:EA80:A550 17:37, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Dialectal forms of contract verbs

 * Each major dialect of Ancient Greek basically has its own separate rules for contraction (Epic/Herodotus doesn't contract but uses ευ when it does, or uses assimilated forms; severe Doric uses η/ίο, Æolic uses athematic verbs...) which makes it very hard to display all possible forms in a single table (or even multiple tables, although that's largely a difficulty in programming) and in any case that's a lot of information to be displayed, especially for a class of verbs that is not only productive but probably the most common type in Greek. Given this, I would like to propose that we display only the Attic contracted forms (alongside the uncontracted forms)—anyone who wants a dialectal form is probably knowledgeable enough to be able to derive it from the uncontracted form. If a dialectal form is attested, it would warrant its own page anyway, and therefore the relevant table can be displayed there instead.
 * Thoughts or alternate proposals? —ObsequiousNewt (εἴρηκα|πεποίηκα) 20:48, 8 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Hmm. I can only comment on Attic and Epic, since I haven't had any experience actually reading Aeolic or Doric, and don't really know the forms.


 * I personally think the εο > ευ synaeresis should be displayed somewhere. We shouldn't assume the reader is knowledgeable. There are bound to be newbies reading Greek works in Ionic or Epic who don't know all this stuff. I sure hope so, at least. And displaying the synaeretic forms lets someone search Wiktionary and find the right lemma, if there's not an entry on the form.


 * The "uncontracted" forms are used in Epic and Ionic, and the synaeresis naturally goes along with these forms. It is weird that we don't show it. It wouldn't add too much to the table in, say,, since εο only occurs in a few forms:
 * ποιεῦμεν, ποιεύντων, ποιεῦμαι, ποιεῦν, ποιεύμενος (-η -ον)
 * (ἐ)ποίευν, (ἐ)ποιεῦμεν, (ἐ)ποιεύμην, (ἐ)ποιεύμεθα, (ἐ)ποιεῦντο


 * Well, there are quite a few cases in the imperfect, actually. But only a half or a third of the forms in each table can have synaeresis, so it wouldn't add too much height to the table.


 * I certainly think it would be nice if the inflection tables could be made more readable somehow (I mean, there are so many present and imperfect tables in ), but not sure how. — Eru·tuon 21:41, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I say go for it. There are so many present and imperfect tables in, a few more won't matter. We already have several labeled Doric, Epic, and Ionic. The only other thing I can think of would be to have separate subpages for inflection like de-wikt has for German verbs; then we could have , , , and so on, keeping the main page for the "classical" Attic/Koine forms. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:30, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I can add those forms, but adding all of the "assimilated" άω forms would basically require a separate page.
 * For something like ποιέω, perhaps (although the Doric and Ionic forms should probably be on separate pages), but I'm a little more hesitant to do it with, say, μοναυλέω, a typical compound with only one citation in LSJ. —ObsequiousNewt (εἴρηκα|πεποίηκα) 16:27, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, no, there's no reason to do it for verbs that aren't even attested in the minor dialects. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:56, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I like the idea of having subpages. I was considering the possibility of, say, putting Attic contracted forms at, but that would make it hard for people to find the forms. Best to have them as subpages off the same main page. — Eru·tuon 19:53, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Contraction
Seems like the parameter cform does the opposite of what it should; in adding con to the Koine future  makes the template only display uncontracted forms. — Eru·tuon 22:28, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
 * The new version of will have cform= folded into form=. I can fix the old one until I get the new version done. —ObsequiousNewt (εἴρηκα|πεποίηκα) 18:14, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Parameters for selecting forms displayed
Is there a way to turn off, say, the non-indicative forms for an aorist iterative like ?

For that matter, it would be nice to have a way to simply remove the cells for various moods from a table. Say, a parameter noshow that takes two letters: then  for subjunctive,   for optative,   for imperative,   for infinitive,   for participle; then   for active,   for middle,   for passive.

I also wish it were possible to specify just active and passive in form. And it would make more sense if the parameters were just,  , and  , and then you'd just choose from those or the combinations  ,  , and. It's weird that active and passive have three-letter abbreviations. while active-middle and middle-passive have two letters. — Eru·tuon 21:32, 28 March 2016 (UTC)


 * (Sorry I didn't see this section before.) There is a parameter indonly= for certain aorists (e.g. ἔδωκα), and this can be extended to iteratives. I can add greater customizability of moods, but I know of no reason to. Changing the code of form= is possible, but I am hesitant to do so given the existing standard. What verb has only active and passive aorist? —ObsequiousNewt (εἴρηκα|πεποίηκα) 17:57, 1 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Verbs that are transitive and can be passivized, but don't have a distinct middle meaning: for instance,, , . — Eru·tuon 19:16, 1 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Ah, of course. I will add form=ap. —ObsequiousNewt (εἴρηκα|πεποίηκα) 19:48, 1 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks! And I'm excited for the updates, whenever they come. — Eru·tuon 20:34, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Athematic with stem in -υ-
has athematic imperfect and present or perfect forms in addition to thematic present and imperfect: for instance,,. Cunliffe and LSJ disagree on whether the former is present or perfect. I could encode them using the special form parameter, but it would be nice to have a way to generate them with the template. I think there are other verbs like this, but I can't remember them at the moment. — Eru·tuon 22:08, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure there's any other verb that conjugates quite like ἔρυμαι, unless the conjugation is identical to verbs in -νυμι. I suspect the prudent course of action will be to manually write an incomplete table. —ObsequiousNewt (εἴρηκα|πεποίηκα) 15:38, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I went with creating tables with tons of different stem forms and manually entering the divergent ones. Not sure if LSJ and Cunliffe give enough forms to manually create an incomplete table or not. — Eru·tuon 16:37, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Parameter prefix= not working

 * The  parameter isn't working at προσεῖπον. Even though I've specified , the module is still throwing the stress onto the initial syllable in the lines where the augment is contracted with the root-initial vowel. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:47, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Fixed. — ObſequiousNewt — Geſpꝛaͤch — Beÿtraͤge 17:21, 1 November 2016 (UTC)

Uncontracted o-stems?

 * pres-con-o and imperf-con-o show only the contracted forms, not the uncontracted ones. Is that on purpose? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:53, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Smyth just answered my question: "Verbs in -οω never appear in their uncontracted forms in any author." Never mind! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 18:58, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * However, that being the case, shouldn't we lemmatize the contracted form, e.g. shouldn't the lemma be rather than ?
 * Dictionaries always (well, except [sometimes] in the case of ζῶ and a few others) cite by uncontracted form. This is of course preferable since otherwise κοινῶ is ambiguous. Smyth says that the verbs always contract; Buck says that ο+ο "regularly contracts" but does mention that uncontracted ο+ε exists. Pharr (§944) says "These verbs [referring to all of them] may be contracted as indicated above, and are regularly so contracted in later classical Greek." He doesn't mention any special treatment of ο-contracts. He does however mention the existence of gen. sg. -οο. — ObſequiousNewt — Geſpꝛaͤch — Beÿtraͤge 21:46, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I like the idea of lemmatizing the contracted forms, but it is problematic for the reason that ObsequiousNewt states. It would be possible to lemmatize contracted forms if we switched to the infinitive (this is what my St Andrews Attic vocabulary does). With the infinitive, we would have, , and . I like the idea because it would show that the contracted forms are the default in the most important dialects (Attic and Koine), but since Wiktionary already has the first-singular lemmatized, it would require a huge amount of work. — Eru·tuon 22:41, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I really meant only lemmatizing the contracted form in the case of -όω verbs, since the uncontracted forms are (if Smyth is right) purely hypothetical. In the -άω and -έω verbs, the uncontracted forms are attested, so the lemma can remain uncontracted. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:59, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Auxiliary verbs in perfect mediopassive subjunctive/optative

 * The forms of the auxiliary verb in the perfect mediopassive subjunctive and optative now link to the corresponding participle instead of to the verb form itself. For example, at αἰνέω, the 1st singular perfect mediopassive subjunctive is linked as   instead of as  . Is that intentional? Is it a good idea? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:10, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

ὄλλυμι etc.

 * Would it be possible to modify  and   to change the ν to λ when the preceding consonant is λ? That would allow us to add the present and imperfect of ὄλλυμι and its compounds. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:40, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Clarification on code

 * I have a number of questions on the code, and I will post them here rather than commenting on the code. What do,  , and   stand for? — Eru·tuon 20:48, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Ctable is conjugation table, pctable is passive conjugation table. Pstem is passive stem.--2603:8000:8900:6E00:F96C:2D79:3F5C:4A28 12:47, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Third plural perfect mediopassive indicative forms
perf generates γεγελᾰ́σᾰται; grc-conj-perfect-σ generates γεγελασμένοι εἰσί. Which is right? —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:17, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Likewise, there's a discrepancy between perf and grc-conj-perfect-labial. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:17, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Pluperfects too. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 22:25, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Dialect parameter
The dialect (dial) parameter does not work as I would expect it to. att or koi should make display  and  as the titleapp text, and cause the table to only have contracted forms, because uncontracted forms are never used in Attic or Koine.

For instance,  displays the following:

— Eru·tuon 18:54, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Incorrect Aorist Ιnfinitive of κωλύω
The aorist active infinitive of should have a circumflex accent over the 2nd syllable in the stem κωλῦσαι, rather than the spurious form listed with an accute accent over the first syllable (*κώλῡσαι). ἐκώλῡσ
 * Fixed; thanks! —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 15:34, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Epic first-person plural middle ending
When epi is set, the first-person plural middle ending (all tenses except perfect) shows up as "με(σ)θᾰ(σ)θᾰ" instead of "με(σ)θᾰ", and the link doesn't behave as desired. For example, at ἔδω, the first-person plural middle active indicative displays as "ἐδόμε(σ)θᾰ(σ)θᾰ" and links thus:. Instead, it should display as "ἐδόμε(σ)θᾰ" and link as. Can anyone fix this? It seems to be happening in the "-- Epic forms (not in Buck)" section of the main Module:grc-conj page (not the /data subpage, surprisingly enough), but I don't understand Lua so I can't fix it myself. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:52, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Fixed. The problem was in the linking function: Module:grc-accent was outputting a form with combining diacritics in ἐδόμε(σ)θᾰ (alpha + combining breve), while the search-and-replace function to find the stem was using the composed form of ᾰ, so it never found the stem and just added -σθᾰ and -θᾰ to the "stem" ἐδόμε(σ)θᾰ. Simple but took me a while to figure out because the combined and uncombined letters look identical. — Eru·tuon 18:54, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Glad you found it! It's odd, because on ordinary pages, even if you type alpha + combining breve in the edit box, it's automatically converted to precomposed alpha-breve. But apparently that isn't true within module code. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:03, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Middle/Passive perfect infinitives are wrong throughout
Perfect infinitives for middle/passive should have an acute accent on the penultimate syllable, yet the inflection templates create an acute in antepenultima position. AFAICT, the bug bites for every verb.

Example: For the verb φέρω, the template produces ἐνήνεχθαι but the correct form is ἐνηνέχθαι.

27.34.20.142 22:09, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Fixed. Thanks for calling my attention to this. — Eru·tuon 22:40, 22 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for this extremely fast reaction (also for not forgetting that some infinitives need a circumflex)
 * 27.34.104.53 17:33, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Imperativus praesentis activi persona tertia pluralis
Why there isn't this -έτωσαν form, but only -όντων? Sorry, I can't add it by myself. Дитмар (talk) 15:27, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Does this module generate pages of each forms of the words? And if not, can someone make it to do so?
To make them one by one is too bothersome. I'd appreciate if you could meliorate.--Yoshiciv (talk) 08:25, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Entries have to be created by editors. But a module can be used to generate the initial content. I started a module to more easily create entries (Module:User:Erutuon/grc), but it isn't finished and doesn't create inflected form entries, only main entries. (There's also a script to create pages for inflected forms (WT:ACCEL), which would be even more useful, but Ancient Greek is not supported yet.) — Eru·tuon 10:44, 6 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for the information!--Yoshiciv (talk) 12:16, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

, deux conjuguaisons non contractées
Bonjour, Je ne suis pas un expert du grec mais, lorsque j’utilise le modèle, j’obtiens deux conjuguaisons toutes deux indiquées non contractées : , alors que la deuxième, ἀγγελῶ, me semble au contraire contractée. N’est-ce pas une coquille ? Bon courage ! :-) 2A01:CB00:796:3C00:B5F1:97F4:6414:E50A 18:22, 25 November 2018 (UTC) P.-S. : Je pense que ce problème est similaire à celui signalé par Eru·tuon le 2 Mars 2017 : Module_talk:grc-conj 2A01:CB00:796:3C00:B5F1:97F4:6414:E50A 19:01, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, this is an error. I can look into fixing it. — Eru·tuon 00:02, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

No contraction of ε + η or ε + ῃ in verbs with monosyllabic stems
Regarding ε-contracted verbs, Smyth only mentions that ε + ο and ε + ω aren't contracted and the module currently reflects that, but   me to the fact that ε + η and ε + ῃ aren't contracted either. On Greek Wikisource, of several pairs of contracted and uncontracted forms (for instance, ῥῇ and ῥέῃ, δῆται and δέηται) that I searched for, only the uncontracted version can be found. So Smyth seems to have forgotten to mention that ε + η and ε + ῃ aren't contracted, or maybe he mentions it somewhere else. Anyway, I think I will try to change the behavior of the  conjugation type to reflect this, though it would be nice to get confirmation. — Eru·tuon 23:31, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you . Smyth at 397 comments on the indicative only. General rule is: ε+ε=ει, ε+ει=ει. The only contracted outcome can be ει (some notes here). Apart from pres.subjunctive, also important is the stress at Imperfect e.g. πνέω ἔπνεες>ἔπνεις).  Also at 2sing.imperative of compounds. And δέω=tie, δέω=need and δέομαι: the 'tie' sense is the one with all-contracted. sarri.greek (talk) 06:12, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * ! You are great, thanks. sarri.greek (talk) 16:18, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

Contracted forms labeled uncontracted

 * imperf-con-e provides both contracted and uncontracted forms, but both sets are labeled "uncontracted". See ὠθέω for an example: the fourth Imperfect table is titled "Imperfect: ὤθευν, ὠθεύμην (Uncontracted)", but ὤθευν and ὠθεύμην (and all the rest of the forms in the table) are actually contracted. —Mahāgaja · talk 20:36, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah, this general type of problem is noted at Module:grc-conj/documentation. I don't know when I will manage to fix it. — Eru·tuon 21:38, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Finally fixed in this edit after it was reported a third time in . — Eru·tuon 19:47, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Manually specified mediopassive perfect participle

 * at it is necessary to manually specify the mediopassive perfect participle  because the usual -θμ- > -σμ- rule doesn't apply. However, the periphrastic subjunctive and optative forms, which are built on this participle, still show the automatically generated . Would it be possible to get them to use the manually specified participle wherever one is given? Thanks! —Mahāgaja · talk 10:39, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Even if it's impossible, it needs to be done. Currently the module is regenerating the perfect passive participle for each perfect passive periphrasis. (See  in Module:grc-conj/data, where   stands for the perfect passive stem plus μ; not sure what   means.) It would also be great to generate the feminine and neuter forms of participles from the masculine rather than separately (see   and   in Module:grc-conj/data) so that only the masculine has to be supplied in . I already have code that can do that in Module:User:Erutuon/grc . — Eru·tuon 17:40, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Fixed, I think, though in a kludgy way. — Eru·tuon 20:33, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but though it's displayed correctly, the links are wrong. In the participle lines, each participle form links to the infinitive rather than to itself, and in the subjunctive/optative lines, they link to the third-person plural indicative. —Mahāgaja · talk 21:38, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Wow, that's bizarre. The words in the periphrases are also linking to the wrong entries: κεκορυθμένος and ὦ link to κεκορύθαται (the word at the end of the previous row), and κεκορυθμένος and εἴην link to κεκορύθαταιν (apparently formed from κεκορύθαται + ν, where ν comes from ὦσῐ(ν) at the end of the previous row). The linking function (which also retrieves the forms and adds stems to the endings) is very convoluted and has a lot of variables that are not erased between runs, so state bleeds over between the linking of different forms. — Eru·tuon 00:01, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
 * There's some weird stuff going on at τεύχω now too, which has automatically generated perfect passive participles, not manually specified ones. —Mahāgaja · talk 14:35, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Whoops, fixed that, but I'm getting so tired of fixing one bug and having another pop up because the module is so confusingly structured. I need to start a complete rewrite. — Eru·tuon 17:42, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Not completely fixed, I'm afraid. The feminine and neuter forms of the participle at τεύχω are missing the first four letters. —Mahāgaja · talk 18:17, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Ahh, I should have noticed that. Tried again. (Now some of the forms are still linked to the wrong entries, but different wrong entries. Huh.) — Eru·tuon 18:32, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Form override

 * Any idea why the manual override isn't working at ἧμαι? For the pluperfect, I've added ἧστο, but the table still has ἧτο. —Mahāgaja · talk 11:15, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I figured it out. I have to use ἧστο and call it a middle form. —Mahāgaja · talk 12:15, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Ahh, yeah. In the present, perfect, and pluperfect you can think of M as standing for mediopassive. — Eru·tuon 19:40, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Stray "Î"

 * Any idea why there is a stray "Î" at ἀλέομαι in the table "Present: ἀλεῦμαι (Uncontracted)" in the third-person plural middle optative? —Mahāgaja · talk 17:31, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * That's a symbol that in the module represents a particular type of contraction (έ plus οι). It happened to be decomposed (I plus combining circumflex) at the crucial point when it was supposed to be replaced with, so the substitution code didn't recognize it. I fixed it by moving contraction symbol substitution before the handling of dialectal forms. As usual, hopefully this doesn't cause something else to break; at least the dialect code looks like it doesn't look at contraction symbols at all. — Eru·tuon 23:27, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Many mistakes in the Perfect and Pluperfect conjugation
As per the grammar of Michalis Oikonomou:

(I will use the verb λύω for the examples provided, as he does)

the most usual form of conjugating the active perfect subjunctive/optative/imperative was periphrastically:

λελυκὼς-κυῖα-κὸς ὦ ᾖς ᾖ λελυκότες-κυῖαι-κότα ὦμεν ἦτε ὦσι λελυκότε-κυία-κότε ἦτον

λελυκὼς-κυῖα-κὸς εἴην εἴης εἴη λελυκότες-κυῖαι-κότα εἴημεν/εἶμεν εἴητε/εἶτε εἴησαν/εἶεν λελυκότε-κυία-κότε εἴητον/εἶτον	εἰήτην/εἴτην

λελυκὼς-κυῖα-κὸς ἴσθι ἔστω λελυκότες-κυῖαι-κότα ἔστε ἔστων/ἔστωσαν/ὄντων λελυκότε-κυία-κότε ἔστον ἔστων

When it comes to the active imperative, the monolectic forms are almost never used. For the pluperfect, while the archaic forms

ἐλελύκη(ν) ἐλελύκης

do appear, without the nu for the first person, the 3rd singular does not (ἐλελύκη). The later forms

ἐλελύκειμεν ἐλελύκειτε ἐλελύκεισαν

are also absent. There also does exist a periphrastic imperative for the middle voice, but it is not used much, so it isn't very crucial that it be added. --PastelKos (talk) 13:37, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Also, the 3rd plural middle indicative perfect and pluperfect for verbs that do not end in a vowel is formed almost always periphrastically:

πράττω: πεπραγμένοι εἰσί, πεπραγμένοι ἦσαν γράφω: γεγραμμένοι εἰσί, γεγραμμένοι ἦσαν πείθω: πεπεισμένοι εἰσί, πεπεισμένοι ἦσαν

--PastelKos (talk) 13:42, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

Uncontracted δηλόω
About this edit, there is a table showing the hypothetical uncontracted forms of in Appendix:Ancient Greek grammar tables. In general entries should show forms that are attested or possible.

As I understand it, we don't include uncontracted present and imperfect forms of or other -όω verbs because they aren't attested; they are only the hypothetical ancestors of the Attic and Ionic forms. (All but the Ionic table in Appendix:Ancient Greek contraction show ο contracting with the following vowel. Not sure if that means Ionic doesn't contract in those cases, or that there aren't examples of vowel combinations starting with ο.) I thought I had edited the module to remove the table of uncontracted -όω forms, but it doesn't seem to have ever been there. I visited the history, clicked on some of the old revisions of the module, edited each one, and did "preview page with template" putting in δηλόω in the box, but only saw the contracted tables.

We should only include tables and entries for uncontracted forms when a particular Greek dialect had that word and the form is actually attested or is theoretically possible in that dialect. I guess -όω verbs never have uncontracted forms (and they might be an Attic and Ionic category only), but -έω verbs could have uncontracted forms in particular dialects. If they were not attested in such dialects, we can only show contracted forms; for instance, if I remember correctly is a verb first attested in Koine Greek; the form  did not exist and should not be shown in a table and should not have an entry. It currently does have an entry because a well-meaning editor created a lot of lemma forms for all forms that were listed in the conjugation tables of some verbs at the time. I've since removed the uncontracted table, but not yet deleted the entries for the unattested verb forms.

It is unfortunate that our lemma is the first-person singular present indicative, because it means that we have to put the entry at an uncontracted form that did not exist in Attic and sometimes did not exist in any dialect. *ποιέω is an Ionic form, *δηλόω is nonexistent, *τῑμάω might have been unattested completely, or attested in some obscure dialect because the tables in Appendix:Ancient Greek contraction show αω contracting to ω everywhere. If we had the entries at, , we wouldn't be able to tell apart the main contraction types, but if the lemmas were τῑμᾶν, ποιεῖν, δηλοῦν, we would be using attested forms and the contraction types would have different endings. Sometimes a verb simply wasn't used in a non-contracting dialect, like. Also sometimes dialects have a combination of uncontracted and contracted forms, or contracted forms that are different from the Attic forms or uncontracted forms that are different from the hypothetical precursors to the Attic forms.

I'm not very familiar with analogues of Attic contracted verbs outside of Attic and Ionic, so I might have gotten some of this wrong, but hopefully it is mostly correct. — Eru·tuon 21:17, 7 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for your detailed explanation. (I shall read it again, more carefully). I have been thinking all you said, as in el.wikt, we do not have verb conjugations (except some very few). Here is the thing: Tradition has it that full tables are provided (unattested+attested, forms, tenses etc). Students of Anc.Gr. are asked to provide all forms. So, wiktionary readers, at least from Greece where the lesson is compulsory, need to see the full table. e.g. δηλόω is a standard paradigm at Grammars). Perhaps, as you say, such tables could be placed in Appendix areas showing endings only. Still, the students cannot copypaste their answers.
 * On the other hand, wiktionaries would like to be precise and present attested forms, just as printed dictionaries do.
 * I am trying to find a solution of combining in some way these two (for future el.wikt tables). Thank you for your explanations, I will take them under consideration.
 * We miss you at the grc section! I have so many questions and requests (for Medieval Greek, for extended late Kone up to Iustinianus, etc) but I do not know how or where to ask. If you ever have the time, it would be so nice to revisit some issues! Thanks. I wish you a very happy and healthy 2023. &#8209;&#8209;Sarri.greek &#9835; I 21:33, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
 * , Your Appendix:Ancient Greek grammar tables is perfect. That is what we need. Thank you. &#8209;&#8209;Sarri.greek &#9835; I 21:44, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

use of athematic conjugation types for thematic verbs
There seem to be a lot of cases where wiktionary entries use conjugation types like aor-ami for thematic verbs, but "ami" is documented as being for athematic verbs with an underlying α, such as ἵστημι. An example of this is in the entry for οὐτάω, which has { { grc-conj|aor-ami|οὐτ|οὐτ|AI3S=οὖτᾰ|dial=epi } }. It seems like this is being used to make a second aorist for this verb. Is this a kludge that just takes advantage of the fact that it gives the right endings? --2607:FB91:1B9C:13B4:B8F3:A642:EA80:A550 18:43, 28 October 2023 (UTC) =bug in Laconian infinitive= I believe Laconian infinitives are supposed to end in -ην ( https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Ancient_Greek_dialectal_conjugation#Infinitive ). The following template coding currently generates πᾰ́σχεν:

Looking at the Lua code, it seems that the problem is with the following lines in grc-conj.lua:
 * dialform('AI', 'ην', 'ele', 'lak')
 * dialform('AI', 'εν', 'ark', 'del')
 * dialform('AI', 'εν', 'doric')

I think these are in the wrong order. Since Laconian is classified by the code as a type of Doric, the change to -ην in the first line always gets undone, in the case of Laconian, by the third line. The check for Doric should come first.--2603:8000:8900:6E00:7065:6310:2DB0:44FB 23:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC) =possible bug for Doric= I could be misunderstanding this, but it seems like there is a bug in the treatment of Doric. The documentation for what dialects and dialect groups exist seems to be this source code: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Module:grc:Dialects. (If there is some other documentation besides reading the source, maybe I'm missing it.) Accoding to this, there is supposed to be a three-letter dialect code 'dor' for Doric. However, the code in grc-conj.lua never actually defines any endings for a 'dor' code. There is only a dialect group 'doric'. Here is the relevant line of the source:
 * ['doric'] = list_to_set{'lak', 'her', 'meg', 'krn', 'kor', 'arg', 'rho', 'pam', 'koa', 'thr', 'kre'},

So although it seems like we're supposed to have a dialect 'dor', it isn't defined as a member of the Doric group. So I think 'dor' should be added to this list, both to be consistent with the documentation and as an ease of use feature for users. If you look at the two examples below, the first one shows that 'dor' was recognized (as shown in the title), but it gives the standad Attic infinitive rather than the Doric one. The second one uses 'her' for Heraclean, which is a member of the Doric group. It works properly.

--Valvecable (talk) 23:29, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Acceleration
The links in the table need to have accelerated form creation enabled (WT:ACCEL). This was suggested by Vergencescattered in the Discord group. It is probably possible in the current version of the module by setting the  variable in   (which is currently   so no acceleration is added). would have to translate  to get the mood, person, and number labels for  (for instance,   to  ) and   would need a new parameter for the tense label (,  , etc.). The tense code would be translated from the  (for instance,   to  ). I'm not doing this right now, but just writing what I figured out here, because I wrote it on Discord, which is less accessible to editors. — Eru·tuon 19:24, 8 February 2024 (UTC)