Talk:всички

Hi. Could you please validate the entry, as there is some circular message in dictionary. Is всички both the plural of and also a singular pronoun with its own declension? What is the declension like? вси́чки (m), вси́чка (f), вси́чко (n), вси́чки (p) (plural = sg m?). Any other forms? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 22:50, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Всички used as a singular pronoun (всичката супа) sounds extremely colloquial to my ear and I personally avoid that usage (although it is unfortunately far too widespread to designate it as ungrammatical). The definite forms are: всичкия(т), всичката, всичкото. They can always be replaced with цял, цяла, цяло. Bogorm converſation 16:33, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Used as a singular pronoun, it does not mean each, every, but the whole. Изядох всичката супа – I have eaten the whole soup. Bogorm converſation 16:35, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Please review the current revision, if it's OK. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 22:38, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, it is all right now. Bogorm converſation 10:26, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
 * The historically correct forms are *всичък (m), всичка (f), всичко (n). It's not colloquial, simply the singular forms have mostly dropped out. The formation is from + diminutive suffix  =  +  (other lemmas with this suffix are, , , , , etc.). Безименен 15:32, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Can Bogorm please respond to this? I'm not a native speaker and it sounds a bit complicated. BTW, @Безименен, I never receive any pings from you ( or )! There may be a bug, probably because you don't have a user page. Also calling . --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 08:17, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the problems with the pinging. I'm not sure why it happens. I just created a simple profile page, but I doubt it will help. Btw, if you are stuck with some etymology, try BER. In this particular case, is explained in vol. 1, p. 195. Some volumes have really low reading quality, but unfortunately there are no better options. St. Mladenov had also composed an etymological dictionary of Bulgarian, however, it is not available online. Безименен (talk) 09:17, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
 * : I did received your ping this time! Thanks for the user page. The issue with the entry is now that yours and Bogorm's statements contradict each other a bit (about being colloquial, for example). You can try editing the page yourself. Let us know what kind of help you need. I've made a couple of entries like {m|bg|голе́мичък}} based on your message.
 * At https://ibl.bas.bg/rbe/lang/bg/всички/ I can read this:
 * ВСЍЧКИ мн., обобщ. местоим. 1. Вместо прил. Цялото количество от лица
 * ◊ Всеки един. Разг. Всеки.
 * It looks to me the entry matches these definition, doesn't it? It looks we still need to add "anyone" sense. . --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 09:30, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't think Bogorm's statement and mine share the same context to call them contradictory. Bogorm referred to the current status of the meaning entire, whole, while I was talking about the diachronical origin of the lemma itself.
 * Before I make any premature changes to page, how exactly do you want to proceed? We may create a page for and move the second meaning over there. I'm not sure if that's what we want, though. RBE seems to treat  as a variant of . This is functionally correct and I confirm that the two forms can be synonymous, but it is morphologically and diachronically false. Objectively, the two forms are distinct. One is все + -ичък, while the other все + -як (the same suffix as in, ).
 * For example, BER (vol.1 authored by Vl. Georgiev) treats (всяк/всякой, всяка, всяко, etc.) as distinct from  (*всичък, всичка, всичко). Безименен (talk) 10:32, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Are you able to edit the page the way you want it to be? It may be better that way because I don't know what needs to be added. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 12:01, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, I was able to edit. The problem is that I'm not sure if we are suppose to create . I tried to create it as a reconstruction page, but Wiktionary did not allow me to do that (I guess it's because Bulgarian is not supposed to have reconstructed terms). If that's not what we are supposed to do, then reverse the changes and delete that I just created. Безименен (talk) 13:41, 19 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Please let me know what you need. Do you want deleted?! --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 01:39, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the late reply. I'm not sure exactly. I'm not familiar what Wiktionary regulations are in cases like this one. As I mentioned in an earlier comment, the masculine form of itself is not directly attested in the standard language. Български етимологичен речник gives it as a reconstruction . That is also what I tried to create initially, but Wiktionary did not let me. For this reason, I created it as a normal entry. If that's not against the principles of Wiktionary, then keep it. I haven't come across another case like this one before, so I don't know how to proceed. Безименен (talk) 20:21, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

I don't know myself. I will call Bulgarian contributors again: Please help us decide what to do with  - should it be reformatted or deleted? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 22:19, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I suppose you should delete, and remove вси́чка from the table, keeping only the definite forms in singular. Also the plural form of is again , they are in fact homonyms. Тhe plural form  has very limited use - only in position before phrases, compairing a numeral and a countable form or a plural form of a noun: все́ки ча́с, but на все́ки два́ ча́са, вся́ка мину́та and на все́ки две́ мину́ти. In other cases the plural form  has been entirely replaced by , but morphologically  is not part of the forms paradigm of . - Nauka (talk) 16:53, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi. If you can follow, are you able to make the changes requested? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 23:03, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * OK, it looks like we have the following forms: definite masc singular вси́чкия(т) "all the (masculine noun), the entire (masculine noun)", definite feminine singular вси́чката "all the (feminine noun), the entire (feminine noun)", indefinite neuter singular вси́чко "everything", definite neuter singular вси́чкото "all the (neuter noun), the entire (masculine noun)", indefinite plural вси́чки "everyone, everybody", definite plural вси́чките "all the (plural noun), the entire (plural noun)". Missing are *вси́чък, *вси́чка, vocative masculine singular *вси́чки(й). Is that right? Two questions:
 * Where should the lemma go? PONS puts it under вси́чкия, RBE and chitanka  put it under вси́чкият, although chitanka lists a full paradigm (including feminine singular вси́чка, which per RBE is archaic) under вси́чкия . I'm inclined to put it under вси́чкият.
 * Should we include вси́чко and вси́чки under the вси́чкият paradigm?
 * Benwing2 (talk) 11:10, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
 * The academic books, which I could check in, present the pronoun as separate pronoun, which is out of the paradigmа of, because   is substantivated pronoun with its own, very different meaning, which does not correspond to the meaning of the definit singular forms:  /, ,  . All books present the paradigma of  with the forms / (m. sng),  (f. sng),   (n. sng),  / (common pl. forms). The singular forms are always definit. These pronouns also do not have vocative forms. The form  does not exist. Regards! --Nauka (talk) 18:14, 24 April 2020 (UTC)