Talk:вям

The module thinks it's a derivative of ям. Which is obviously wrong. The present goes вям, ве́деш/веш, ве́де, ве́дем, ве́дете, ве́дят??? Pres part ве́дящ? PPP ве́ден? VN ве́дене? What about the aorist, aorist participle, imperfect, imperfect participle, imperative? Benwing2 (talk) 16:01, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I've been looking through resources on the net, but unfortunately I couldn't find exactly. Because of the coronavirus lockdown, I also lack access to the uni-library, so I can't check there either. The verb itself is obsolete, so it does not appear in modern dictionaries. БЕР (which I have listed in the references) gives 2nd sg. pres. as веш, but this is not sufficient to recover the whole paradigm. The aorist is either ведох, веде, веде, ведохме, ведохте, ведоха (similar to, ) or ведеех, ведее, ведее, ведеехме, ведеехте, ведееха (like the aorist of 🇨🇬). One thing that I found was that the form also exists /here is a reference/, so both variants are possible. It may be better to redo the entry as a non-lemma before further resources are found. I got a little excited when you published the new conjugation module, but it may have been premature to create  as a full-fledged lemma. Безименен (talk) 20:50, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
 * BTW, the form exists as a derivative of  - it's referenced in.
 * I think we could come up with a way for "unknown" inflections. @Benwing2, you did something like that for Russian terms where the stress or inflections are not known with 100% certainty. It's good to try to convert all terms using old templates but we should try not to introduce new errors either (not necessarily about this term but in general). Perhaps I should mention this in a more visible place, like Module talk:bg-headword? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 02:50, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Maybe under Module talk:bg-verb. Benwing2 (talk) 05:12, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I added in Module_talk:bg-headword instead. Not for verbs for any terms, perhaps? --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 05:26, 5 May 2020 (UTC)