Talk:Gscheidwaschl

Moved out of the entry, a mention:

RFV discussion: December 2018–March 2021
Only 1 result at google books (which might be a mentioning), 1 in google groups (dialectal, for example with i = I, di = you (sg., obj.)). --Brown*Toad (talk) 11:39, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Here is one in de.sci.philosophie. The same one? I don’t get the intention of the “dialectal” parenthesis. --Lambiam 19:15, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * google groups gave me this by opa2013 from 05.12.13: "Schau Gscheidwaschl, a nett?s G?schenk hab i f?r di!" (maybe this link works...). My guess would be that it's supposed to be: "Schau Gscheidwaschl, a nett's G'schenk hab i für di!". Anyway, i (=, ) and di (= , [singular, object]) show that it's not normal High German but dialectal (Bavarian?). The parenthesis after you specifiy which you it is. --Brown*Toad (talk) 19:36, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * It is the same message I saw. Nominative i and accusative di fit with Bavarian. --Lambiam 23:35, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * There seems to be a problem with the encoding of that text: on my computer (Mac: both Firefox 64 and Safari 11.1.2), I'm seeing placeholders for umlauted vowels, apostrophes, and other "non-ASCII" characters. Chuck Entz (talk) 18:07, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
 * This is obviously a difference of interpretation as to what language this is- Wiktionary doesn't require languages ...
 * Move to Bavarian and look for references that meet CFI for that Limited-documented language. Pinging as the one who understands best how Wiktionary treats "German dialects". Chuck Entz (talk) 17:54, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
 * @Chuck Entz (1): I've the same problem - it looks like an error on google's/usenet's part and not on our part.
 * @Chuck Entz (3): google groups or usenet is an accepted source as for wt's LDL requirements. Thus the single quote could be enough to attest a Bavarian term. However, the text encoding problem could be an attestation problem. Is malformatted text acceptable? Can someone restore the text (there's a suggestion above, can someone verify or correct it)? Can someone translate it (suggestion: "Look #, a nice present have I for you" or "Look #, I have a nice present for you")? --84.161.18.20 23:20, 25 December 2018 (UTC)


 * It may have been entered in German by someone who genuinely saw it in German — I can find non-durable websites where it occurs in German [ ] text — but if that's the only citation, then it seems it only meets CFI as Bavarian (although deciding between Bavarian-regional  and   from only a very short text can be, well, like trying to decide if a single sentence is Scottish English or Scots). Since the malformatting isn't in the specific word we're trying to attest, and doesn't render the citation ambiguous or unintelligible as to meaning or language, it's tolerable, though obviously suboptimal. I would quote it with the errors intact, but we could provide a 'normalization' afterwards in brackets or something. Providing a translation is fine. - -sche (discuss) 03:51, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Of course it should be quoted with the errors, as only that would give a correct quote. Bavarian i, di, für, hab, á, schau, Gschenk can be attested by other sources. &  are dialectal (Bavarian?) and have nett's. -84.161.23.193 10:00, 26 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Moved from the entry:




 * RFV-failed as German (there was only one German use, which I moved from the entry to right above this comment). Relabelled "Bavarian". - -sche (discuss) 03:40, 17 March 2021 (UTC)