Template talk:el-verb

New parameter "note"
— It would be good if you can tell anyone else who might be interested about this addition.
 * There is now an additional parameter which you might need to use occasionally, see.
 * — Salt  marsh . 17:11, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

all four stems
Just a thought: all three (four -with ppparticiple-) stems to be stated at the main lemma. e.g. Too long... But it is complete. My ideal would include imperfect too sarri.greek (talk) 08:28, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * αγαπάω &bull; (agapáo) / αγαπώ (past: αγάπησα. passive: present: αγαπιέμαι, past: αγαπήθηκα, perfect participle: αγαπημένος)
 * Shown better at User:Sarri.greek/template1 --sarri.greek (talk) 21:33, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

The head-word line
Rather a long gestation I'm afraid!


 *   (simple past tense or aorist:, passive voice:  or , perfect passive participle: )
 * /  (simple past tense or aorist:, passive voice: , perfect passive participle: )
 *   (simple past tense or aorist:, active voice: , perfect passive participle: )
 *  deponent,  (simple past tense or aorist:, perfect passive participle: —)

If it isn't to spread out over one line (for those long verbs) I have curtailed it a bit. (1) Leaving out the passive past, (2) giving the transliterations a ttips (3) Abbreviating the PoS names, but they have ttips and are still linked to a definition. Any thoughts please? — Salt  marsh. 20:02, 9 November 2019 (UTC)


 * By by-passing the "official" HWL system we could simplify the 2 sets of brackets:
 *  /   (simple past tense or aorist:, passive voice: , perfect passive participle: )
 * — Salt  marsh . 20:07, 9 November 2019 (UTC)


 * , I was writing this, while you were writing the last paragrph! Coinciding thougths. This is what i was writing:
 * it looks so nice! Oh wonderful! Thoughts, of first impression.
 * I think that the four stems must all be visible at the Active main lemma (that is, including passive past which is vital for the verb. Thank god, they are only 4! (in ancient there may be up to 8 stems!)
 * sp I don't know if anglophones 'get it' more than I do. I would rather have: past. And pass for passive
 * for varying forms, one could avoid the wording or with a slash?
 * example active: (Ι made up some extreme learned forms, for the sake of the example. Distinguish voices with an mdash?):
 *   (simple past tense or aorist:  &mdash; passive voice: /, simple past tense or aorist: /, perfect passive participle: )
 * I would rather have in parenthesis only the OTHER voice, but I suspect this is not allowed
 * , simple past tense or aorist: (passive voice: /, simple past tense or aorist: /, perfect passive participle: )
 * example passive:
 * /, simple past tense or aorist: /, perfect passive participle: (active voice: )

The ppp belongs to the passive series of forms. The active, could be outside the parenthesis or somehow separate.
 * PS: I presume the parenthesis marks are compulsory... ahhhh. To open and close them must be a nuisance at templates...
 * PS2, a detail: the comma after the dot of transcriptions: it looks weird.
 * PS3, for the terms (ps, p, a) it would be nice if they looked like simple past tense or aorist, just like the genders m, f, n look. I am excited!! Thank you, boss!!!!


 * , and one more thing: I thhhhink they always have the forms in bold. and the terms just italics, but not bold. sarri.greek (talk) 20:40, 9 November 2019 (UTC)

— — — — — — — — you can see some other language formats at User:Saltmarsh/Sandbox
 * Of your's I think that I like best:


 * , simple past tense or aorist: (passive voice:, simple past tense or aorist: , perfect passive participle: )
 * or


 * , simple past tense or aorist: (passive voice:    simple past tense or aorist:    perfect passive participle: )
 * 1. Since the translit bullets act as punctuation perhaps the commas are not needed?
 * 2. If long verbs aren't going to extend into the next line can we leave out alternative forms?
 * 3. There is one proviso with all of this - any new template must work with the existing HWL arguments.
 * If you agree I will play with the second one immediately above. — Salt  marsh . 06:26, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , I cannot see any difference at the 2 above examples. Yes, alternative forms could be omitted. It looks better without commata. sarri.greek (talk) 10:40, 10 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Thank you - I'll see how it can be assembled. — Salt  marsh . 11:07, 10 November 2019 (UTC)