Thread:User talk:CodeCat/Perfective and imperfectie forms/reply (10)

Not all languages are like Dutch. Usually there can be many ways to form diminutives.

One of the advantages of these categories is keeping the common base (part of speech) category less populated with contentless entries. Just like Dutch diminutives don't categorize into Category:Dutch nouns beside Category:Dutch diminutive nouns. Though Serbo-Croatian at this stage still lacks automatic categorization for perfectiveness in the headword templates. The other advantage is because it's interesting. I want to be able to look these alternative forms up. Fetch a list of them without having to parse the content of all verbs.

The reason why there is no category for the base lemma as well is because it's the unmarked form. Similarly, we don't have categories for "nouns from which diminutives are derived". Though I admit it's an intriguing idea. I do however want to see categories for verbs which are both perfective and imperfective, and for those lacking perfective/imperfective counterpart. These would be interesting because such behavior is unexpected. The default behavior would be each verb having a perfective/imperfective counterpart, with one of those forms being a base lemma, and that kind of assumed behavior needs no special marking through categorization. Everything that deviates from it does.

The use is the same as all the alternative forms categories - why not? We have many more useless categories which nobody every uses, like subdivision of nouns by gender, or by inflection such as Category:Spanish verb first-person forms.