User talk:Dƶoxar

Welcome!
--Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 23:36, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

Template:uk-conj-table
Please don't use this template directly in entries. It's meant to serve as a base for other templates. 02:47, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Ideally, you're right but there are no other specific conjugation templates for Ukrainian. What if one wants to add each form manually, like the old and  (apart from impf/pf, everything else is manual)? Should there be another template for that? --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 02:51, 22 April 2014 (UTC)


 * For Serbo-Croatian the single template is used as well.--Dƶoxar (talk) 03:08, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I would actually consider making a separate template just to pass the forms on to the other. It seems pointless and redundant at first, but it has advantages in maintenance because it makes it easier to adjust the "in-entry" template without disturbing other templates that rely on the basic table, or the other way around. 03:12, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
 * (E/C)Could you help with that, please? At least to split impf/pf and disable irrelevant forms for the input and output? Also, if a form is not added, could you add "—"? робити are зробити are good examples to work with, although with not the simplest conjugation. I'll try to convert some verbs if templates are created. It must be less exciting than modules, so I'll take no for an answer :). --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 03:21, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Of course the best solution may be to create Module:uk-verb, using Module:ru-verb as example. Do you think you could work together on that? 03:14, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Not sure. I could help a bit if the job is started. There's still so much to do for Russian and there's not enough reference material for Ukrainian. Some basic words can be done but it may not get as comprehensive as Module:ru-verb. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 03:21, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Anatoli is right, we have not enough references for Ukrainian verb conjugation to divide verbs clearly.--Dƶoxar (talk) 03:40, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Template:uk-conj-reflexive
I deleted this template because it mostly just duplicates Template:uk-conj-table, which would lead to maintenance problems in the future. It's better to re-use the existing templates instead of making copies of it. 22:07, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, but how to make Template:uk-conj-table work correct with reflexive verbs?--Dƶoxar (talk) 22:10, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Does it not work correctly already? 22:12, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * No. Reflexive verbs have different scheme of creating future tense. Instead of му etc they use тимуся ect where base means infinitive without тися.--Dƶoxar (talk) 22:16, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * It seems that the template was not properly designed from the start, then... Sigh. It shouldn't have inflectional information in it, like the -ти- future forms. It should really be changed so that those future tense forms are provided directly as parameters, instead of being created automatically by the template. Hopefully the template is not used in too many entries yet, so that it still can be amended somehow. 22:21, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * But isn't it possible to do similar like with perfect and imperfect verbs? If a verb is non-reflexive the template would work like it works now, and if a verb is reflexive the template would use "reflexive" version. In that case we would need just add line "base" to articles about reflexive verbs, mark "ref=y" like with Spanish ones and make some changes in the template page. --Dƶoxar (talk) 22:39, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I suppose that might work. A lot of this would be easier if we could split the template in two, like I suggested above. Because then we could add extra parameters to the "top" template while leaving the "bottom" template for the table the same. Or we could make a small module, which does not have different conjugations built in like Module:ru-verb does, but takes away all the difficult parts of having to manage perf/impf, reflexive and so on. The Russian module does that quite nicely I believe? 22:53, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * We could use your skills, CodeCat. Reflexive verbs are much easier in Ukrainian, though (can't say the same about the rest of conjugations). There's only one ending "-ся" (never "-сь" like in Russian) and I'm pretty sure (correct me if I'm wrong), it can never be stressed like in some Russian forms. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 23:20, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Module:ru-verb looks quite complicated for me as I'm not very good in this topic :( /// Yes, -ся can never be stressed. --Dƶoxar (talk) 23:31, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * To be more exact... if you make a verb reflexive, does that change the basic verb (spelling, including accent) in any way? Or is it literally just a matter of adding -ся to the basic form? 23:37, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's what I meant. Just add "-ся". Same with Belarusian, actually but -ць + -ся is merged into -цца. (This is how we say it Russian but Belarusians also write it this way - written Belarusian often seems like spoken Russian or "падонки" slang, eye dialect.) --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 23:41, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Ok, I have Module:uk-verb almost ready, and a template that uses it. I wonder about the "impersonal" past passive participle. I don't really like how it looks in the original table, with the text "Impersonal" just put in the table cell, but I'm not sure what else to do with it.  01:14, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I've used it on робити. Oops, re: -сь not used. It seems it does in alternative imperatives - диви́ся/диви́сь, диві́мося/диві́мось. @Dƶoxar, where else, do you know? We may need to adjust rules as we go along, by trial and error. "impersonal" looks predictable from passive past, just a form of it. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 01:30, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Also дивлюся, дивлюсь // дивимося, дивимось // дивитеся, дивитесь.--Dƶoxar (talk) 02:59, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Also, I noticed that has an alternative form after vowels. Presumably, this should also be applied to the future forms, right? Do all verbs have alternation of initial і- like that?  01:25, 24 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Yes, after vowels - бу́де йти́ but бу́деш іти́. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 01:30, 24 April 2014 (UTC)


 * We can establish a simple rule for reflexive imperatives. There are two forms if an imperative ends in a vowel - one with -ся and one with -сь. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 01:40, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * What are the vowels that it should check for? 01:42, 24 April 2014 (UTC)


 * аеєиіїоуюя and ёыѣэ if archaic are to be used as well. @Dƶoxar. please fix Babel :)--Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 01:51, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Ok, I've made it automatically alternate the initial vowel, but I don't know what happens if the initial vowel is stressed. Can you check to make sure everything is ok? Also, why do the tables have two 1pl forms, one with -mo and one with -m? Wikipedia doesn't list the second form.  02:10, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * It looks very good, thank you. I can't find verbs that start with a stressed "і́". I've checked but it should preserve "і" if the stress is also preserved. The alternative forms are more colloquial but there's no need to mark them. There's no big difference between іді́мо/іді́м, диви́ся/диви́сь--Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 02:28, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * What about y-? That's a common prefix as far as I know. 02:29, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Let's leave them unchanged for now. у-/в- may have opposite meanings - уходи́ти/входи́ти - go away/enter. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 02:35, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Obviously verbs like are unaffected, they have a /j/ initial consonant. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 02:51, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * The rules for when to use which letter are defined in Module:uk-common, as we may want to use them for other things. 02:53, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * It's a good idea. FYI, this rule to replace і with й is not strictly followed (the reverse is followed better), it's just to make the speech smoother, in case you need to define it somewhere or wish to verify in real life. --Anatoli (обсудить/вклад) 03:00, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * About -ся/-сь, -мо/-м etc, it looks there is no sense to make a separate line for alternative form. It works the same as if it is written in one line with comma.--Dƶoxar (talk) 03:20, 24 April 2014 (UTC)