User talk:Flāvidus

Translation boxes
Be aware that the parameter  is not intended for IPA but for transliterations (see Template:t). Please remove the IPA from all your translation entries. Fytcha (talk) 19:04, 30 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Can you please do this? Fytcha (talk) 10:08, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes I'll . I just started doing it, as one who has to do it.
 * It may take some time, whenever I find time, I'll do more.
 * In the meantime I'm not going to use IPA anymore where transliteration parameter is intended. Thank you for making me aware, by the I wish Wiktionary would implement a way to add IPA to translations, this is because there may be other people like me for whom phonetic info, for some reason weighs as much as the meaning.
 * Flāvidus (talk) 12:15, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your understanding.
 * Also, Wiktionary does record IPA information, just at a different place. For instance, the IPA that you've added is already present in the corresponding article: विनोद. I hope this clears up things. Fytcha (talk) 12:30, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

cattus
Hi. Why do you say the Armenian and Turkish are borrowed from Latin when the ultimate origin and the chain of travel of this Wanderwort are uncertain? --Vahag (talk) 00:49, 6 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi.You're right, and this is my point too.
 * Looking at the Proto-Indo-European, hypothetically the drift occurred from East to West. Though, I couldn't find any phonetic match among modern Indo-Aryan languages. So, please revert my edit կատու on cattus.
 * I'm thinking about putting kedi on կատու. Right now neither here nor there, but a stray cat. Is it OK?
 * Wanderword pages is a likely solution, and I'm not aware that they exist. I'll mention it in Tea Room.
 * Flāvidus (talk) 02:20, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
 * It is uncertain whether the word travelled from East to West, from North to South or from South to North. See the further etymology in . It is not possible to create Wanderwort pages on Wiktionary. All we can do in this situation is to mention the related words in the Etymology section, which is what has been done. Vahag (talk) 10:01, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, I thought so too. but I was not there to say so, As a
 * wanderlusting term it may have been more than bi-directional.
 * Yes, there's no evidence կատու is a descendant of cattus.
 * Flāvidus (talk) 14:02, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Special:Diff/66102980 in kez
Hey. I don't think this edit is correct, see e.g.:



Your example is also wrong from what I can tell; it should be “bana söyle” not bana söğle. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 08:48, 17 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Yes, in this context plural form of the ’’word” sounds natural, no matter if it is rare in usage, it only proves the exception. I'll undo the edit.
 * By the way, I found another book source with the ”word’’in plural.
 * Yet, as I expected, like nothing returns on the day to day internet, social chatter or othervise.
 * The difference “y” and “ğ”, is not learned  versus dialect, it just sounds better in given set of letters in this particular language.
 * As for the Wiktionary:dialects policy, I'm aware every language community supplies alternative spellings, and I've a good mind to add söğlemek as an alternative spelling to the section söylemek.
 * Here are some literal sources.
 * Flāvidus (talk) 14:16, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
 * If can be attested, it may of course be added (though probably as a rare, nonstandard form). I personally don't know what's going on in the first book you've cited (multiple footnotes on every single page to explain the nonstandard forms ), so I'm pinging  who maybe also has to say a thing or two about this. However, even if  can be attested, I still think we shouldn't use it in the usage examples of other words. The average reader who looks up  would obviously profit more from a usage example that contains the standard form. &mdash; Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 14:55, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
 * As you say, this may be the idea.
 * ”The average reader who looks up kez would obviously profit more from a usage example that contains the standard form”,and I agree to that.
 * Flāvidus (talk) 15:10, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
 * i don’t think i’ve ever come across “söğlemek” up until now. it’s that rare apparently. i think authors use it just to seem figurative (i even don’t know if it’s the right term to describe it as but you got the point). and i don’t think it should be mentioned in any entry in my opinion. the case with “kez” is different though. you can use with a figurative sense at some point. İtidal (talk) 22:57, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
 * “Söğlemek” girdisini “Söylemek”  olarak değiştireceyim. Wiktionary üzerinden tekerleği kendi başıma icat etme niyetim yok.
 * Bu arada, ' kez' kelimesinin çoğulu varmı derken ilk aklıma yok geldi idi. Hoş sonrada cümle içinde örnekleyemedim hemen 5 dakikada, fakat iki, üç tane Google books,da çıktı.Fytcha bulmuş, hoş Google web'de 0 hit var. Türkçe wikide sormayı < bence burda 'ğ' phonetic olarak uymuyor.
 * “Söğlemek” ve “söğle” türevleri Google'da yaklaşık 600 sonuç üretiyor.Sosyal medyadan ve halk ağzından farkındayım
 * Ben aslen İzmirliğim, bunu söğlememdeki sebeb, bildiğiniz batı Türkçesi konuşmuş olmam. Liseden sonra yurt dışında eğitim aldım ve 20 yıldan fazla ikamet ettim
 * ' söğlememdeki' birleşikmi yazılır yada ayrımı bile TDK ya göre değişebilir. Bunları kendi başıma ve aklıma göre değiştirme niyetim yok. Fakat, eğer dil yaşıyan birşey ise,ve öğle: (İlginç o kadar stabile olmuş birçok batı dilinde bile son 50 yıl içinde birkaç orthographic vs reform oldu) ve sanırım bunu yapacak olanlar, hepsini aynı kefeye koymadan TDK'daki puristler değil.Teşekkürler,
 * Flāvidus (talk) 03:48, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
 * anladım. ortografik bir reform sonucu imla değişimi söz konusu değil gördüğüm kadarıyla, çünkü söylemek terimi osmanlı türkçesi zamanında dahi biçiminde kayıt altına alınmış, "ğ" ile değil, "y" ile. İtidal (talk) 21:02, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Link to first book.ANDIRINLI AŞIK ALİ:(page 216)
 * https://books.google.com.tr/books?id=ARGwDwAAQBAJ
 * Flāvidus (talk) 14:57, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
 * ' söğlememdeki' birleşikmi yazılır yada ayrımı bile TDK ya göre değişebilir. Bunları kendi başıma ve aklıma göre değiştirme niyetim yok. Fakat, eğer dil yaşıyan birşey ise,ve öğle: (İlginç o kadar stabile olmuş birçok batı dilinde bile son 50 yıl içinde birkaç orthographic vs reform oldu) ve sanırım bunu yapacak olanlar, hepsini aynı kefeye koymadan TDK'daki puristler değil.Teşekkürler,
 * Flāvidus (talk) 03:48, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
 * anladım. ortografik bir reform sonucu imla değişimi söz konusu değil gördüğüm kadarıyla, çünkü söylemek terimi osmanlı türkçesi zamanında dahi biçiminde kayıt altına alınmış, "ğ" ile değil, "y" ile. İtidal (talk) 21:02, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Link to first book.ANDIRINLI AŞIK ALİ:(page 216)
 * https://books.google.com.tr/books?id=ARGwDwAAQBAJ
 * Flāvidus (talk) 14:57, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

Cantonese and Min Nan transliterations
Re: and : please use standard Cantonese and Min Nan transliterations. Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 02:10, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Turkish Imperatives
I would like to ask if you could help me figure out the various imperative forms of Turkish verbs. The only forms that appear in the conjugation tables on Wiktionary are, , and , but I know that the forms ,  (which even has an entry) and  also exist and I've been wondering if there are any others I don't know of? Trimpulot (talk) 11:29, 19 November 2023 (UTC)


 * @Trimpulot You are right, all the forms you mentioned in this message do exist, I checked on declention yapmak table, and it isn't included. As I said they do exist.
 * There is a straight answer to yapınız - is more formal form of (Ad una persona che dai da Lei ) yapın. Example: "Lütfen yapınız" One can use this form with any verb. I assume you're aware of the vocal harmony in declensions in Turkish. In another words "Lütfen konuşun" will become "Lütfen konuşunuz" In another words final suffice will follow the last syllable's  vocal harmony.
 * As for yapsana and yapsanıza There is not a single sense.
 * On one hand, yapsana is synonym to yap, thus an imperative. On the other hand, sound more euphemistic and less imperative, depending on the sentence. Example: "hadi yapsana bir an önce", come dire "perche non fai subito".
 * This explanation may sound a bit confusing. Look at this example: bak from bakmak "guardare". In this case, bak è come dire "guarda!" In una situazione dove uno ti dice "non  lo ho visto"  perche prima tu avevi detto "guarda!" e  se tu dici "allora perche non guardi", "baksana or bak o zaman".
 * In conclusione, in mio opinione yap e yapsana sono sinonimi.
 * Se hai altre domande, forse la prossima volta sarà una cosa più facile da rispondare, o avrò più fortuna di dare una risposta diretta. :) Flāvidus (talk) 19:08, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much for your reply. If you have time, I'd really appreciate it if you could clear some doubts I have regarding what differences there are among the various adverbs you can derive from a verb, in particular adverbs formed with (eg.: yapa yapa),  (eg.: yaparak),  (eg.: yapınca) and  (eg.: yaparken, yapıyorken, yapmışken, yapacakken). I'd also appreciate it if you could help me understand when either yapınca or yaparken (or yapıyorken etc.) would be equivalent to yaptığımda (or yaptığında etc.). Thanks again.
 * Trimpulot (talk) 13:15, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
 * @Trimpulot I'll try to answer your questions to my best judgement. Please bear in mind, I am not a linguist or a teacher, and after graduating from high school, I lived ( study, work) for long period of time abroad, Germany, Italy, Switzerland, Far East etc. So, my Turkish was kind of High school level for a long time. lately, I am having more contact to the language.
 * While, there was this Beerparlor discussion on yapmak I'd compliled this quotiations, my intent was put on the discussion, later I changed my mind. I am sending it to you, maybe it is some use to you. The difference as a native speaker it is obvious to me, when to use yapmak or etmek, and when one can use any. The difference looks like, if it is (intransitive) or (transitive). However in some cases, as in şaka one can use both. If you look at joke there is an archaic transitive form.
 * Yapmak (transitive) ”Have you ever danced the tango? ”, ”Hiç tango yaptın mı?'(never ettin mi) in this case ”- (intransitive): ” I danced with her all night long.”,”Onunla tüm gece dans ettim.” '(never ”Onunla tüm gece dans yaptım ) in this case
 * With some exceptions, one can use etmek instate of yapmak, but not viceversa . in some cases such use it will sound more informal.
 * şaka ettim yada yaptım both forms are OK.
 * banyo ettim yada yaptım''' both forms are OK.
 * ''hata ettim yada yaptım both forms are OK.
 * Flāvidus (talk) 20:05, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
 * banyo ettim yada yaptım''' both forms are OK.
 * ''hata ettim yada yaptım both forms are OK.
 * Flāvidus (talk) 20:05, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Flāvidus (talk) 20:05, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Flāvidus (talk) 20:05, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

yapa yapa etc
@Trimpulot

① yaparken [] Zarf fiili çünkü zarf fiil eki olan -ken eki kök,ek fiil,ken eki şeklinde oluşuyor ENGLISH It is an adverb because the adverb suffix -ken is formed as a root, suffix verb, and suffix ken. (This is a link for Turkish students asking questions, I assume it is for Turkish students in schuola  media, quindi solo in Turco.

In my opinion it is easy to memorize, because it is not declined. It translates into “ while doing or having / mentre = “Toplantı ... yaparken,'''.Non sono sicuro della traduzione in Italiano, ma sembra come dire “ mentre avevano una reunione”. In case of yaparken öğrenmesini istemişti. , mi sembra si può tradurre “voleva che lo impara facendolo, ma anche altre traduzioni sono possibili.



② ( As for yapa yapa or similar expressions ) As you can see in the quoted book, it translates into “by doing, by playing, by acting” If I am not mistaken, it is like, “facendo, suonando, comportando or comportandosi in reflexiv etc”. As for vocal harmony, the endings are either (- a or -e ), as in the case of “öğrenmek” - “imparare ” che diventa “ “öğrene öğrene”, “göre göre” by looking etc,. Bear in mind “göre göre”or its synonym” bile bile” has a idiomatic use of “ intentionaly or on purpose, usually with an implication of doing something in spite and intentionally by knowing the negative impact of the action”

In most cases it is possible to use yaparak as an infinitive, instate of yapa yapa öğreniriz,, thus one can say yaparak öğreniriz,. The difference between both is, that the iterative form emphasizes.



I'll write more on other forms of adverbs deriving from verbs as you have meentioned. Stay tuned. Flāvidus (talk) 18:54, 27 November 2023 (UTC) ▬▬▬ ▬▬▬  @Trimpulot I am using https://kelimeler.net/kelime-bulma-makinesi with parameters *[e*mek] 7 Harfli Kelimeler (EKLEMEK - TO ADD), (DENEMEK Hyphenation: de‧ne‧mek-TO TRY) or elemek One can see the declension pattern at the denemek too. This goes for the previous thing yapa yapa and all the other examples we have mentioned.

Therefore. it becomes deneye deneye probably you are aware of this kind of declension.

Take the elenmek= BE ELIMINATED, and it becomes elene elene I am sure there is rule to it , probably it is the syllable count.

In my opinion the difference between yapıyorken and yaparken is minimal, this is to say both sounds as the action occurs at the present time.I am looking at the some words at the kelimeler.net and it looks like the form -yorken doesn't remain unchanged, and depends on the previous syllable's sound system.

Thus öğrenmek > öğrenirken or öğreniyorken So far there are words that get an additional i -yorken or ı-yorkenor ü-yorken or u-yorken (An example is : [[okumak] ]=”okuyorken or okurken.”

I think the sound changes in Turkish might be the most challenging thing, it is similar to Finnish in this respect. Depends on the person who learns, yet if I was a non native, I'd simply guess , this is what the natives do anyway. As for yapmışken It sounds like an action wholly or at least partially completed. As one can see from quotes, it almost always implies a sense of while you are at it, it is worth doing it well“”. Thus it is a common expression to say {yapmışken iyi yap}= 'anything done or attempted, is also worth doing it well'





This doesn't cover all the questions and probably won't clear all the doubts. I may add more this topic.

English quotations
Hello. I've noticed you've added a lot of English quotations. Firstly, thank you for your work. However, I have noticed that many of these quotations are badly formatted or pasted in with numerous errors and typos. In addition, many of them are not given with the original date of the quote or the name of the actual author of the text in question. For instance, the quote you added here was not written by Stephanie Quinn in the year 2000, but by Robert Frost in 1936. Stephanie Quinn was only quoting Robert Frost, and in such cases the original author and date should be included at a bare minimum. Please make sure when you are adding a quotation to include the original date and author of the text in question, and to proofread the text itself so it is not full of typographical errors. Thanks! — Vorziblix (talk · contribs) 21:17, 3 January 2024 (UTC)