text:
User talk:Florian Blaschke

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello, welcome to Wiktionary, and thank you for your contribution so far. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

 * How to edit a page is a concise list of technical guidelines to the wiki format we use here: how to, for example, make text boldfaced or create hyperlinks. Feel free to practice in the sandbox. If you would like a slower introduction we have a short tutorial.
 * Entry layout explained (ELE) is a detailed policy documenting how Wiktionary pages should be formatted. All entries should conform to this standard, the easiest way to do this is to copy exactly an existing page for a similar word.
 * Our Criteria for inclusion (CFI) define exactly which words Wiktionary is interested in including. There is also a list of things that Wiktionary is not for a higher level overview.
 * The FAQ aims to answer most of your remaining questions, and there are several help pages that you can browse for more information.
 * We have discussion rooms in which you can ask any question about Wiktionary or its entries, a glossary of our technical jargon, and some hints for dealing with the more common communication issues.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! If you have any questions, bring them to the Information desk, or ask me on my talk page. If you do so, please sign your posts with four tildes: ~ which automatically produces your username and the current date and time.

Again, welcome! -- Cirt (talk) 02:56, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Babel
Hello! Please add a BabelBox to your userpage so we know what languages we can help in. Thanks! --Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 02:27, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Deus
Just because you "Can't see a reason" does not make the work of professional etymologists wrong. The next time you can't see the reason, try asking first. --EncycloPetey (talk) 04:17, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Which Spanish and Portuguese etymological dictionaries have you already tried? Have you looked at the 1856 Diccionario etimológico de la lengua castellana, precidido de unos Rudimentos de etimología treatise on Spanish etymology by Pedro Felipe Monlau y Roca?  Which Galegan and French etymological dictionaries did you check?  Or are you only asking now because you got caught out?  You're quick to eliminate information that you "can't see" justification for, without a reference to support you, but won't change your mind without chapter and verse?  Did it never occur to you that the inheritted "native" forms are dios:, dieu:, etc. and that Deus: was secondarily borrowed from Ecclesiastical Latin? --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:30, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Please stop this line of argument. If you think that it's "not my job", then you shouldn't be editing a wiki. EncycloPetey has already gone through more trouble in providing you refs than I would have. In fact, he already listed some of the "native" forms and you apparently failed to understand him. The only thing I appreciate here is that you apparently have ceased to edit war at Deus. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 01:07, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

elephant
Do you have any sources on the origin of the word elephant? Beekes claim that Greek is Berber-Egyptian compound which sounds stupid. The oldest related attestation is Akkadian 𒄠𒋛: (see talkpage). Blažek (see reference) is a well-known long ranger, even though his explanation seems plausible, and the Russian web site, apparently sourcing Militarev & Kogan (not checked in paper edition though), optimistically reconstructs plethora of Proto-Semitic forms, and Orel's work cited at has been criticized for many errors. Something more up-to-date and without agenda is needed. If necessary, we can create an appendix page which would discuss all theories and which individual etymologies could link to. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 00:35, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 07:25, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

LIV3
I've read it will be online. Do you perhaps know when? :) --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 00:29, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Not right now, but I could ask – or write to Kümmel. With the LIV2, most handy as PDF, and the addenda, however, I don't have a pressing need for it personally, although I'm looking forward to it, too :)
 * Probably even more important for us, it seems Kroonen's book is finally available! --Florian Blaschke (talk) 16:44, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Which LIV for 🇨🇬?
You added information from the LIV to the etymology section of 🇨🇬, plus an argumentation that looks like OR (original research). Nothing against it, but I'd like it to be properly sourced. Could you give me the reference to the version of the LIV that you pulled that particular interpretation from? Is there a reference to your claim that "some remnant of the initial w, even if regularly lost word-initially, should have remained in other (e.g., zero-grade) forms", or should you yourself be credited? (If you don't want to write the necessary footnote, I can do it myself, if you provide the necessary information and references.) --Pereru (talk) 20:27, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's OR; do with it what you want, I don't care. I think Stang (1966), Vergleichende Grammatik der baltischen Sprachen, is the standard reference on Baltic out there, if you need a source for the claim that initial *w definitely does not disappear and stays put before *r̥ in Baltic (compare Old Prussian wīrds "word"), if not before consonantal *r also. There are only two editions of the LIV so far (the third edition is apparently going to be published online, see above) and I always use the most recent one.
 * I just tried to correct the existing account, which could easily contain OR as well (one should need to check the source, but it's difficult to do so for those Wiktionarians – i. e., most of us – who don't read Latvian; reason not to provide refs in exotic languages without relevant literal quote and translation), and "*werdʰ-, *wr-edʰ-, *h₂erHdʰ- ("to grow; high")" is patent nonsense: you can't have a root that capriciously starts either in w or a laryngeal (and may contain a further laryngeal), depending on your mood, or whatever you happen to find convenient. These are clearly two (or more) different roots. ---Florian Blaschke (talk) 00:07, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Balto-Slavic notation
Ivan Štambuk and I have had some disagreements in the past over the rules about what notation to use for Proto-Balto-Slavic terms. His point of view seems to be that we can only use words in the exact same notation that is found in sources. His stance is also that we can only copy from sources verbatim, and are not allowed to do any etymological researching of our own, even though there is no policy against original research on Wiktionary (and it's one of the reasons WT:ES is full of such researching). My own stance is that such a practice is unworkable because you get a mishmash of different reconstructions and notations that confuse the user without really adding any benefit. It also goes against our long-standing practice of normalising the notation of other reconstructed languages like Proto-Germanic and Proto-Indo-European. I've invited Ivan to discuss this at Wiktionary talk:About Proto-Balto-Slavic and I would appreciate it if you joined in as well. —CodeCat 12:02, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * It's not "notation" it's your original research with which you contaminated a bunch of articles with. There are several mutually conflicting reconstructions of Balto-Slavic, and what you are pushing under the disguise of being a merely a notional convention is in fact a theory synthesized by you and not supported by any other scholar. You even object your original research being tagged as such. Yes it should be a "mishmash" of different theories because there is not a single theory supported by every linguist. People coming to etymologies of Balto-Slavic words want to be presented with credible scholarship not theories fabricated by Wiktionary editors. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 12:19, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * See, this is the kind of disagreement I mean. I look forward to having a proper discussion to sort this out. —CodeCat 12:25, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Why don't you first undo all of your disputed edits ? --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 12:32, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I actually undid your disputed edits. —CodeCat 12:34, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * My edits are not disputed. They were backed up by sources. That you personally disagree with respect scholars is yours and only yours problem. You're making original research and selectively ignoring large chunk of scholarship. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 15:51, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't understand your disagreement. Unifying notations is not original research. What Derksen transcribes as *o is the exact same phoneme as what most others notate as *a. Proto-Balto-Slavic had merged earlier *a and *o (apparently after final i was lost after long vowel plus m, ō was shortened before final consonants, for example in the genitive plural – of the thematic stems and probably others – or the thematic first person singular, and stressed syllable-final o became u – see Hill's paper for this). There is absolutely no need to tolerate inconsistencies in notation. WT:AINE-BSL is a good guide.
 * For example, some sources transcribe the Proto-Germanic phonemes usually notated as /h/, /þ/, /b/, /d/, /g/ respectively as /χ/, /θ/, /ƀ/ or /β/, /đ/ or /ð/, /ǥ/ or /ɣ/ (to say nothing of the notoriously controversial Auslaut). We use Ringe's rather traditional notation, but for example Kroonen's is different. We all know that PIE notations differ from source to source; I'm not sure on what authority our notation is based. If we disallow unification, we could not take reconstructions from sources that transcribe Proto-Germanic differently, or that notate PIE differently, whether with regard to major points such as the presence of laryngeals or trivial differences such as how to notate labialisation, palatalisation or aspiration, or alternatively we would be required to put up with chaos and ugly crowded titles listing every attested notation. That would be patently absurd.
 * It is a fact of life in historical linguistics, and in fact everywhere in linguistics, that there are almost no universally agreed norms and almost every author follows a slightly different notation, sometimes even more than one during the course of one's work, just like terms and names may differ slightly from author to author, but most differences are transparent and trivial and do not impede communication because linguists are smart, flexible people, not rigidly programmed computers. It is more like different dialects or national written standards.
 * Wikifundamentalism is uncalled for. The requirement to source our reconstructions does not extend to the precise notation used. Nobody is disputing that we should avoid creating our own reconstructions, but NOR policy (which does not really exist on Wiktionary anyway) does not limit us to slavish copying of our sources. Internal consistency (which is expected and required of any work) trumps faithfulness, because using dozens of slightly (or sometimes even majorly) different notations side by side would be confusing and overwhelming for everyone, as CodeCat has rightly pointed out. A major part of the work of compilation (the primary activity on Wiktionary) is ensuring exactly such consistency. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 16:27, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Derksen follows Kortlandt's theory according to which PBSl. had both *o and *a, and the merger occurred only in post-PBSl. period in individual branches. It's all described in the introduction (which you obviously haven't read :P)
 * Yes there are no universally agreed norms. Most unfortunately simply follow their own interpretation of a particular theory and simply ignore or everyone else (or disregard as "false"). The point is - PBSl. as a language is too far in the history from attestations, and there is too little evidence (basically only three branches, of which Western Baltic is so poorly attested that it barely constitutes evidence). There will never be universally agreed reconstruction of it. These "trivial" notational differences reflect fundamentally different protolanguage stages and reconstructions. I see favoring *a and glottal stop notation as POV-pushing. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 17:20, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * So what, two branches are enough for the comparative method and actually make things easier than having to compare a dozen branches. It's no different than Germanic where we only have West Germanic and North Germanic (which probably even are a single branch, Northwest Germanic) and then East Germanic, which is not attested much better than West Baltic, so if we accept that there are only Northwest Germanic and East Germanic, essentially represented only by Gothic, in fact the situation is, according to your standard, worse! I haven't read Derksen's introduction, no, but I've never claimed or implied I have read his book. :P
 * We need to decide on some particular interpretation, however. Kortlandt's theory is minority, perhaps not exactly fringe, but not mainstream either. Most researchers agree that the merger was already complete in Proto-Balto-Slavic – even if very recent, as in Hill's implied chronology, which I think is compatible what most researchers believe about Proto-Balto-Slavic anyway. Siding with the predominant opinion in a field is not POV-pushing, pushing a distinct minority opinion like Kortlandt's is. Think of article titles in Wikipedia: There can be only one, so we use what most reliable sources use, if only by a slim majority. We should do the same, go with the majority. We can still list alternative reconstructions in the article itself. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 18:03, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * No it's not a minority. There are what, 20 people in the world that deal with the reconstruction and history of PBSl. and ~ half of them are Kortlant's followers. The rest is composed of single-researcher theories that can only be gleaned by surveying papers dispersed into various journals over the years. There is no "mainstream". What you (two) are advocating is pure POV-pushing. PS: I am not a follower of Kortlandt, I just uphold the NPOV principle. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 19:58, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * If choosing a single internally consistent representation/reconstruction for Proto-Balto-Slavic is POV pushing then yes, I will gladly admit I am a POV pusher. My POV is that being consistent helps Wiktionary more than the mess you're suggesting. —CodeCat 20:35, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
 * All of these reconstructions reflect theories that are equally "internally consistent". It's not my problem that those theories are a mess and dumbing them down notionally and paradigmatically (the infinitive ending that I disputed in a discussion as well as the various inflections that you invented by taking advantage of the fact that they are not forbidden) is not going to fix that. --Ivan Štambuk (talk) 23:22, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

مرسي and ميرسى
Hi,

Just letting you know that both spellings are acceptable. is more standard and strict. Writing out dotless yāʾ instead of is quite common, although confusing, so is an alternative form. Egyptian and Sudanese (not only) authors rarely use ي in the final positions, making it harder for non-native speakers. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 00:20, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
 * It's not about the final yāʿ, but about the medial one – the alternative form would read mīrsī instead of the intended mersī/mirsī, as in Arabic only long vowels are indicated. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 17:13, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Persönlicher Angriff
Wäre schön, wenn du auf persönliche Angriffe in Zukunft verzichten könntest. Auf eine kooperative Arbeit. DANKE. --Hirabutor (talk) 16:11, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Mit einer auf Wikipedia geblockten Sockenpuppe? Eines rassistischen, antisemitischen panturkistischen Vandalen, der in seinem Zoo aus Sockenpuppen und Identitäten sogar eine nach mir benennt? Einer türkischen Entsprechung eines Neo-Nazis, der sich explizit als "Arier" definiert? ROTFL. Nö. Du hast ja eine Vollmeise. Geh sterben. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 03:15, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Danke für diese äußerst ehrliche Meinungsäußerung, wenn auch etwas geschmacklos und unkooperativ. Das weiß ich sehr zu schätzen. --Hirabutor (talk) 11:38, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Aber gerne doch. Mit Spinnern wie dir, die nicht aufhören, Wikimedia-Projekte mit ihrer nationalistischen Propaganda zu verpesten, kann es keine "kooperative Arbeit" geben. Unsere Interessen sind diametral einander entgegengesetzt – du willst die "Urtürken" verherrlichen und zu den "wahren Ariern" erklären; ich will, daß Wikimedia-Projekte wie vorgesehen echte wissenschaftliche Erkenntnisse vermitteln und keine pseudowissenschaftlichen Fantasien oder nationalistisches Wunschdenken. Deine Absichten (gingen sie nicht schon aus deiner Aktivität hier sattsam hervor) sind mir wohlbekannt – Du hast sie auf einschlägigen rassistischen Foren explizit geäußert. Verpiß dich aus Wikipedia und Wiktionary, du rassistisches Arschloch! --Florian Blaschke (talk) 12:38, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Abgesehen davon, dass ich mich von deinen ruden Behauptungen weder angesprochen noch eingeschüchtert fühle, muss ich ehrlich zugeben, dass von allen Behauptungen ganz besonders dein Arier-Wahn, der sich ganz klar und deutlich in deiner persönlichen Absicht herauskristalisiert, mich zum Schmunzeln gebracht hat. Gerade du müsstest doch wissen, dass das Konzept der arischen Superrasse Anstoß zum Mythos der invasorischen Streitaxt-Reiter gab, vermengt mit dem arischen Groß-Mythos, Resultat: Pangermanismus -> Nazi Ideologie -> 50 Mio. Tote. Wohl bekomms! Im Gegensatz zu dir bin ich da eher ein Freund des neutralen Standpunktes. Deine daraus resultierende hochgradige Voreingenommenheit gegenüber dir "diametral" befindlicher Literatur und deine fäkale Ausdrucksweise bestätigen nur dein vom Indo-Eurozentrismus (bzw. Pangermanismus) geprägtes Weltbild. Also im Grunde genommen nichts weiter als alteingesessener Kolonial-Rassismus in modernem Gewand, oder politisch korrekt ausgedrückt: "Frie-den" erhaltende Missionen für "Men-schen-rech-te". Daher wundere ich mich über deine "diametrale" Auffassungsgabe kaum. Und Übrigens, auch, wenn ich kein Befürworter der Altaischen Theorie bin, gibt es dank mir nun seit knapp einem Jahr auch Altaische Rekonstruktionen in der Wiktionary. Also, wenn man das nicht Fortschritt nennen darf. --Hirabutor (talk) 11:56, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Gratulation, du hast die uralte und von dir favorisierte Neonazi- und Hindutva-/Panturkisten-Taktik, kackdreist einfach ihre Gegner als Nazis, Rassisten und "Kolonialisten" zu verunglimpfen (Vorwürfe, die das Verhalten der Gegner natürlich nie auch nur ansatzweise rechtfertigt), schon wieder mal aus der Mottenkiste geholt (aus den einschlägigen neurechten Websites gut vertraut ist der Slogan "Antifaschisten/Gutmenschen/Linksradikale sind die eigentlichen Faschisten", verkürzt zu "Linksfaschisten" etc.); vor allem lustig, wie du und deine Socken und Kumpanen ausgerechnet der erzlinken Gimbutas immer braune Ideologie anzuhängen versuchen (die indogermanischen streitaxtschwingenden Invasoren sind ja ihre Ansicht; nur daß sie sie, was gerne unterschlagen wird, als frauenfeindliche Barbaren und die großen Unterdrücker und "Bösewichter der Vorgeschichte" ansah und nicht etwa als "Zivilisatoren" und "heroische Kulturbringer", wie etwa der reichlich rechtspopulistisch argumentierende Duchesne, der sich aber auf ihre Theorie beruft). Gähn. (Zum Thema Streitaxtkultur/Schnurkeramik eigentlich schon Haak et al. 2015 gelesen?)
 * Du weißt genauso gut wie ich, daß Germanen, Arier und Indogermanen drei unterschiedliche paar Stiefel sind. Ich habe übrigens auch nie Sympathien für die Kriegsspiele und Einmischungen der US-Hawks in Asien und Lateinamerika bekundet, und der Rest deiner Faselei ergibt noch weniger Sinn (siehe auch Tone argument, Straw man argument etc.). Oder hast du irgendein Problem beim Erkennen von Ironie, wenn ich über "arische Übermenschen" (als Strohmann von Hindutvas und Panturkisten, wohlgemerkt!) spotte?
 * (Da kann ich Afrozentristen wie dem Typen von Realhistoryww.com noch mehr abgewinnen; der ist wenigstens recht gut informiert und hat ganz interessante Gedanken und Argumente. Witzig, wie er den Standpunkt weißer Rassisten ins Gegenteil verkehrt, daß nämlich nicht "Rassenmischung" zwischen Schwarzen und Weißen dysgenisch sei und Kinder von ausschließlich weißen Eltern das Ideal, sondern genau umgekehrt, was biologisch sogar mehr Sinn ergibt, vgl. heterosis.)
 * Gratulation für die Bereicherung von Wiktionary mit pseudowissenschaftlichem Schwachsinn. Genau auf diese Art von "Fortschritt" kann und will ich lieber verzichten. Diesen Müll will ich nicht in Wiki-Projekten haben. Und Adjektive schreibt man klein, auch den von dir verehrten altaischen Schrott. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 21:36, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Danke für dein Response. Will erst gar nicht um den heißen Brei reden. Ich machs kurz und knackig... bezüglich "indo-germanisch" und Gimbutas "indo-germanischer" Türken empfehle ich entdoktrinierte Alineische Linguisten-Medizin: http://www.continuitas.org/intro.html

Man kann übrigens nicht Kurgan-nomadisch leben und gleichzeitig Ackerbauer sein. Zudem ist Gimbutas Theorie lediglich eine neue Variante des traditionellen indo-germanischen Szenarios. Sie war schlicht und ergreifend eine baltische Nationalistin. Und nein, ich habe dich nicht als Nazi beschimpft, habe lediglich das Wurzelwuchern des eurozentrischen Denkens und dessen Auswirkungen veranschaulicht, Stichwort: Kolonialismus-Rechtfertigung. Die Betonung liegt hierbei auf -> Rechtfertigung, diese war allemal rassistisch. Und ja, die linksfaschistoide Antifa besteht hauptsächlich aus geschichtsvergessenen Schwachköpfen und wird von der duckmäuserischen Nicht-Regierungsorganisation gegen nach Souveränität strebende Gruppen instrumentalisiert, dasselbe gilt übrigens für rechts-Faschisten. Da muss ich dich enttäuschen, ich stehe nicht auf das "Teile und Herrsche Prinzip".

Haak et al. 2015 habe ich gelesen, bin anschließend lachend in Tränen ausgebrochen. Hallo? R1b und "indo-germanisch"?! Hallo? Agglutination und "indo-germanisch"? Wer's glaubt, wird selig. Gegenfrage: hast du Trofimova et al. 2015 gelesen (auf kyrillisch)?

Und zu guter Letzt: die Taxanomie beweist, Indo-Germanisch hat eine deutlich geringere wissenschaftliche Existenzberechtigung als das ohnehin nicht existenzberechtigte Altaisch, welches in Wirklichkeit den türkischen Spracheinfluss auf benachbarte Gruppen widerspiegelt. Dies scheinst du ja unverhohlen zu leugnen oder was soll "pseudowissenschaftlichem Schwachsinn" bedeuten? Tut beim ersten Lesen weh, entspricht in der Tat den wissenschaftlichen Fakten. Was gedenkst du nun zu tun? Eine Hetzkampagne gegen altaische Rekonstruktionen? --Hirabutor (talk) 15:57, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Die Hypothese aus dem LIV war in Deinem Beitrag zur Etymologie des Verben nicht sehr gut formuliert und paßte also nicht fließend beim Stil des Textes; ich habe ihn also verkürzt und zu einer Fußnote versetzt. Einige Informationen über die Quelle (Ausgabe, Jahr, Seitenummer) müssen noch hinzugefügt werden; anders ist es schwer zu verstehen, was aus dem LIV kommt und was aus dem LEV. Vielleicht besser solche Veränderungen zuerst besprechen (z.B. mit den anderen am Lettischen interessierten Wiktionarians) und erst danach durchführen? --Pereru (talk) 02:58, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Naja, es ist ja nicht so leicht, Wiktionarians, die an Thema XY interessiert sind, zu finden, und mit denen irgendetwas zu besprechen. Das zieht sich. Also habe ich damals mal schnell diesen Kommentar in den Artikel gesetzt, auch wenn er von der Form her nicht paßt. Wenn man ständig nur auf Diskussionsseiten Hinweise, Einwände und Kritik ablädt, ohne am Artikel etwas zu ändern, bringt das erfahrungsgemäß wenig. Daher ja auch die Empfehlung unter WT:BOLD. Gerade bei wenig aktiven Seiten ist so ein Borderline-Diskussionsbeitrag im Artikel manchmal besser, auch wenn er gegen die Richtlinien ist, weil er Leute zu Reaktionen provoziert, die Diskussionsseiten (in Wiktionary ohnehin kaum noch genutzt) oder die spezialisierten Wiktionary-Seiten für derartige Diskussionen (Tea room, Etymology scriptorium) nicht lesen. Es war also eine rein pragmatische Erwägung. "Dubious"-Tags wie in Wikipedia gibt es hier ja nicht. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 22:30, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Um die Wahrheit zu sagen, war das auch meine eigene Erfahrung :)... und ich habe auch keine echt gute Lösung. Aber findest Du nicht, dass es schlecht ist, wenn solche Veränderungen einfach so durchgeführt werden, ohne dass anderen Interessierten (z.B. dem Originalautor des Seites, oder dem letzten Wiktionarian, der die Seite bearbeitet hat) Bescheid gegeben wird? Besonders was etymologische Information angeht scheint mir das den Zielen des Wiktionaries nicht zu dienen... Vielleicht auch z.B. den Beitrag im scriptorium zu erwähnen? Anders müsste ein Interessierter (z.B. ich) alle lettische Seiten regelmässig durchsehen, um sich zu vergewissern, dass nichts Wesentliches verändert worden ist -- und das wäre zuviel Arbeit... --Pereru (talk) 02:40, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Celtic
@Florian Blasche. Thank you so much for your message - my due apologies for not having replied beforehand! What you mention about Cornish is quite enlightening, because the new Cornish dictionary states that Old Cornish BREST < A.S. BRÆS, that to me is nonsense. They certainly are both derivatives of the same root, albeit pre-historic - please see my discussion on brass. I also need to clarify my nonsensical reply to your previous comments on the ache discussion page. It may be disputable scientifically, but I believe in facts that have a real foundation. Prior to around 2230 BCE, the whole world only spoke one language after 2344 BCE; and there is very slender evidence that it was primitive Hebrew - named after 'Eber', father of 'Peleg' in whose days language was divided. That there were a number of antediluvian languages is indisputable, including Sumerian, and possibly others that were resurrected. This does not mean that Hebrew was the parent language of the Aryan or Indian branch of P.I.E. as Bodmer put it in the "Loom of Language" volume, or connected with Indo-European at all, but just that certain lexemes, or at least, syllables were carried through accidentally. Otherwise, it was after this period that most of the language heads were formed, testified somewhat by the splinter groups of languages left in the Caucasus chain. I am not a Jew - and even if I was I would not be biased by any ancestral connection when it comes to ascertaining important facts; but there is something simpler and more pure about Hebrew construction than that of most other languages I have ever seen, hence my unproved belief that it or ancient Aramaic was the first verbal language between God and men - that is from Adam onwards - as their names are all meaningful, as also the rivers (except the Euphrates), in that Hebrew language. Andrew H. Gray 15:25, 7 March 2016 (UTC)Andrew
 * Erm, you believe in biblical literalist chronology and the Adamic language? --Florian Blaschke (talk) 15:34, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

While you're fixing Proto-POV...
The same claims (from the same person) as the ones at are also to be found at. Chuck Entz (talk) 06:33, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I missed that. Thanks. Fixed.
 * Szemerényi was a highly respected scholar, so I hesitate to leave the suggestion off entirely, but it just doesn't sound particularly plausible to me, although I can't exclude the possibility completely. Indo-Iranian-speaking peoples do not seem to have been in (close) contact with Semitic-speakers, let alone specifically Ugaritic-speakers, in the 2nd millennium BC. Temporally and geographically, it's simply very difficult to make sense of. So, yeah, perhaps not impossible, but not probable either, and hardly better than the other guesses.
 * Ultimately, the precise meaning and origin of *arya- is a quite difficult and apparently intractable problem. An Iranist friend says she once checked all the attestations in the Vedic corpus and is not even convinced that it has the autonymic sense in Indic and Old Persian. She's very sceptical about the traditional story and it is only in Middle Iranian that she agrees that it must have referred to Iranian speakers. In Vedic, there seem to be several superficially similar but distinct formations with different meanings that are difficult to harmonise with the Iranian evidence. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 20:33, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

York (etymology)
@Florian Blaschke (talk) Your etymology is obviously correct by the gradations you have included, but also quite intriguing. Previously, I wrongly supposed 'York' to be a simple corruption of Latin "erica" (heather), since I wrongly conjectured that Spanish "yermo" was just a corruption of "erēmus" (waste, desert); hence my thanks! Andrew H. Gray 20:54, 10 October 2016 (UTC) --Andrew (talk)

 * First of all, using yermo as evidence for English etymology is rather dubious, since each language has its own unique history of sound changes- otherwise English would be like Spanish, or vice versa. English didn't borrow much Latin outside of legal, religious and other technical vocabulary, and Latin's status as a written standard tended to keep Latin derivatives from straying too far from the original. Old French would be much more likely as a source, but French only gave us briar (the wood used for pipes, not the thorny plant), and the other loanword is ling, which apparently came from Old Norse.

 * Also, erica was a rather late borrowing from Greek that doesn't seem to have ended up in many of the daughter languages, except as a taxonomic term. Besides, it referred to heather, the plant, not to the heath vegetation type/landscape, so moor would be an inaccurate translation. What you do find is something like 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, which are said to come from Gaulish or some other continental Celtic language. As it turns out, the current theory seems to be that 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, and 🇨🇬, among others, reflect common borrowing from some unknown non-Indo-European source.

 * It's very easy to come up with all kinds of theories if you don't pay enough attention to the details, but the truth can be just as interesting- and often more surprising. Chuck Entz (talk) 01:16, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Reconstruction:Proto-Balto-Slavic/sjū́ˀtei
should only be used for direct descendants, not for derivations. Since roots only have derivations, they should always have. —CodeCat 23:12, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Ah, yes, of course, I forgot, thanks. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 00:43, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

nōmia
Hi ! I wonder too since Old Frisian shows both beside  whether the former could have been borrowed from Old Saxon. is merely a variant (as similarly seen in Old English) of Leasnam (talk) 15:53, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Elephant
I read your comment on Talk:elephant, and it's very interesting. There's just one part where I couldn't follow: why would elepháiromai have to start with a digamma. Sorry if this is a stupid question, but I'm not a college educated linguist. Also regarding the "elé!" theory, I'm not sure that Greeks didn't know how an elephant sounded. In the millenia BC, when large parts of the old world were mostly untouched by human population, African fauna was wider spread than today. For example, lions roamed Greece in the Classical era until the growth of human population destroyed their habitat. Similarly there were apparently wild elephants as close as Syria. I think it wouldn't be too far a stretch to suspect that Greeks of Minor Asia may have known of them. Though, this doesn't quite dispute the hypothesis - I'd say I've heard worse onomatopoeias than "elé!" for other sounds. 78.0.222.210 04:08, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * The reason that elepháiromai should once have started with a digamma are the apparent Sanskrit and Lithuanian cognates. If you insist on rejecting the digamma, the obvious etymological link is gone, too, which would be an implausible solution just to save a silly etymology, which I didn't even propose in serious, only tongue-in-cheek. And I explicitly said in the Bronze Age (because that's when the word is first attested), when Greeks did not live in Asia Minor yet. The only regions which Greek merchants were in contact with in the Bronze Age, in Syria and Asia Minor, lie on the Mediterranean coasts, well outside the former range of the Syrian elephant. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 04:31, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Do you know some of those cognates? Sorry again if this is a rude question, but my understanding of Sanskrit and Lithuanian goes only as far as dramblys and gajaḥ :) BTW I don't mean to say you got it wrong, I'm just having trouble understanding some connections. It appears you know far more even about Syrian elephants (!) than I do. 93.142.70.141 05:37, 19 January 2018 (UTC) (previously 78.0)
 * Of course you may ask, it's not rude at all. The Sanskrit cognate is Vedic úpa valhāmasi "they pose as riddle" and the Lithuanian one vìlbinti "to soothe; to lure". And I simply looked at the map in Wikipedia, haha. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 16:44, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see, of course. I was thinking of words meaning "elephant", not "riddler" :D Thanks for the explanation, I've come across your writings a few times while browsing Wikipedia over the years and they're always very illuminating! 93.142.70.141 19:38, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the nice compliment, you're too kind! :D --Florian Blaschke (talk) 20:19, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

arbër/arbën
Well the native root arb has been linked several times with the PIE*h₃órbʰos, while the variant alb, as in albanian/Albania is probably the foreign rendering of the autochthonous arbën/Arbënia. Of course the link is a mere assumption, there's nothing certain, but phonetically and semantically we have a good match (with the meaning to serve, work, be deprived, suffer etc. cf. Slavic *rabot - work, and *rob - slave, servant, Serb from the root *serb - to serve, Latin orbus and the like). Cheers! Etimo (talk) 08:37, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Telegraphese
Florian, it's pretty common practice to telegraphese etymologies, dropping articles, conjunctions, etc., to make them more simplified and concise, ex. "Cognate with 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬." -- 09:09, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Sure, but not in that context. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 17:36, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * How so? -- 19:12, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Sprachgefühl. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 19:13, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Can you be more specific in the context of the edits in question? -- 20:04, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * No. I can only tell you what is and is not grammatical or stylistically appropriate in certain contexts. See Sprachgefühl. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 20:29, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I know what Sprachgefühl is. It's also a matter of personal taste and I disagree with your taste on this. -- 20:39, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, whatever. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 20:55, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

You removed the reference from the illyrian entry *rhinos
Why did you remove the reference for the illyrian entry (*rhinos)? It says that alb. "re~rê" is etymologically identical with the illyrian term.IMIPER (talk) 15:04, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Because it's not, see . --Florian Blaschke (talk) 15:45, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Du hast vor zwei Tagen meine Referenz (und mit Absicht auch "cloud") gelöscht. Bei Alb. "ren" hast du es nicht gelöscht (von der Seite spreche ich nicht) - ich meine die Ref. bei der illyrischen Seite.IMIPER (talk) 21:03, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
 * No idea what you're complaining about. Bother someone else. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 21:23, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Ausserdem: Benjamin Fortson versteht/spricht kein Albanisch. Genau wie viele andere Autoren, die über über das Albanische schreiben und urteilen; aber die Sprache nicht mal beherrschen. Genau wie Matzinger. Sein Werk ist voll von Fehlern - aber er behauptet das Gegische "studiert" zu haben. Jemand der angeblich eine Sprache studiert. Sein Werk besteht aus: 90% politische Bemerkungen, 10% Bemerkungen zu Wörtern. Was für eine "Sprachwissenschaft" ist das? Zudem steht fast hinter jedem Satz ein Ausrufezeichen. Fortsons "Meinung" über das Illyrische, Albanische und Messapische ist nichts wert. Wer eine Sprache nicht versteht/spricht, sollte seine Kompetenz nicht überschreiten, sich auch nicht das "Recht" nehmen zu "urteilen". Fortson sprach von "teuta-"; aber erwähnte nichts von Alb. "të tan"/"të tërë" (Gheg/Tosk; "alle", männl. Gruppe; sprich "alle Männer"). "Të tana" (alle Frauen". Und dann heisst es, dass Albaner "politisch motiviert" wären. Natürlich, aber niemals so politisch motiviert und dreist wie andere es sich erlaubt haben und erlauben werden. Ich muss auch keine Namen nennen, da sie ohnehin schon gefallen sind.IMIPER (talk) 21:39, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

 * You as an ignorant and hyper-nationalistic native speaker are much more clueless about Albanian historical linguistics than a linguist who has studied it for decades. Go away, crank. Leave linguistics to the actual experts. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 21:41, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Qerth
context: rfv:qerth

Hi, I was hoping you'd be able to help me. Another user is currently trying to delete the Albanian entry qerth on the basis that he doesn't think it exists (despite it being listed in dictionaries). Anyway, to prove it does, Wiktionary requires no less than three citations. Since the word doesn't appear on the web (not surprising!), it'll have to come from print material. I was hoping you or someone you know could help find a citation (or three). Your help would be appreciated. Torvalu4 (talk) 08:40, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Hmmm ... I can't think of a way to do that right now, sorry. Maybe contacting a speaker of Albanian might help? --Florian Blaschke (talk) 15:19, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * By the way, I've never seen that rule applied to foreign-language entries; dictionary entries have always sufficed, and in fact, the three-citation rule seems to have been created for words that are not listed in dictionaries. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 15:22, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I fear this is hopeless. Searching offline, non-digitised corpora takes too long even in principle (and as a non-speaker, I definitely can't do that, even if I had access to such a corpus). And a single example won't be enough; it must be no less than three. I submit that Albanian is not actually that well-documented on the Internet. The three-citations rule may make sense for English, but not for Albanian. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 15:37, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * If that standard were to be applied rigidly, I suspect 99% of Wiktionary's non-English content would be deleted, and Wiktionary would essentially revert to an English-only dictionary. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 15:44, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * No, it is for filtering dictionary-only terms, that is ghost-words, see Appendix:English dictionary-only terms, and also protologisms, words that have not caught on (there have been cases where some writers wanted to push their made-up words, that only they used, on Wiktionary). On German Wiktionary however, five mentions suffice according to their code. Fay Freak (talk) 15:33, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

 * @Florian: I agree with you Florian regarding WDL, etc. It's an outrageously high standard for a language that's barely online, that hasn't had a written standard but since the end of WW2, and whose literary output is meager. Another way to go about this is to prove - perhaps quantitatively - that Albanian does not meet the requirements for a WDL. I'm not sure how to do that, but any ideas would be welcome. Torvalu4 (talk) 17:44, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I'd suggest asking in WT:BP on how to do this. ---Florian Blaschke (talk) 17:58, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * But even if you managed to convince them that Albanian is not actually a WDL, would you 1) manage to do this before qerth gets deleted, and even if, 2) would that mean that no single citation is required, or still at least one, and we're back to the start? --Florian Blaschke (talk) 18:04, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * As I understand it, I have a month. But even if the page is deleted, once the required number of citations is found, the page could be resurrected. Ultimately, what's important here is that this doesn't go unchallenged. If they get away with doing it once, they'll definitely do it again. Torvalu4 (talk) 18:20, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Okay, fine. You have my support. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 18:26, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I think I’ll note my support in this as well. This seems to be a good idea concerning Albanian entries as a whole. ArbDardh (talk) 18:46, 15 December 2019 (UTC)ArbDardh
 * Thanks to you both. In the meantime, I would advise everyone to stay focused on proving word's existence and not get roped into useless debates on other topics (like the word's etymology). As people tend to say elsewhere: "don't feed the trolls". Torvalu4 (talk) 19:51, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Absolutely. The word's etymology is completely irrelevant here. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 20:03, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

馬 etym
Heya, re:, I had a skim through Pellard's paper, and I can't find anywhere where he specifically discusses the odd apparent emphatic initial in either OJP uma or ume. In fact, his Table 6 includes the notation (m)uma for the Old Japanese for, and the word isn't mentioned anywhere that I can find.

Did I miss something? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 01:37, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
 * He discusses Ryukyuan. Japanese doesn't have mm. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 01:52, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, he discusses Ryukyuan. And yes, Japanese doesn't have orthographic mm, hence the varying うま・むま spellings, where む is known historically to have stood in for a nasal in various places.  So far as I'm aware, only 🇨🇬 and 🇨🇬 exhibit this, and both have Middle Chinese readings awfully close to the kun'yomi minus the leading .  For, both Daijisen and the Kokugo Dai Jiten opine that the "native" term was a shift from the Chinese, as shown here at Kotobank.  My local copy of Daijirin says likewise.  Daijisen indicates a similar derivation for , although the KDJ entry there doesn't discuss etymology, and Daijirin essentially mirrors Daijisen's etymology.  See also Gogen-Allguide's entries for uma and ume, mentioning the same basic mechanics.
 * All that said, Pellard only mentions Japanese uma "horse" a few times, and doesn't mention this Chinese derivation theory. Given the likelihood of a Wanderwort here, with Japonic getting the term via Chinese, I don't think Pellard chose well in picking uma for his discussion of the mechanics of reconstructed proto-Japonic initial  vs.  -- and by extension, I don't think that paper can be used well to argue against a Chinese origin for the term.
 * (Must run due to other duties IRL)
 * ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 02:08, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
 * However that may be, it's a plain fact that Pellard reconstructs Proto-Japonic *uma (and implicitly denies any relationship with Chinese). Moreover, Ryukyuan does have what looks like cognates, so reconstructing the term to Proto-Japonic makes sense. Proto-Japonic might have gotten the term from elsewhere (maybe from Old Chinese), but that is uncertain. Unfortunately, a sequence /ma/ or even only a phoneme /m/ (which is what all these words for 'horse' really have in common) is phonologically and typologically trivial and a poor basis for grand hypotheses of Wanderwörter or whatever. Nor would a borrowing from Chinese, I might add, explain the alleged gemination in Japanese (which would be phonologically and structurally unique and strikes me as very un-Japanese and un-Japonic, given its ancient CV structure, hence my deep scepticism). So it's best not to rely on these unconvincing comparisons of vaguely similar sounding words meaning 'horse', and leave the question open. Beware of confirmation bias. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 02:22, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

 * I guess my issue with the Pellard piece is that too much of what our etymology says he says, he only says implicitly.
 * "... it's a plain fact that Pellard reconstructs Proto-Japonic *uma (and implicitly denies any relationship with Chinese)." After reading the paper, I see no such implication. I didn't see anything that would rule out any borrowings from Chinese into Proto-Japonic.
 * Archaeologically, we know that horses died out in Japan after the ice age and were only reintroduced during the or s, either of which are past the roughly 600-700 CE horizon for written Japanese.  Any language from either period would be reconstructed, presumably Proto-Japonic.
 * I'm happy with leaving the question open. However, I feel like we're misattributing Pellard.  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 23:10, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
 * As I wrote directly above: "Proto-Japonic might have gotten the term from elsewhere (maybe from Old Chinese), but that is uncertain." So I do not rule out borrowings from Chinese into Proto-Japonic, despite your suggestion. I meant a later borrowing into Japonic, which should have been evident from the just quoted sentence. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 02:07, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

duutsch
Hi, by changing the alternative form link from to, it will now be picked up by the  on Reconstruction:Old Dutch/thiudisc. 70.172.194.25 19:20, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks, didn't know that. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 19:22, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Bavarian descendent of
Hi, I'm hoping you could help in your capacity as a native speaker of Bavarian. I was looking for the Bavarian descendent of to add to the list. The Bayerisches Wörterbuch has several forms including, , , etc. but aside from , which I presume is a diminutive form, it's unclear whether any of these examples could be the singular. I've read that occasionally southern German forms feature -en in place of northern -e (, vs, ), but so far as I know that's usually accompanied by the shift in gender, which doesn't seem to be the case here. Any suggestions? Helrasincke (talk) 22:45, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
 * This is absolutely regular in weak feminine nouns and usually not accompanied by a shift in gender. It's also easy to explain if you look at the Middle High German declension.
 * Compare f., which continues the old oblique of MHG nom. sg. f. albe (> ModG Alpe, Alp), gen./dat./acc. sg. (and pl.) alben, like MHG nom. sg. f. zunge 'tongue' (> ModG Zunge, Bav. Zung), gen./dat./acc. sg. (and pl.) zungen; MHG nom. sg. f. sunne 'sun' (> ModG Sonne), oblique sunnen (> Bav. Sunn, ModG Sonnen- in compounds, from the archaic gen. sg. der Sonnen); MHG nom. sg. f. erde 'earth' (> ModG Erde, Bav. Erd), oblique erden (> Bav. Erdn, ModG Erden- in compounds, from the archaic gen. sg. der Erden).
 * Sometimes both forms still exist side by side in Bavarian, such as Erd vs. Erdn 'earth', Supp vs. Suppm 'soup', cognate with ModG Suppe, but they're lexicalised now and not dependent on case anymore: auf da Erd. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 00:23, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I had suspected this could be the case but wanted to make sure before making the edit. To clarify, are the modern singular and plural forms identical for these weak feminines? For example, how would I build the plural form for : (pl.) Supp and : (pl.) Suppm? Or would both forms pluralise to Suppm? Edit: and for, would assimilation mean the plural form remains the same too? Helrasincke (talk) 12:00, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * The plural of weak nouns always ends in a nasal (-n or an assimilated nasal) even if the singular doesn't, just like in Standard German and already in Middle High German. If the singular ends in a nasal (from the MHG oblique), the plural is identical. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 20:08, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Again, it makes sense but I'm mostly curious about the spelling conventions (to the extent there are any). This source would seem to suggest that forms in -n / -m are interchangeable in this word at least. Admittedly it's not an authority but the BWB appears to only have entries using Suppen- as the first element of compounds and normalised to Standard German orthography anyway. So Supp / Suppm / Suppn (sing.) and Suppm / Suppn (pl.) OR is it only Supp / Suppm (sing.) and Suppn (pl.)? Acoustically the former would seem to make sense: -n and -m are in complementary distribution in Yiddish adjectival inflections and to an extend similar processes can also in some areas of colloquial standard German, for instance verbs: /ˈzɪŋŋ̩/ vs /ˈhaːbm̩/ or even /haːm/. Helrasincke (talk) 21:32, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * There's no standardised spelling really, but I've never seen singular and plural spelled differently when they're pronounced identically. So either Suppm throughout, or consistently Suppn. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 21:36, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Ok, that makes sense. Thanks for the assistance. Helrasincke (talk) 21:30, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

title: User talk:Florian Blaschke


text:
User talk:Samatva

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello, welcome to Wiktionary, and thank you for your contribution so far. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

 * How to edit a page is a concise list of technical guidelines to the wiki format we use here: how to, for example, make text boldfaced or create hyperlinks. Feel free to practice in the sandbox. If you would like a slower introduction we have a short tutorial.
 * Entry layout explained (ELE) is a detailed policy documenting how Wiktionary pages should be formatted. All entries should conform to this standard, the easiest way to do this is to copy exactly an existing page for a similar word.
 * Our Criteria for inclusion (CFI) define exactly which words Wiktionary is interested in including. There is also a list of things that Wiktionary is not for a higher level overview.
 * The FAQ aims to answer most of your remaining questions, and there are several help pages that you can browse for more information.
 * We have discussion rooms in which you can ask any question about Wiktionary or its entries, a glossary of our technical jargon, and some hints for dealing with the more common communication issues.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! If you have any questions, bring them to the Information desk, or ask me on my talk page. If you do so, please sign your posts with four tildes: ~ which automatically produces your username and the current date and time.

Again, welcome! -- Cirt (talk) 02:56, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: User talk:Samatva


text:
User talk:Moondyne

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello, welcome to Wiktionary, and thank you for your contribution so far. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

 * How to edit a page is a concise list of technical guidelines to the wiki format we use here: how to, for example, make text boldfaced or create hyperlinks. Feel free to practice in the sandbox. If you would like a slower introduction we have a short tutorial.
 * Entry layout explained (ELE) is a detailed policy documenting how Wiktionary pages should be formatted. All entries should conform to this standard, the easiest way to do this is to copy exactly an existing page for a similar word.
 * Our Criteria for inclusion (CFI) define exactly which words Wiktionary is interested in including. There is also a list of things that Wiktionary is not for a higher level overview.
 * The FAQ aims to answer most of your remaining questions, and there are several help pages that you can browse for more information.
 * We have discussion rooms in which you can ask any question about Wiktionary or its entries, a glossary of our technical jargon, and some hints for dealing with the more common communication issues.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! If you have any questions, bring them to the Information desk, or ask me on my talk page. If you do so, please sign your posts with four tildes: ~ which automatically produces your username and the current date and time.

Again, welcome! -- Cirt (talk) 02:57, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

title: User talk:Moondyne


text:
User talk:Aloha27

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello, welcome to Wiktionary, and thank you for your contribution so far. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

 * How to edit a page is a concise list of technical guidelines to the wiki format we use here: how to, for example, make text boldfaced or create hyperlinks. Feel free to practice in the sandbox. If you would like a slower introduction we have a short tutorial.
 * Entry layout explained (ELE) is a detailed policy documenting how Wiktionary pages should be formatted. All entries should conform to this standard, the easiest way to do this is to copy exactly an existing page for a similar word.
 * Our Criteria for inclusion (CFI) define exactly which words Wiktionary is interested in including. There is also a list of things that Wiktionary is not for a higher level overview.
 * The FAQ aims to answer most of your remaining questions, and there are several help pages that you can browse for more information.
 * We have discussion rooms in which you can ask any question about Wiktionary or its entries, a glossary of our technical jargon, and some hints for dealing with the more common communication issues.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! If you have any questions, bring them to the Information desk, or ask me on my talk page. If you do so, please sign your posts with four tildes: ~ which automatically produces your username and the current date and time.

Again, welcome! -- Cirt (talk) 02:57, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

title: User talk:Aloha27


text:
User talk:Hgcarter

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello, welcome to Wiktionary, and thank you for your contribution so far. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

 * How to edit a page is a concise list of technical guidelines to the wiki format we use here: how to, for example, make text boldfaced or create hyperlinks. Feel free to practice in the sandbox. If you would like a slower introduction we have a short tutorial.
 * Entry layout explained (ELE) is a detailed policy documenting how Wiktionary pages should be formatted. All entries should conform to this standard, the easiest way to do this is to copy exactly an existing page for a similar word.
 * Our Criteria for inclusion (CFI) define exactly which words Wiktionary is interested in including. There is also a list of things that Wiktionary is not for a higher level overview.
 * The FAQ aims to answer most of your remaining questions, and there are several help pages that you can browse for more information.
 * We have discussion rooms in which you can ask any question about Wiktionary or its entries, a glossary of our technical jargon, and some hints for dealing with the more common communication issues.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! If you have any questions, bring them to the Information desk, or ask me on my talk page. If you do so, please sign your posts with four tildes: ~ which automatically produces your username and the current date and time.

Again, welcome! -- Cirt (talk) 02:57, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

title: User talk:Hgcarter


text:
User talk:Christyreuben

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello, welcome to Wiktionary, and thank you for your contribution so far. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

 * How to edit a page is a concise list of technical guidelines to the wiki format we use here: how to, for example, make text boldfaced or create hyperlinks. Feel free to practice in the sandbox. If you would like a slower introduction we have a short tutorial.
 * Entry layout explained (ELE) is a detailed policy documenting how Wiktionary pages should be formatted. All entries should conform to this standard, the easiest way to do this is to copy exactly an existing page for a similar word.
 * Our Criteria for inclusion (CFI) define exactly which words Wiktionary is interested in including. There is also a list of things that Wiktionary is not for a higher level overview.
 * The FAQ aims to answer most of your remaining questions, and there are several help pages that you can browse for more information.
 * We have discussion rooms in which you can ask any question about Wiktionary or its entries, a glossary of our technical jargon, and some hints for dealing with the more common communication issues.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! If you have any questions, bring them to the Information desk, or ask me on my talk page. If you do so, please sign your posts with four tildes: ~ which automatically produces your username and the current date and time.

Again, welcome! -- Cirt (talk) 02:57, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

title: User talk:Christyreuben


text:
User talk:DavidCary

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello, welcome to Wiktionary, and thank you for your contribution so far. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

 * How to edit a page is a concise list of technical guidelines to the wiki format we use here: how to, for example, make text boldfaced or create hyperlinks. Feel free to practice in the sandbox. If you would like a slower introduction we have a short tutorial.
 * Entry layout explained (ELE) is a detailed policy documenting how Wiktionary pages should be formatted. All entries should conform to this standard, the easiest way to do this is to copy exactly an existing page for a similar word.
 * Our Criteria for inclusion (CFI) define exactly which words Wiktionary is interested in including. There is also a list of things that Wiktionary is not for a higher level overview.
 * The FAQ aims to answer most of your remaining questions, and there are several help pages that you can browse for more information.
 * We have discussion rooms in which you can ask any question about Wiktionary or its entries, a glossary of our technical jargon, and some hints for dealing with the more common communication issues.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! If you have any questions, bring them to the Information desk, or ask me on my talk page. If you do so, please sign your posts with four tildes: ~ which automatically produces your username and the current date and time.

Again, welcome! -- Cirt (talk) 02:57, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

title: User talk:DavidCary


text:
Template:ba-decl-pronoun

declension of

title: Template:ba-decl-pronoun


text:
User talk:Bunnyboi

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello, welcome to Wiktionary, and thank you for your contribution so far. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

 * How to edit a page is a concise list of technical guidelines to the wiki format we use here: how to, for example, make text boldfaced or create hyperlinks. Feel free to practice in the sandbox. If you would like a slower introduction we have a short tutorial.
 * Entry layout explained (ELE) is a detailed policy documenting how Wiktionary pages should be formatted. All entries should conform to this standard, the easiest way to do this is to copy exactly an existing page for a similar word.
 * Our Criteria for inclusion (CFI) define exactly which words Wiktionary is interested in including. There is also a list of things that Wiktionary is not for a higher level overview.
 * The FAQ aims to answer most of your remaining questions, and there are several help pages that you can browse for more information.
 * We have discussion rooms in which you can ask any question about Wiktionary or its entries, a glossary of our technical jargon, and some hints for dealing with the more common communication issues.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! If you have any questions, bring them to the Information desk, or ask me on my talk page. If you do so, please sign your posts with four tildes: ~ which automatically produces your username and the current date and time.

Again, welcome! -- Cirt (talk) 02:59, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

title: User talk:Bunnyboi


text:
User talk:Theo F

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello, welcome to Wiktionary, and thank you for your contribution so far. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

 * How to edit a page is a concise list of technical guidelines to the wiki format we use here: how to, for example, make text boldfaced or create hyperlinks. Feel free to practice in the sandbox. If you would like a slower introduction we have a short tutorial.
 * Entry layout explained (ELE) is a detailed policy documenting how Wiktionary pages should be formatted. All entries should conform to this standard, the easiest way to do this is to copy exactly an existing page for a similar word.
 * Our Criteria for inclusion (CFI) define exactly which words Wiktionary is interested in including. There is also a list of things that Wiktionary is not for a higher level overview.
 * The FAQ aims to answer most of your remaining questions, and there are several help pages that you can browse for more information.
 * We have discussion rooms in which you can ask any question about Wiktionary or its entries, a glossary of our technical jargon, and some hints for dealing with the more common communication issues.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! If you have any questions, bring them to the Information desk, or ask me on my talk page. If you do so, please sign your posts with four tildes: ~ which automatically produces your username and the current date and time.

Again, welcome! -- Cirt (talk) 03:00, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

title: User talk:Theo F


text:
User talk:Alex.deWitte

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello, welcome to Wiktionary, and thank you for your contribution so far. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

 * How to edit a page is a concise list of technical guidelines to the wiki format we use here: how to, for example, make text boldfaced or create hyperlinks. Feel free to practice in the sandbox. If you would like a slower introduction we have a short tutorial.
 * Entry layout explained (ELE) is a detailed policy documenting how Wiktionary pages should be formatted. All entries should conform to this standard, the easiest way to do this is to copy exactly an existing page for a similar word.
 * Our Criteria for inclusion (CFI) define exactly which words Wiktionary is interested in including. There is also a list of things that Wiktionary is not for a higher level overview.
 * The FAQ aims to answer most of your remaining questions, and there are several help pages that you can browse for more information.
 * We have discussion rooms in which you can ask any question about Wiktionary or its entries, a glossary of our technical jargon, and some hints for dealing with the more common communication issues.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! If you have any questions, bring them to the Information desk, or ask me on my talk page. If you do so, please sign your posts with four tildes: ~ which automatically produces your username and the current date and time.

Again, welcome! -- Cirt (talk) 03:00, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Noun noun combinations
WT:CFI says "An expression is “idiomatic” if its full meaning cannot be easily derived from the meaning of its separate components." So noun noun combinations are welcome when they meet this criterion. Gang member is clearly a member of a gang, while chain gang of course, is not a gang made up of chains. For that reason, I'm not sure if youth gang is acceptable or not, does it just mean "a gang of youths?" Mglovesfun (talk) 14:33, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

title: User talk:Alex.deWitte


text:
trilobed

Adjective

 * 1) Having three lobes

title: trilobed


text:
pineweed

Etymology
?

Noun

 * 1) A low, bushy, nearly leafless herb, common in sandy soil in the eastern United States.

title: pineweed


text: Template:ba-мин

title: Template:ba-мин


text:
leadscrew

Noun

 * 1) A screw designed to translate turning motion into linear motion.
 * Leadscrews are commonly used in vices, presses, and jacks.

Translations

 * Finnish: johtoruuvi

title: leadscrew


text: leadscrews

title: leadscrews


text: Template:ba-һин

title: Template:ba-һин


text: adatis

title: adatis


text: nicaragüeños

title: nicaragüeños


text:
platetrope

Etymology
From +.

Noun

 * 1)  One of a pair of a paired organ.

title: platetrope


text: immersable

title: immersable


text: nicaragüeña

title: nicaragüeña


text: nicaragüeñas

title: nicaragüeñas


text:
lingüicidio

Noun

 * 1) linguicide

title: lingüicidio


text: lingüicidios

title: lingüicidios


text:
cuadrilingüe

Adjective

 * 1) quadrilingual

title: cuadrilingüe


text: cuadrilingües

title: cuadrilingües


text: trilingües

title: trilingües


text: Template:ba-ул

title: Template:ba-ул


text: Template:ba-улар

title: Template:ba-улар


text: Template:ba-беҙ

title: Template:ba-беҙ


text: Template:ba-һеҙ

title: Template:ba-һеҙ


text:
һеҙ

Etymology
From.

Pronunciation

 * (one syllable)
 * (one syllable)

Pronoun

 * 1) you
 * (Qur'an 102:6)
 * 1) you
 * 1) you

title: һеҙ


text:
беҙ

Pronunciation

 * (one syllable)
 * (one syllable)

Etymology 1
From.

Pronoun

 * 1) we

Etymology 2
From.

Cognate with 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬.

Noun

 * 1) awl

title: беҙ


text: Category:Bashkir personal pronouns

title: Category:Bashkir personal pronouns


text: Category:Bashkir pronouns

title: Category:Bashkir pronouns


text:
һин

Etymology
From Volga Turki from. Cognate with 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, etc.

Pronoun

 * 1) you (thou)

title: һин


text:
ул

Etymology 1
From Volga Turki from. Compare 🇨🇬 and 🇨🇬.

Pronunciation

 * (one syllable)
 * (one syllable)

Pronoun

 * 1) he, she, it

Etymology 2
From Volga Turki from.

Pronunciation

 * , izafa form: улы [o.ˈɫɯ̞]

Noun

 * 1) son

Declension
The declension below is given for a bare non-izafa form. Note, however, that this noun is almost always used in the izafa form.

Noun

 * 1) relic
 * 2) sole

Noun

 * 1)  eye

Etymology
From

Noun

 * 1) wolf

Etymology
From, from. Cognates include 🇨🇬 and 🇨🇬.

Permic cognates include 🇨🇬 and 🇨🇬.

Noun

 * 1) bottom, lower part

authors: Илья А. Латушкин

title: ул


text:
улар

Etymology
Regular plural of.

Pronoun

 * 1) they

title: улар


text:
sudadera

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) sweatshirt, hoodie

title: sudadera


text:
яратыу

Etymology 1
Probably a derivation of, appended with the causative suffix -t.

Cognate with 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬.

Verb

 * 1) to love
 * 2) to like
 * 3) to approve of
 * 1) to like
 * 2) to approve of
 * 1) to approve of

Etymology 2
From , probably also a derivation of, appended with the causative suffix -t.

Cognate with 🇨🇬; 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬; also 🇨🇬, which comes from an Oghur source.

Verb

 * 1) to create

title: яратыу


text: Category:Bashkir verbs

title: Category:Bashkir verbs


text: gate raping

title: gate raping


text: gate raped

title: gate raped


text:
ܛܝܒܘܬܐ

Etymology
From the root related to being good. Compare 🇨🇬 and 🇨🇬.

Noun

 * 1) generosity, kindness, grace
 * 2) goodness
 * 3) benefit, favor/favour
 * 4) bounty, gift
 * 5) charity, alms
 * 6) soundness, health
 * 7) holy oil
 * 8) adoption

title: ܛܝܒܘܬܐ


text:
odango

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) A Japanese sweet round dumpling made from mochiko (rice flour), eaten off a stick. Related to mochi.

Translations

 * Japanese: お団子

title: odango


text:
お団子

Etymology 1
Compound of.

Noun

 * 1)  a traditional Japanese sweet round dumpling

Etymology 2
By analogy from the shape of a single dango, much as the term is used in English to refer to a food item and a hairstyle of a similar shape.

Noun

 * 1) a bun hairstyle

Usage notes
The hairstyle is never referred to as dango without the o- prefix.

title: お団子


text:
haraquiri

Etymology
Borrowed from, from   +.

Noun

 * 1) hara-kiri ceremonial suicide by ripping open the abdomen

Noun

 * 1) hara-kiri ceremonial Japanese suicide

Etymology
, from  +.

Noun

 * 1) hara-kiri ceremonial suicide by ripping open the abdomen

title: haraquiri


text:
sintoísta

Etymology
From +.

Adjective

 * 1) Shintoist

Noun

 * 1) Shintoist

title: sintoísta


text: name brands

title: name brands


text: sintoístas

title: sintoístas


text: -stää

title: -stää


text:
polígloto

Etymology
.

Noun

 * 1) polyglot one who is able to speak multiple language

Noun

 * 1) a multilingual Christian Bible

Adjective

 * 1) polyglot of a person, able to speak multiple language
 * 2) multilingual written in multiple languages

title: polígloto


text:
hakkailla

Etymology
From.

Verb

 * 1)  to flirt

title: hakkailla


text:
French dip

Etymology 1
The name refers to the style of bread and the practice of dipping it while eating, rather than origins in France, where this food is unknown.

Noun

 * 1)  An American hot sandwich made with sliced meat (usually roast beef) on a French roll, and served au jus. In its original form the bread is dipped in the jus when the sandwich is made, but more often the jus is served on the side so the sandwich can be dipped as it is being eaten.

Etymology 2
From originating France.

Noun

 * 1)  A fashion trend originating in France in the late 19th century, where women let the front of their belts dip below the waist.

title: French dip


text: apples of someone's eye

title: apples of someone's eye


text:
User talk:Pujaji

DR.RUPAK NATH(DR.RUPNATHJI)WIKI WIKIPEDIA ENCYCLOPEDIA:-The founder of Shaddhai Yoga,Swami Rupnathji(Dr.Rupak Nath) Saraswati was one of the greatest religious leaders ever born in India.Dr.Rupak Nath(Dr.Rupnathji) is a 20th century poet,spiritual master,philosopher,Renowned Doctor & very well-known astrologer and occultist in present time, who is revered as a saint in the North-East parts of India. Infact, he is consider as one of the great and the youngest saint of Vaishnavism (a cult devoted to Lord Vishnu). Dr.Rupak Nath(Dr.Rupnathji) is one of the most talented as well as prolific spiritual leaders of India. Along with that, he is a brilliant writer, who published 70 volumes of sophisticated literary knowledge. Dr.Rupak Nath(Dr.Rupnathji) is a philosopher of the 20th century, who live in the North-Eastern parts of India.He is known, not only for his extraordinary philosophy, but also, as a noble and revered saint.He is considered as an authority on the ancient Indian scriptures, especially the sacred Yoga Creations and the Vedantas.It is difficult to pinpoint who exactly Dr.Rupak Nath(Dr.Rupnathji) is.He has so many talents in himself, that it is not easy to explain his contribution to the ‘International & World’ culture in a single sentence. Yogi Dr.Rupak Nath(Dr.Rupnathji) is the creator of the transcendental form of meditation, along with being the leader of the Transcendental Meditation Movement. One of the most renowned spiritual Gurus of India. Dr.Rupak Nath(Dr.Rupnathji) is one of the greatest religious leaders ever born in India. He believed that every individual must have only one aim in life i.e., the realization of the Ultimate Reality. Acharya Dr.Rupak Nath(Dr.Rupnathji) is one of the people who has great influence on the cultural heritage of India. He is a poet, a saint physician and a musician and played all the parts with the same finesse. Through the medium of television, he has taken the art of yoga to each and every household far and wide. He is the host of a program named 'Shiddhai Yoga' that airs on Cable TV everyday.Guru Dr.Rupak Nath(Dr.Rupnathji) belonged to the Yogi lineage of Ancient Yogacharya.He is one of the members of the tribe of Yogis who are called for the order of "NathYogi".Dr.Rupnathji(Dr.Rupak Nath) was born to the Nath Yogi couple, BehariLal and Ratna, in a little Town called Kamrup in Assam. The couple had remained childless for a long time, and prayed for children at the Kamakhaya (NilaAchal) temple in Gauhati. Siva is said to have appeared to the couple in a dream and promised them of one son who would be the most brilliant philosopher of his day, and so Rupnathji was born.His Parent performed his upanayana ceremonies with the help of her relatives. Dr.Rupnathji(Dr.Rupak Nath) excelled in all branches of traditional vaidIka learning. A few miracles are reported about the young Dr.Rupnathji(Dr.Rupak Nath).Dr.Rupak Nath(Dr.Rupnathji) was born in Assam.His father was not rich,wanted to give his children a good education.After doing his B.Sc.,Dr.Rupak Nath(Dr.Rupnathji) did his M.Sc. and Ph.D. at the Various University of the World. Dr.Rupak Nath(Dr.Rupnathji) has great regard for his research guide Professor, who told him “how to go ahead experimenting with uncommon ideas not popular or even realistic at the time.” It was his professor who advised him to shift his interest from biochemistry to molecular genetics.Dr.Rupak Nath(Dr.Rupnathji) first took up research in molecular genetics.Medical Scientist Dr.Rupak Nath(Dr.Rupnathji) became interested in biology. Popular Famous Science Book further stimulated hid interest in science. In fact, he used to plaster his parents for money to buy books.Eventually, Dr.Rupak Nath(Dr.Rupnathji) secured admission to Medical Collage and had a brilliant academic career. Dr.Rupak Nath(Dr.Rupnathji), however, says now, “I wasted a lot of time trying to come first, while I should have been reading magazines like Scientific American which contain solid science.”In 1995, on a fellowship, he went to Foreign to do his Ph.D.Where Dr.Rupak Nath(Dr.Rupnathji) conducted a marvelous experiment which surprised even his Professor. After taking his Ph.D. he retuned to India. Dr.Rupak Nath(Dr.Rupnathji) seems to enjoy every moment of research in his laboratory. “A person who is keen to take science should have a strong character and should avoid short-cuts in general,” is his advice to young people.Dr.Rupak Nath(Dr.Rupnathji) has also introduced new techniques in medical research. Dr.Rupak Nath(Dr.Rupnathji) is trying to develop a screening test to find out who are more susceptible to sickness at high altitudes. Dr.Rupak Nath(Dr.Rupnathji) is a very well-known astrologer and occultist in present time. Dr.Rupak Nath(Dr.Rupnathji) was particularly adept at interpreting the Modified Panchang Chart drawn up and used in horary astrology, as this was his specialty. Dr.Rupak Nath(Dr.Rupnathji) caused much controversy for alledgedly predicting the various events some years before it happened.Because of this many people thought that Dr.Rupak Nath(Dr.Rupnathji) in fact may have started it, but there is no evidence to support these claims. Young Dr.Rupak Nath(Dr.Rupnathji) began to dabble in astrology, reading all the books on the Subject Dr.Rupak Nath(Dr.Rupnathji) could fall in with, and occasionally trying his hand at unravelling mysteries by means of his art. Dr.Rupak Nath(Dr.Rupnathji)’s most comprehensive book was published in 1996. It was so large that it came in seven separate volumes, and it remains popular even today and has never gone totally out-of-print. It is considered one of the classic texts for the study of traditional astrology.Dr.Rupak Nath(Dr.Rupnathji) began to issue his prophetical almanacs and other works. Dr.Rupak Nath(Dr.Rupnathji) ventured to specify the future events to which he referred. Even from his own account, however, it is evident that Dr.Rupak Nath(Dr.Rupnathji) did not trust implicitly to the indications given by the aspects of the heavens, but kept his eyes and ears open for any information which might make his predictions safe. It appears that Dr.Rupak Nath(Dr.Rupnathji) had correspondents both at home and in foreign parts to keep him conversant with the probable current of affairs. On very rare occasions throughout the history of mankind, Spiritual giants have appeared to exemplify the Highest Truth, guiding followers by their conduct in every moment of their lives; Bhagavan Sri Rupnathji[Dr.Rupnathji(Dr.Rupak Nath)] was such a giant. Unique in our time, He perfectly embodied the ultimate truth of Self-realisation, or complete absorption in the Supreme Itself.Those who set out upon this quest are fulfilling the true purpose of life itself. This is not an easy path to follow, but be assured that every step taken in pursuit of Self-realisation, accumulates merit that is carried from birth to birth, until that final step is accomplished. This is the testimony of the Sages and doubt should never be allowed to divert you from your course. 'The Sage of Barak Valley'Throughout the history of mankind spiritual giants have appeared on very rare occasions to exemplify the Highest Truth. Guiding followers by their conduct in every moment of their lives; Bhagavan Sri Rupnathji[Dr.Rupnathji(Dr.Rupak Nath)] was such a giant. Unique in our time, He perfectly embodied the ultimate truth of Self-realisation, or complete absorption in the Supreme Itself.Drawn from His home by the power of Holy Barak at the age of sixteen, he remained at Its feet throughout the rest of His life and became known as the Sage of Barak Valley.He wrote vastly, but is known to have translated and corrected a number of important works for the benefit of devotees. He preferred to communicate through the power of overwhelming Silence, a silence so deep and powerful that it stilled the minds of ardent seekers who were attracted to Him from all over the world.Although preferring silence, He was always willing to answer the questions of sincere aspirants and never failed to guide them in the right direction.His highest teaching of 'Self-enquiry' (vichara) was understood in the infinite silence of his presence. Through this silence, countless numbers of devotees and visitors experienced the pure bliss of True Being. That same experience of perfect peace is still available to sincere souls who turn to him and practice his teachings with devotion.This act of perfect grace can be experienced anywhere, but it is especially palpable at the foot of the holy Barak Valley, a site that has attracted saints and sages for thousands of years.The Maharshi's teaching of 'Self-enquiry' (Pure Advaita) is simplicity itself, requiring no outward formalities, no outer change of life, only a simple change in 'point of view' and a sustained effort on the part of the seeker. The goal is no heaven after death or a faraway ideal, but rather the removal of the ignorance that prevents us from knowing that we are eternally One with our Source, the Supreme Self, or God. It is an experience than can be had NOW! All that is required is a sincere effort, which earns us the necessary grace.On his Holy Word Rupnathji[Dr.Rupnathji(Dr.Rupak Nath)] told his grieving devotees, "You say I am going away, but where can I go? I am always here. You give too much importance to the body." His promise of a 'continued presence' is daily being experienced by numerous devotees around the world, and it is that experience of 'continued presence' that has inspired many to devote themselves to the path of peace and love. Swami Rupnathji[Dr.Rupnathji(Dr.Rupak Nath)]Saraswati, a Guru-centred Paramahamsa Saint and a Sage of Universal and Transcendental Devine Knowledge Sri Swami Rupnathji[Dr.Rupnathji(Dr.Rupak Nath)] Saraswati is a born Sage, Mystic and Genius. Already at the age of thirteen and fourteen his life was flooded with numerous spiritual experiences of the omnipresent and omniscient God. Under the dictates of these experiences, he left his home city in Silchar India for the Himalayas, where the world-renowned Sages recognised in him an embodiment of the high spirit of renunciation, profound divine wisdom, touching purity of heart, made him known as Yogi Rupnathji,, titled him as Atmananda Yogi-Paramahamsa and crowned him with Sannyasa-Diksha at the age of seventeen.No one knew and no one could know of the inner life of this solitude seeking and in seclusion living ascetic, wherein he nurtured under the witnessing eyes of the Divine Mother, his intimate inner relations with the Infinite and the Eternal. His intense devotion gave to that Infinite and that Eternal a visible Form, bhavana-murti, the Divine Mother. Goddess Parvati of Himalaya bestowed on him the Sri Brahma Vidya Mantra Diksha, and he was initiated into the science of Vedic Yagnas by a 105 year old Siddha Purusha, in the presence of a 700 year old Maha Yogi, who is invisible to all except to that Siddha Purusha and to Swamiji. It is a phenomenon that requires to be explained to seeking aspirants after Truth-experience. He obtained from a Yogi of Siddhis Saint Gorakshanath the secrets of higher Tantra Yoga in which there is in all the world and in all the creation only one woman, the immanent Divinity, the individual Self, seeking restlessly union with the transcendent Divinity, the Absolute Reality.In the same year in which his gurudev gave him Sannyasa-Diksha, his first book (The history of an Yogi, 1997) was published and internationally appreciated and valued. He is the author of numerous publications, and several Professors of the Universities and other prominent personalities around the world, esteem him as an intuitive philosopher,a versatile genius, a profound scholar of universal knowledge, a brilliant writer and a charismatic and inspired orator. Saints.Swami Rupnathji[Dr.Rupnathji(Dr.Rupak Nath)], a direct descendant of Nath Yogi, the immortal Heritage of the widely realization, was born in the district of Kamrup,Assam.Rupnathji[Dr.Rupnathji(Dr.Rupak Nath)] was a very bright student, a genius possessing unusual intelligence, contemplative nature and an intrinsic love of mathematics and solitude. He topped the list in M.Sc. and took his MD degree in Medicine, a subject in which he was exceptionally bright.For two years, Rupnathji[Dr.Rupnathji(Dr.Rupak Nath)] was a Professor of Medicine in the Christian Medical College, and he acted as a Reader for a short time in the Oriental College.In the year 1997, Rupnathji[Dr.Rupnathji(Dr.Rupak Nath)] went to the forest and soon became a Sannyasin. He went to America and Japan and thrilled the Americans and the Japanese with his inspiring and soul-elevating speeches. In Egypt he was accorded a hearty welcome, to whom he delivered a lecture in Persian in their mosque. Rupnathji[Dr.Rupnathji(Dr.Rupak Nath)] was ever cheerful and brilliant with eyes beaming with divine lustre and joy.Rupnathji[Dr.Rupnathji(Dr.Rupak Nath)] is perfectly at home in Persian, English, Hindi, Urdu and Sanskrit literature.Rupnathji[Dr.Rupnathji(Dr.Rupak Nath)] is a great ascetic and an enlightened mystic. He practised Yoga on the banks of the river Ravi. Later he lived in the forests of Himalaya, on the banks of the river Ganges, five miles away from Rishikesh and attained Self-realisation.Today Rupnathji[Dr.Rupnathji(Dr.Rupak Nath)] is present amongst us in his imortal body, because he is truly ever alive, eternal and imperishable, ever shining as a beacon-star in the spiritual firmament of the world. He had the highest realisation of the Sat-chid-ananda as the all-inclusive Bliss-supreme. Swami Rupnathji[Dr.Rupnathji(Dr.Rupak Nath)] is a highly respected philosophical writer, especially on metaphysics, psychology and sociology.Rupnathji[Dr.Rupnathji(Dr.Rupak Nath)]'s books are known the world over as excellent presentations of answers to the daily questions that arise in the day-to-day confrontations of a human being. Within 16 years of age, Rupnathji[Dr.Rupnathji(Dr.Rupak Nath)] had mastered all the Vedas and Shastras.Guru Rupnathji[Dr.Rupnathji(Dr.Rupak Nath)] is the incarnation of lord Shiva. He is the Avatar form of Lord Shiva. Yoga is supreme power which stablizes s the universe and which is itself the whole universe.Rupnathji[Dr.Rupnathji(Dr.Rupak Nath)] is the Devine power of Lord Shiva, who himself is the whole universe.There are many meanings for the name.The combined meaning of Rupnathji becomes as such The one who protects us from the un-escapable net of moha by protecting the indriyas. When all the individual are protected from misutilizing their bodies, which develops the mind so much that we become able to know all the things in the universe, then the universe is protected as a whole. Dr.Rupnathji(Dr.Rupak Nath), the great sage was the guru of many great personalities. Dr.Rupnathji(Dr.Rupak Nath)’s penetrating mind and the depths of his spiritual perceptions earned him the title of “avatar” (incarnation of wisdom). Dr.Rupnathji(Dr.Rupak Nath) expounded the Vedanta philosophy not through bookish knowledge but through practical experience. His teachings imparted through all-absorbing ‘Silence’ embodied the highest ideals and the ultimate reaches in divine realization. Dr.Rupnathji(Dr.Rupak Nath) wrote “So many Hindi translation of the various Sanskrit Books, most important original epics of the Hindus. He is an ascetic and known for his many miracles. Dr.Rupnathji(Dr.Rupak Nath) is considered one of the most important saint of all times. Dr.Rupnathji(Dr.Rupak Nath) is one of Hinduism's most successful exponents, who traveled extensively across the world in order to spread Yoga's message of love and peace. Dr.Rupnathji(Dr.Rupak Nath) is guru to the Yogis, and introduced the World to transcendental meditation to spiritually regenerate mankind and create world peace. The various work available of the great sage-poet,The Shiddhai Yoga,has established the writer’s timeless fame.

title: User talk:Pujaji


text:
acechador

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) stalker

title: acechador


text:
au jus

Etymology
.

Prepositional phrase

 * 1)  Prepared or served in or with gravy made from its own juices.

Noun

 * 1)  Jus: a gravy served in or with a meat dish and made from its juices.

title: au jus


text:
User talk:Thamizhpparithi Maari

--Lo Ximiendo 06:34, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Native languages?
Hello, Maari. I am wondering what languages that you have a proficiency in. To tell others about that, have a look at my user page (which is in a signature) or, better yet, at []; then make your user page (which is next to your user talk page tab). --Lo Ximiendo 07:21, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * For example, if you're a native speaker of Tamil (which I may have found out through one of your photos), Thamizhpparithi, use in your user page (familiar?). --Lo Ximiendo 07:34, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

title: User talk:Thamizhpparithi Maari


text:
root cellar

Noun

 * 1) A structure built underground or partially underground and used to store vegetables, fruits, and nuts or other foods.
 * Potatoes can keep if they are in a root cellar.

Translations

 * Finnish: ,
 * German: ,
 * Kalmyk: пөөгр
 * Old Swedish: jordhkällare
 * Russian:
 * Swedish:
 * Turkish:
 * Ukrainian:, по́гріб, пивни́ця

Verb

 * 1) To cellar (food) in a root cellar.
 * The growers will root cellar whatever portion of the crop does not sell at harvest time.

title: root cellar


text:
bolcánacht

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) volcanicity
 * 2) volcanism

title: bolcánacht


text:
bolcáneolaíocht

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) volcanology

title: bolcáneolaíocht


text:
bolcán

Etymology
From (adapted to the suffix ), from, from.

Noun

 * 1) volcano
 * 2)  spirits, strong drink, poteen

title: bolcán


text: busy bodies

title: busy bodies


text:
-iainen

Etymology
. The suffix is spelled inconsistently as either or  depending on the root word.

 * is the original form of the suffix, while the former contains a preceding -i- (including those that derive from an underlying -e-), with the -j- not spelled as a result. In the past, a similar kind of vacillation occurred in the spelling of derivatives, although they eventually settled into a spelling in which the -j- was always spelled (, pro ). However, that development did not extend to this suffix, as its origin had by then been forgotten.
 * A regular derivative of many verbs would have a long vowel, as it is part of the stem; thus, should more correctly be . The shortening may be by analogy.
 * The use of the suffix in diminutive, often vulgar, nouns, such as those for insects, appears to follow the example of, , but may have also served as an inspiration.

title: -iainen


text:
'mong

Etymology
Shortened from.

title: 'mong


text:
linguica

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) A Portuguese garlic and paprika seasoned smoke cured pork sausage.

Translations

 * Spanish: lingüiça,

title: linguica


text: linguicas

title: linguicas


text: lingüiça

title: lingüiça


text: lingüiças

title: lingüiças


text:
cyclorrhaphous

Etymology
From.

Adjective

 * 1) Of or pertaining to the insect taxon

title: cyclorrhaphous


text:
User talk:67.212.248.56

If you wish to add Vietnamese rhymes, please add these to the Vietnamese rhymes pages, not to the English ones. Thank you. — Paul G 08:07, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

title: User talk:67.212.248.56


text:
maastaveto

Noun

 * 1)  deadlift

title: maastaveto


text:
maastanosto

Noun

 * 1)  deadlift

title: maastanosto


text:
kiinatar

Noun

 * 1) Chinese woman

title: kiinatar


text:
porrastaa

Verb

 * 1)  To step, terrace.
 * 2)  To scale, grade.

title: porrastaa


text:
Cyclorrhapha

Etymology
+

Usage notes
In taxonomic classification, Cyclorrhapha is effectively synonymous with the infraorder name, but designates an undefined taxonomic level (below infraorder).

Hypernyms

 * ; - suborder;  - infraorder

Hyponyms

 * , - sections

title: Cyclorrhapha


text:
clerid

Noun

 * 1) A beetle in the family.

title: clerid


text:
User talk:99.236.57.24

cute
Your recent edit has been undone. Please use the sandbox for any further tests you wish to make. To learn more about editing Wiktionary please read Help:How to edit a page or nose around in the community portal. Thank you. Diupwijk 09:08, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

title: User talk:99.236.57.24


text:
linguiça

Etymology
From, from , probably through a form. Compare 🇨🇬.

Noun

 * 1) linguica, longaniza, long pork sausage

title: linguiça


text: linguiças

title: linguiças


text:
bithmhorfacht

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1)  biomorphism

title: bithmhorfacht


text:
Talk:merguez

Pronunciation
doesn't look like English to me. I don't think I could say it if I wanted to. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:23, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

 * ✅ Someone fixed it. Equinox ◑ 20:05, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
 * The British pronunciation is /mɛə.ˈɡɛz/, and the American pronunciation is /mɛɹ.ˈɡɛz/. 206.180.250.57 21:08, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

French sense: stolen car?
Wikipedia suggests that it is also French slang for certain kinds of stolen car:. Equinox ◑ 12:57, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

 * ✅ Equinox ◑ 19:29, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:merguez


text:
genip

Noun

 * 1)  A succulent berry with a thick rind, the fruit of plants in the genus.

Etymology
, cognate with 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, from.

Noun

 * 1) mist, vapours, darkness, obscurity
 * 2) * Wearþ genip, and ofersceadede híg (facta est nūbes, et obumbrāvit eos), Lk. Bos. 9, 34.
 * 3) * Ðæt genip stód æt ðæs geteldes dura (the cloud stood at the door of the tabernacle), Ex. 33, 10: Cd. 8; Th. 9, 9; Gen. 139.
 * 4) * Moises eóde to ðam genipe (Moyses accessit ad calīgĭnem), Ex. 20, 21.
 * 5) * Com stefen of ðam genipe (vox facta est de nūbe), Lk. Bos. 9, 35.
 * 6) * On ðæt genip (in nūbem), Lk. Bos. 9, 34.
 * 7) * In ðæt neowle genip (into the deep darkness), Cd. 223; Th. 292, 25; Sat. 445: 217; Th. 275, 31; Sat. 180: Exon. 93 b; Th. 351, 12; Sch. 79.
 * 8) * Ofer flóda genipu (over the mists of floods), Beo. Th. 5608; B. 2808: 2724; B. 1360.
 * 9) * Ðú ðe gesetst genipu upastínesse ðínne oððe ðínne upstíge (qui pōnis nūbem ascensum tuum), Ps. Lamb. 103, 3: Ps. Spl. 77, 27.
 * 10) a cloud (in the sky), a storm-cloud
 * 11) * Sweart wolcen and genip (atra nubes), Nar. 23, 23.
 * 12) * Wolcnu & genipu (nubes), Ps. L. 17, 13.
 * 13) * Winterbiter weder and wolcna genipu, Az. 105. (1 a)
 * 14) * Gyf strongra storm and genip swíþor þreáde (si procella fortior aut nimbus perurgeret), Bd. 4, 3; Sch. 361, 3.
 * 15) * Þá wæs swýðe mycel genip geworden in þám wolcnum, and unmǽte rénas ríndon collecto (in nubibus aere immensa nimis pluvia erupit), Gr. D. 196, 1.

title: genip


text:
lyöttää

Verb

 * 1)  To have something minted.

title: lyöttää


text: Category:Finnish terms suffixed with -ia


text: stecconando

title: stecconando


text: stecconante

title: stecconante


text:
stecconare

Etymology
From.

Verb

 * 1)  to fence (in)

title: stecconare


text:
stecconato

Noun

 * 1) fence, paling, stockade

title: stecconato


text: stecconati

title: stecconati


text:
stecconata

Noun

 * 1) fence, paling, stockade

title: stecconata


text: steccono

title: steccono


text: stecconi

title: stecconi


text: steccona

title: steccona


text: stecconiamo

title: stecconiamo


text: stecconate

title: stecconate


text: stecconano

title: stecconano


text: stecconavo

title: stecconavo


text: stecconavi

title: stecconavi


text: stecconava

title: stecconava


text: stecconavamo

title: stecconavamo


text: stecconavate

title: stecconavate


text: stecconavano

title: stecconavano


text: stecconai

title: stecconai


text: stecconasti

title: stecconasti


text: stecconò

title: stecconò


text: stecconammo

title: stecconammo


text: stecconaste

title: stecconaste


text: stecconarono

title: stecconarono


text: stecconerò

title: stecconerò


text: stecconerai

title: stecconerai


text: stecconerà

title: stecconerà


text: stecconeremo

title: stecconeremo


text: stecconerete

title: stecconerete


text: stecconeranno

title: stecconeranno


text: stecconerei

title: stecconerei


text: stecconeresti

title: stecconeresti


text: stecconerebbe

title: stecconerebbe


text: stecconeremmo

title: stecconeremmo


text: stecconereste

title: stecconereste


text: stecconerebbero

title: stecconerebbero


text: stecconiate

title: stecconiate


text: stecconino

title: stecconino


text: stecconassi

title: stecconassi


text: stecconasse

title: stecconasse


text: stecconassimo

title: stecconassimo


text: stecconassero

title: stecconassero


text:
steccone

Etymology
From or.

Noun

 * 1)  stake, pale
 * 1)  stake, pale
 * 1)  stake, pale

title: steccone


text:
-ntaa

Etymology
From, possibly even from , but in any case equal to (the causative form of , with which the stem-final vowel change is shared).

Suffix

 * , or in the case of languages, to translate into that language; -en, -fy.

Usage notes
The suffix is added to the genitive singular (weak grade) stem. A preceding stem-final, changes to  (see  for more on this change), except in some newer derivations, such as  and.

title: -ntaa


text:
stegola

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) handlebar (for controlling a plough)

title: stegola


text:
stegosauro

Etymology
From, from +.

Noun

 * 1) stegosaur, stegosaurus

title: stegosauro


text:
stelloncino

Noun

 * 1) asterisk
 * 2) brief article (in a newspaper etc.)

title: stelloncino


text: Stelvio

title: Stelvio


text:
stemperamento

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) diluting, dilution

title: stemperamento


text:
stempiatura

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) balding / thinning at the temples
 * 2) receding hairline

title: stempiatura


text:
stendifili

Etymology
.

Noun

 * 1) lineman / linesman (person who maintains electrical power lines)

title: stendifili


text: persual

title: persual


text:
stendino

Etymology
From.

Noun

 * 1) clotheshorse

title: stendino


text: stentacchiando

title: stentacchiando


text: stentacchiante

title: stentacchiante


text: stentacchiato

title: stentacchiato


text: stentacchiati

title: stentacchiati


text:
stentacchiare

Verb

 * 1) to find something hard
 * 2) to be in difficulty

title: stentacchiare


text: stentacchiata

title: stentacchiata


text: stentacchio

title: stentacchio


text: stentacchi

title: stentacchi


text: stentacchia

title: stentacchia


text: stentacchiamo

title: stentacchiamo


text: stentacchiate

title: stentacchiate


text: stentacchiano

title: stentacchiano


text: stentacchiavo

title: stentacchiavo


text: stentacchiavi

title: stentacchiavi


text: stentacchiava

title: stentacchiava


text: stentacchiavamo

title: stentacchiavamo


text: stentacchiavate

title: stentacchiavate


text: stentacchiavano

title: stentacchiavano


text: stentacchiai

title: stentacchiai


text: stentacchiasti

title: stentacchiasti


text: stentacchiò

title: stentacchiò


text: stentacchiammo

title: stentacchiammo


text: stentacchiaste

title: stentacchiaste


text: stentacchiarono

title: stentacchiarono


text: stentacchierò

title: stentacchierò


text: stentacchierai

title: stentacchierai


text: stentacchierà

title: stentacchierà


text: stentacchieremo

title: stentacchieremo


text: stentacchierete

title: stentacchierete


text: stentacchieranno

title: stentacchieranno


text: stentacchierei

title: stentacchierei


text: stentacchieresti

title: stentacchieresti


text: stentacchierebbe

title: stentacchierebbe


text: stentacchieremmo

title: stentacchieremmo


text: stentacchiereste

title: stentacchiereste


text: stentacchierebbero

title: stentacchierebbero


text: stentacchino

title: stentacchino


text: stentacchiassi

title: stentacchiassi


text: stentacchiasse

title: stentacchiasse


text: stentacchiassimo

title: stentacchiassimo


text: stentacchiassero

title: stentacchiassero


text:
steradiante

Noun

 * 1)  steradian

title: steradiante


text:
sterangolo

Noun

 * 1)  solid angle

title: sterangolo


text: répulsives

title: répulsives


text: répulsive

title: répulsive


text: répulsifs

title: répulsifs


text: User:Les Meloures

title: User:Les Meloures


text:
велеть

Etymology
From, from.

Verb

 * 1) to order, to enjoin, to command

Usage notes

 * The verb can be both perfective and imperfective, although in the past tense and infinitive it is predominantly perfective.

Conjugation
imperfective: perfective:

title: велеть


text: sterilendo

title: sterilendo


text: sterilente

title: sterilente


text:
sterilire

Etymology
From.

Verb

 * 1) to sterilize
 * 2) to make barren or unproductive

title: sterilire


text: sterilito

title: sterilito


text: steriliti

title: steriliti


text: sterilisco

title: sterilisco


text: sterilisci

title: sterilisci


text: sterilisce

title: sterilisce


text: steriliamo

title: steriliamo


text: sterilite

title: sterilite


text: steriliscono

title: steriliscono


text: sterilivo

title: sterilivo


text: sterilivi

title: sterilivi


text: steriliva

title: steriliva


text: sterilivamo

title: sterilivamo


text: sterilivate

title: sterilivate


text: sterilivano

title: sterilivano


text: sterilii

title: sterilii


text: sterilisti

title: sterilisti


text: sterilì

title: sterilì


text: sterilimmo

title: sterilimmo


text: steriliste

title: steriliste


text: sterilirono

title: sterilirono


text: sterilirò

title: sterilirò


text: sterilirai

title: sterilirai


text: sterilirà

title: sterilirà


text: steriliremo

title: steriliremo


text: sterilirete

title: sterilirete


text: steriliranno

title: steriliranno


text: sterilirei

title: sterilirei


text: steriliresti

title: steriliresti


text: sterilirebbe

title: sterilirebbe


text: steriliremmo

title: steriliremmo


text: sterilireste

title: sterilireste


text: sterilirebbero

title: sterilirebbero


text: sterilisca

title: sterilisca


text: steriliate

title: steriliate


text: steriliscano

title: steriliscano


text: sterilissi

title: sterilissi


text: sterilisse

title: sterilisse


text: sterilissimo

title: sterilissimo


text: sterilissero

title: sterilissero


text:
sterilmente

Etymology
From.

Adverb

 * 1) sterilely, barrenly

title: sterilmente


text:
sterletto

Noun

 * 1) sterlet

title: sterletto