Reconstruction talk:Proto-Slavic/-janinъ

Irregular plural

@PUC: This suffix and its alternatives are peculiar in that they follow the paradigm of *-janinъ in the singular and dual but switch back to *-janъ in plural. Do you know how to implement this variation in the declension template? I see that Proto-Slavic *slověninъ manually accounts for it, but probably there is a smarter way to do it? If anything else fails, a possible option is to give the singular+dual and the plural declensions separately. Безименен (talk) 10:17, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

@Atitarev, Benwing2: Can you help? Безименен (talk)

@Bezimenen, Benwing2: Sorry, I can't help with making templates but you need a different template here, possibly with parameters - single and plural stems. Note that in descendants, such as Russian, the plural ending is not always the same for such nouns: славяни́н/славя́не, граждани́н/гра́ждане but болга́рин/болга́ры, тата́рин/тата́ры. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 23:09, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

@Bezimenen: Sorry, I don't know how to fix that, but maybe @Useigor can help? PUC – 10:34, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Reconstruction *-jan(in)ъ

I see the ESSJa reconstructs instead *-jan(in)ъ, *-ěn(in)ъ, etc. apparently because forms with only *-janъ, *-ěnъ exists as well:

• Russian слове́н (slovén) (dialectal) : славяни́н (slavjanín) (standard)
• Bulgarian стопа́н (stopán) (dialectal) : стопа́нин (stopánin) (standard)

Shouldn't Wiktionary follow the same paradigm? Безименен (talk) 11:49, 25 August 2020 (UTC)