Template talk:ko-noun

Remake based on Template:ja-noun and Template:cmn-noun

I don't really see the point in having these three parameters in the template. I think I am right in saying that subject, topic, and direct object are indicated by post-posisioned particles, which are always the same, and do not change the form of the noun either (unless the noun is conjoined with the particle to form some colloquial shortening, which I doubt is formal and which could be mentioned in usage notes). Anyway, it is clear that there will never be articles for all Korean words with every possible particle attached; that's just ridiculous. On the other hand, I see a lot missing in this template. This template would be really useful if it worked similarly to Template:ja-noun and Template:cmn-noun, where one first specifies form of writing (in the case of Korean, hangeul or hanja), then inludes the other form in a parameter (if it exists), and in another parameter inline hangeul jamo for proper alphabetizing. There's only a handful of entries using this template now, so it should be easy converting them. – Krun 16:59, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

The code could be:

<includeonly>{{#switch:{{{1}}}|hg='''{{PAGENAME}}'''|hj={{PAGENAME}}}} (<!--
-->{{#switch:{{{1}}}|hg=''hangeul'', <nowiki/>|hj=''hanja'', <nowiki/>|}}<!--
-->{{#ifeq:{{{count|}}}|-|''uncountable'', <nowiki/>|{{#if:{{{count|}}}|''counter'' {{wlink|{{{count}}}}}, <nowiki/>}}}}<!--
  -->{{#if:{{{hangeul|}}}|''hangeul'' {{JAchar|{{wlink|{{{hangeul}}}}}}}, <nowiki/>}}<!--
  -->{{#if:{{{hanja|}}}|''hanja'' {{JAchar|{{wlink|{{{hanja}}}}}}}, <nowiki/>}}<!--
  -->{{#if:{{{rv|}}}|''revised'' '''{{wlink|{{{rv}}}}}'''}})<!--
  -->{{#if:{{{mr|}}}|''McCune-Reischauer'' '''{{wlink|{{{mr}}}}}'''}})<!--
-->[[Category:Korean nouns|{{{hidx|{{PAGENAME}}}}} {{PAGENAME}}]]</includeonly><noinclude>
Korean nouns. For usage, see the [[Template talk:{{PAGENAME}}|discussion page]].
[[Category:Korean inflection templates]]
</noinclude>

Any further ideas? – Krun 17:37, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Edit: I went ahead and changed the template, but I see that the particles aren't always the same. There must be some rule, though… The best thing would be to find out for each word its inflection category and link to an appendix that teaches how to apply these particles. – Krun 19:08, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

They aren't always the same, and I don't really see what makes these particles so different from declension endings in other languages, but I've long since lost this argument. -- Visviva 10:22, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

link to MR transliteration

Is there any reason to link to the MR transliteration? I doubt most such transliterations would meet CFI. Rod (A. Smith) 20:25, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, and done. Not sure how I missed that the first time. It seems that I am quite incapable of making a "clean" edit to this template... good thing I'm not the only one minding the store. ;-) -- Visviva 03:06, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Broken

This template seems to not work on Romanized entries. I can't work out what it's trying to achieve, therefore I can't (yet) fix it. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:06, 31 October 2010 (UTC)