User talk:Hekaheka/Archive 2015 2017

crown

I think the sense you edited was meant to be a metaphorical sense. Webster has "A wreath or garland, or any ornamental fillet encircling the head, especially as a reward of victory or mark of honorable distinction; hence, anything given on account of, or obtained by, faithful or successful effort; a reward." Equinox ◑ 21:58, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

OK. I failed to check Webster. But, as this sense is derived from the "wreath" -sense I moved it to the fourth place on the list of definitions, right after "wreath". --Hekaheka (talk) 22:19, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

vyösyöttöinen

I've been working on Special:WantedCategories, and I'm always reluctant to create affix categories in languages I don't know, because it's usually very tricky telling real affixes from independent words or coincidental combinations of other morphemes. This term is categorizing to the redlinked Category:Finnish words suffixed with -syöttöinen. The suffix in question looks to me like a verb with a nominalizing suffix- should the combination be considered a suffix in its own right? Chuck Entz (talk) 04:16, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

This term, and many others like it, are a challenge for classifiers. It's derived from the verb syöttää (“to feed”) > syöttö (“feeding, feed”) + -inen. It is never used alone, but always as headword in a compound adjective. Yet, it isn't a suffix, but rather an adjective. Then, should it be listed in Wiktionary under -syöttöinen, or syöttöinen? In current Kotus net dictionary the former is used and in another, only a few years old wordlist it was the latter. In similar cases I have written the main entry under the unhyphenated form and a soft redirect under the hyphenated form. How's that for a policy? --Hekaheka (talk) 07:17, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

vaata

Heips;
kumosit muokkaukseni kommentilla ”alternative spelling is "vaa'ata", not "va'ata"”. Kyseessä on kuitenkin kaksi eri sanaa: 'Vaakaaminen' (”levelling”) on eri asia kuin 'vakaaminen' (”stabilizing”), joka sanana on 'vaata'-verbin neljäs infinitiivi. --Pänikkä (talk) 11:47, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Joku taisi tosiaan mennä väärin, mutta lähtökohtakaan ei ollut ihan oikein: vaata -sanassa ei nimittäin ole keskellä heittomerkkiä, eihän? --Hekaheka (talk) 20:45, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Asia näyttää olevan vähän monimutkaisempi. NSK:n mukaan "vaata" tarkoittaa "tarkastaa mittaus- tai punnitusväline ja varustaa se leimalla, kruunata". Mutta myös sanojen "vaa'ata" ja "vaaita" kakkosmerkitys on sama. Lisäksi "vaaita" tarkoittaa korkeussuhteiden mittaamista vesivaa'alla ja "vaa'ata" tarkoittaa vaa'alla punnitsemista, joskin se merkitys on harvinainen. "Vaata" ja "vaa'ata" tarkoittavatkin siis samaa. Kävi vähän niinkuin Väyryselle: "Uskoin kerran olevani väärässä, mutta sitten huomasin erehtyneeni".--Hekaheka (talk) 21:14, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Vaata on silti eri vartalosta johdettu kuin vaa'ata, ja ääntämykseltäänkin erilainen, joten niitä ei voi väittää pelkiksi oikeinkirjoitusvarianteiksi. Tämä rinnastuu paremmin sellaisiin tapauksiin kuin pöllö vs. pölhö tai kuljeksia vs. kuljeskella: täytyy Wiktionaryn systeemien mukaan pistää vain synonyymeiksi. (Kannattaa myös huomata, että sanojen vaka, vakaa perusmerkitys on lähinnä 'rauhallinen, luotettava', ei suinkaan 'horisontaalinen, tasainen', joten semanttisesti tämä johdos on kyllä varmaan ottanut vaikutusta vaaka-sanueesta. Muutenhan odottaisi, että vaata = jotain tyyliin 'rauhoitella, laannuttaa, tuutia'?) --Tropylium (talk) 18:14, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Finnish nominal inflection types

I've been looking at these more closely in order to understand Finnish inflection better and write more in an appendix about it. I noticed some strange things though, that I hope maybe you can help with.

The appendix pages at Appendix:Finnish nominal inflection/kala and Appendix:Finnish nominal inflection/koira state that these are both used for two-syllable nouns, and that the choice depends on what vowels are in the first syllable. But in the categories for these two types, there are many words of 3 or more syllables (and are not compounds; the inflectional base stem is really 3+ syllables). For example, in the kala category there is vihanta, and many others with an -nta suffix, while the koira category has even more. The appendix also says that kala type nouns have a, e or i in the first syllable, but then there are leuka, hauta and jauhopuola to name a few. The koira type, which should have nouns with o or u, has avauma.

Similar things apply to the Appendix:Finnish nominal inflection/risti and Appendix:Finnish nominal inflection/paperi pages. These should have 2 and 3+ syllables respectively according to the descriptions, but in the risti category there are more words with 3+ syllabes than there are words with 2 syllables. What determines the difference between these if it's not the number of syllables?

So I'm wondering, do the descriptions as they are given in the appendixes even make sense? Should they be changed, and to what? —CodeCat 01:25, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

The appendixes were originally written by the user KJBracey, and he might be able to explain why he has written what he has written. I know that NSK recognizes more inflection classes than the 50 years newer Kotus. I guess this reflects the natural development of the language. As you know the Finnish grammar is quite complicated and some rarely used features are gradually being shaded away. My quick theory is that class kala used to be reserved for two-syllable words only, because the 3-syllable words now in that class had some minor differences in inflection. I cannot check my NSK now because I'm in Rome, but at least there has been the genitive plural vihantien. Interestingly, this form has been preserved in the word ikivihanta which is now in koira -class. Also, I believe the editors of Wiktionary have cut some corners here and there dropping out some very uncommon inflections from the inflection tables. I strongly suggest you consult user Tropylium in this matter as he is a linguist by education and I'm just an eager amateur. --Hekaheka (talk) 01:59, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Userpage

Hi, Hekaheka, just wanted to inform your userpage is in a mess. Lotje (talk) 15:26, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

"Mess" is a question of point of view. I have just stored there some stuff that helps me remember certain things. Others are not supposed to find it meaningful. --Hekaheka (talk) 16:07, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

pöpinä

The edits by this IP are clearly at least wrong, with clashing pos between the pos header and the headword line, but I have no clue what "right" would be for this entry. There's a similar pos issue with their edit to pöpi, but I'm not sure whether the definition or the pos needs to be changed. Chuck Entz (talk) 12:55, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

POS was wrong, but the text was on right track as a whole. I fixed the details. --Hekaheka (talk) 14:42, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

-kielisyys

Is this really a distinct suffix? It seems to me that all the nouns using it are just nouns with -kielinen that had -uus added to them. —CodeCat 17:23, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

No, it's not a suffix. That's why I have entered it as a noun. The reason I entered it hyphenated is that it is never used alone, i.e. without a modifier. You may have noted that I also added kielisyys with its only content being a link to -kielisyys. The question is good, however. I was just pondering, whether I should similarly move the content of kielinen to -kielinen, but then decided not to do it, because kielinen may be used independently in questions. However, for the sake of logic, I should probably add -kielinen and soft-redirect it to kielinen. There are many other similar adjectives and nouns, and I bet there's no logic at all in how they are currently presented in hyphenated or un-hyphenated form. I guess we would need a policy that should be discussed on a proper forum, whatever it is. --Hekaheka (talk) 17:36, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Another noteworthy point is that Kotus lists -kielisyys in their web dictionary, but not kielisyys. --Hekaheka (talk) 17:39, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

I think that the process actually goes like this. First you start with for example kaksi and kieli. These are then joined into kaksikielinen as one single step; so it's directly formed as kaksi + kieli + -inen. From there, the suffix -uus is added, giving kaksikielisyys. If you see it this way, then there are no suffixes like -kielisyys, nor unused words like kielinen. Similar things happen in other languages too, like in English for example. redhaired is red + hair + -ed. There is no intermediate step like redhair or haired. I see that we do have an entry for haired, but that doesn't make sense in English anymore than kielinen does in Finnish. —CodeCat 18:01, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

There are loads of these, like tonguedness. Believe me, we need a policy discussion, not your hallmark Amoklauf. I find it quite arrogant that you think you are better to judge what is disctionary-worthy in Finnish than all the experts of Kotus put together. --Hekaheka (talk) 18:08, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

iloisa and iloinen

Hi Hekaheka. I hope you're OK with this edit of mine; if you prefer the original wording, may I suggest you use the coding {{n-g|Alternative term for {{m|fi|iloinen}}.}}? That way, you get the intended default display, but the bits of text are properly marked to ensure that the displayed text will also be correct for users who have opted for non-default display schemes. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 13:24, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

No complaint, except that I tagged it "rare". --Hekaheka (talk) 08:09, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Aye, I noticed. I just wanted to make sure that I wasn't annoying you by interfering with Finnish entries. :-)  — I.S.M.E.T.A. 10:46, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Kirjaamo

I added kirjaamo with the definition registrar. Does that seem right? ~ heyzeuss 10:27, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, it does. --Hekaheka (talk) 04:41, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

vaihteluväli

You wrote on my discussion page (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/User_talk:88.112.130.243) that /ç/ is a Finnish phoneme according to http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/suomi/fon.html unlike I had written in the edit comment on vaihteluväli. That page doesn't say that /ç/ is a phoneme, but it is indeed an allophone of /h/. See the explanation on my discussion page. 88.112.130.243 10:38, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

Form

I added a definition to form: A specific way of performing a movement. The subject in question is sports and fitness, as in, Nykänen really has got great form, Bob. He's going to fly far! Is there any equivalent word in Finnish? ~ heyzeuss 07:23, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

I'd say that the best equivalent is tyyli as in V-tyyli. --Hekaheka (talk) 13:14, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Showing principal forms of inflections when tables are collapsed

I recently added a feature to show the principal forms (the forms that allow you to derive all the others) for Dutch verbs and adjectives when the inflection table is collapsed. See for example gooien and groot. I'm quite pleased with this, and I wondered if the same could be done for Finnish. I made a draft: User:CodeCat/vsExample. For nominals only 7 forms are needed, the rest can be predicted from this. The nominative plural is not technically needed as it's derived from the genitive singular, but there was space for it in the table, and plurale tantum nouns don't have singular forms anyway. Rare forms are not shown when the table is collapsed. Tell me what you think? —CodeCat 20:06, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

In principle this is doable. The #1 authority in Finnish, Kotus uses the same four cases for presenting Finnish declensions (see any noun in their online dictionary at http://www.kielitoimistonsanakirja.fi) and so did already NSK. On the other hand, Wiktionary's established practice seems to be to keep collapsed tables really collapsed. I can imagine that in multiple language entries this night even become an issue, as the entries would grow considerably longer than they currently are - assuming, of course that similar presentations were developed for all inflected languages. All in all, I think this should be discussed on Wiktionary's policy forum. --Hekaheka (talk) 20:25, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

It's still equivalent to four lines of text, more or less. That's the same as if there were four more definitions. I don't see how the length of the entries becomes a problem with such a small table. Compare also the Latin noun and adjective entries, which have uncollapsible (!) tables with 7 rows or more. Irish entries also have a whole extra section with a table for mutations, also not collapsed. So I think there's plenty of precedent for small tables in entries, it's only the larger ones that need collapsing. —CodeCat 20:34, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

yli

In diff, a user has questioned the usage note. Can you judge whether it's accurate or not? - -sche (discuss) 06:22, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

I would say the correction is correct. The whole existence of accusative in Finnish is disputed. Depending on theory, the case of total object (as opposed to partial object which is always in partitive) is regarded as either accusative (which takes the form of either genitive or nominative, see genitive-accusative) or plain genitive or nominative - or accusative in the case of personal pronouns, which are the only Finnish words that have a distinct accusative form (the forms minut, sinut, hänet, meidät, teidät, heidät and kenet). In Wiktionary we have adopted the point-of-view that accusative exists, but in this case I see no object, and therefore genitive appears a more likely interpretation. --Hekaheka (talk) 11:12, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

It's very easy to see whether a case is accusative or genitive: just make it plural. If you end up with the genitive plural, then you're dealing with the actual genitive, while if you get the nominative plural, then you have the accusative. This is also the main argument I see for treating the accusative as a separate case. (And of course historically, the cases actually did have different forms, they just became identical by coincidence). —CodeCat 11:42, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

In this particular example this rule does not work, because there's no actual plural for "vartin yli". However, in more concrete contexts "yli" requires a genitive: "tien yli - teiden yli". --Hekaheka (talk) 12:39, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

llex?

many Finnish nominals are giving llex as the allative ending. I traced the cause to https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Module:fi-nominals

it is a protected page so I cannot change it. You are an active editor and I hope you can get it fixed.

sorry to trouble you but this is affecting all the Finnish nominals across Wiktionary and I hope you can fix it or get it fixed.

thx 87.92.144.103

@CodeCat Please, please, remove the small x'es. Besides you and me, nobody understands them, and they are causing confusion. I have discussed this with other active Finnish contributors, and they agree with me. --Hekaheka (talk) 12:29, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

"Besides you and me and me nobody understands them" Can you explain the x to me? Because in this world it seems that only you and the editor that you contacted seems to know what the x refers to. BTW the editor you contacted has not removed the x .... s/he has merely superscripted the x which still does not help. Finnish does not have superscripted letters with any lexical meaning. ~~

I went to codecat's discussion page and figured the answer. Thanks for intervening. I have asked him myself to remove it. No need for you to reply~~

Righteousness

I added vanhurskaus as a translation to all of the senses of righteousness. Please have a look. ~ heyzeuss 11:45, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

AFAIK, it's correct. --Hekaheka (talk) 16:56, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

seinähirsi

... Ei taivu “seinähirseä”, “seinähirristä” tms. Muutin nyt deklinaation 7 -> 28. Varmista, että tällaiset vahingot jäisivät vähäisiksi!--85.76.54.251 12:33, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

No juu, jos tekee yli 100.000 editointia, niin joku menee väkisinkin väärin. Ei muuten mennyt ihan putkeen korjaukset artikkeleihin fileointiveitsi ja fileerausveitsi sinullakaan! Eiköhän jatketa ihan sopuisasti inimillisiä mokauksia ymmärtäen. --Hekaheka (talk) 16:45, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

itse

I added a request for an inflection table to this entry, but I get the feeling that the use of this term is a bit more complicated than can be put in a table. I've been working on Northern Sami entries and grammar a lot lately, and its equivalent of itse is ieš. It seems to work this way:

• The bare word is used only in the nominative form, and has dual and plural forms. It's used to strengthen the subject of the sentence only, like in I do it myself or you yourself have seen it.
• In all other cases, a possessive suffix is required, and this suffix must match the subject. So non-nominative forms without a case suffix don't exist, while nominative forms with a case suffix don't exist either.

Is the situation in Finnish anything like this? It probably should be explained in the entry. We already have entries for itseni, itsesi and so on, so the definitions at itse should probably limited to only the forms without any possessive suffix. —CodeCat 18:37, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Box-bed

What is the translation of w:box-bed in Finnish? ~ heyzeuss 15:12, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

I don't think there is a Finnish word for it. I have never seen a piece of furniture like that. This [1] comes close, but it's called "vuodekaappi" because it's a bunk bed combined with a cupboard with the lower bed equipped with a curtain. This [2] thing is cited as "sänkykaappi", but again, it's not quite the same, but a baby's bed furnished in a chest of drawers. Kaappivuode or kaappisänky came first into my mind, but these words seem to be used chiefly of a bed which folds into a box when not used for sleeping [3]. Vuodekomero is synonymous to alkovi (“alcove”) and komerovuode doesn't seem to exist. --Hekaheka (talk) 16:13, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

I have never seen that piece of furniture either. :D I was mainly interested in the more traditional Scandinavian built-in beds that have curtains. They seem to be especially common in old farm houses that lack bedrooms. ~ heyzeuss 18:44, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Parahiksi

Is parahiksi dialectical? It does not seem to be an inflected form of paras or parahin. ~ heyzeuss 02:07, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Created an entry for it. --Hekaheka (talk) 04:36, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Great, thanks. ~ heyzeuss 06:21, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

Lähiaika

Am I correct in assuming that lähiaika means recent past or near future? ~ heyzeuss 07:54, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

It is sometimes used that way, but "recent past" is regarded as nonstandard. --Hekaheka (talk) 03:18, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Miltei

Is miltei somehow related to miltä ei? ~ heyzeuss 13:07, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

No, miltei means lähes ("almost"). --Hekaheka (talk) 13:39, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

On the second thought, if miltä ei were contracted it would become miltei, but I cannot explain the conversion of the meaning logically. Perhaps there's an intermediate step which I'm not aware of. --Hekaheka (talk) 03:44, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

kumajaa vs muistaa

I noticed that kumajaa has its own inflection table, which a few entries use. But are these not just part of the muistaa type? If not, what is the difference? —CodeCat 20:53, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

It is more complicated than that. Our current treatment of this type seems to be incorrect. Both authoritative sources that I have access to, i.e. Nykysuomen sanakirja and the net version of Kielitoimiston sanakirja [4] treat kumajaa as an archaic/dialectal/poetic form of the verb kumista. According to them the form only exists in some moods and persons, but they do not fully agree in which ones. Finnish Wiktionary [5] offers a third approach. This type of variant exists for a limited number of rohkaista-type verbs. the following come quickly into my mind:

helistä > heläjää

humista > humajaa

kihistä > kihajaa

kumista > kumajaa

täristä > täräjää

vipistä > vipajaa

väristä > väräjää

This sort of forms are more common in Ostrobothnian dialects than elsewhere. According to this source [6] for example these exist in local dialects:

jyristä > jyräjää

järistä > järäjää

kolista > kolajaa

Also some salata-type verbs have similar forms:

halata > halajaa (in the sense "to want" only)

palata > palajaa

In Ostrobothnia also:

tomuta > tomajaa

I was once thinking of creating a variant of rohkaista -type conjugation which would only display the actually used kumajaa -type variations along with the ordinary conjugation, but then you made the currently existing LUA table and I felt lacking the programming skills needed to continue with my idea. Now, I just realized that the separate kumajaa template still exists. I could edit it according to my original idea and then you could include it into your LUA table. Does that sound like a plan? --Hekaheka (talk) 08:53, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

It would also be possible to add parameters to the templates, which tell the table to display only 3rd person forms. Something like mode=3rd. For impersonal verbs, the same parameter could be used. That way, you don't need entirely separate conjugation types, since it appears that as far as the forms themselves go, kumajaa is straightforwardly of the muistaa type, just with forms missing. So you'd use: {{fi-conj-muistaa|kumaj|||a|mode=3rd}}. If it doesn't work that way, then your proposal seems ok. —CodeCat 12:54, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

It might really be a better idea to keep kumista and kumajaa in separate entries, because the latter is much rarer and chiefly used in a different context. If both forms are side by side in the same table, an occasional user might think that they are interchangeable, which they are not. One can almost always substitute kumista for kumajaa but not vice versa, at least not without risk of sounding funny. --Hekaheka (talk) 14:17, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

I wasn't proposing to put them in the same entry. —CodeCat 14:26, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

No, you weren't. I was, but am not anymore. --Hekaheka (talk) 15:26, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Here's as it could look like: humajaa. Only the table needs to be made collapsible. --Hekaheka (talk) 05:01, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Another possibility is to add a usage note as I just did in kumajaa. --Hekaheka (talk) 05:30, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

When fourth infinitive is the same as a noun

As far as I know, the Finnish fourth infinitive is essentially a verbal noun that indicates the action itself. Sometimes, though, there may also be another noun with the same form. I am wondering how this is handled for Finnish. Are separate entries given for each of them, or do they get combined? —CodeCat 20:26, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

If I have felt that a noun entry would be useful - which it is especially when there is an English translation which cannot be derived from the verb - I have written a separate section for the noun, just as is done in the English entries. See e.g. "boiling", which is presented as verb, noun, adjective amd adverb. --Hekaheka (talk) 02:57, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Can you create these entries?

I found a Northern Sami-to-Finnish word list, that I'd like to use as a base to create more Sami entries. But quite a few of the Finnish words used in the translations are red links themselves. Could you have a look and fill in what you can? It would help me a lot, and of course Wiktionary's coverage of Finnish too. You can skip non-lemma forms for now, since I know enough Finnish grammar to decypher these in most cases. Here is the list: User:CodeCat/se-fi The page is rather long, so it loads a bit slow. —CodeCat 21:56, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

It will take some time. Where is the list from? There seem to be typing errors and "funny" expressions. Most of the stuff seems good, though. --Hekaheka (talk) 03:48, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

It came from here: http://www.arcticphotos.hol.es/satnegirji/admin/sanit.php —CodeCat 13:47, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

The pages are maintained by Tarja Länsman, who lives in Utsjoki in the northmost tip of Finland. Länsman is a local Sami family name, so the Sami part is likely to be correct. --Hekaheka (talk) 17:39, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

I created adni, so that might help you find the Finnish equivalent. It's a simple agent noun, the -i in Northern Sami is cognate with the Finnish -ja. —CodeCat 23:33, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

To "use" is käyttää in Finnish, and thus the agent noun would be käyttäjä. Käytteliäs on the other hand - if it existed - would be an adjective and in that case käyttävä would seem to be more correct. I checked a bit more about Tarja Länsman's background. She seems to be a teacher, photographer and Sami activist. If you are really interested in editing Northern Sami, you might get a good companion of her. Her e-mail is tarja.lansman@gmail.com. My knowledge of Northern Sami is close to zero, so I can really comment only the Finnish part. Btw I added a comment on "helppo" on the discussion page of your project page. --Hekaheka (talk) 23:50, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Well, in Northern Sami, -i has become the suffix of the present participle as well, so both are possible. Also, just to note, I split definitions with multiple words into individual links on the page. If you think that the combination is idiomatic, you can change the linking. I think this needs to be done with korkea veisu, I can't figure out what it means from the words separately. —CodeCat 00:01, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

virkkaa

I created an inflection table for this verb, to show the irregular swapping of front and back vowel harmony. If there are any other words with weird irregularities that are not currently shown in the tables, please let me know and I'll see if I can fix it. —CodeCat 20:12, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

AFAIK, this is the only one. One comment: I don't think type "muistaa" needs to be mentioned in the table header. This is just a "kaivaa" verb with irregular vowel harmony. Btw, there's also a parallel back-vowel harmony inflection. Both find usage both in straight Google search and GoogleBooks search, front-vowel harmony being 2-3 times as frequently used as the back-vowel harmony. The duality is recognized e.g. in this document[7]. It contains detailed guidelines for Univerisy of Helsinki students who are involved in collecting vocabulary for the needs of dialect research. Guideline #205 points out that the students need to find out which vowel harmony of the verb "virkkaa" is used in the particular dialect that is under study.--Hekaheka (talk) 05:35, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

While we are at it, there's also a parallel 3rd person singular past indicative form "virkki" (vs. "virkkoi"). It is the form used in Kalevala and also Kielitoimiston sanakirja [8] recognizes it as outdated. --Hekaheka (talk) 05:47, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Kuorteen

Is the illative ending -rteen common for pieni-type words like vuori and kuori?

No, it isn't. To me, "Kuorteen" does not sound Finnish at all. Where did you pick it up? If anything, it could be genitive singular form of "Kuorre", but I don't know that word. There are placenames Kuorresalmi, Kuorreapaja and possibly others. Perhaps they are derived from kuore (“smelt”). --Hekaheka (talk) 17:45, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

-ua or -tua?

I'm looking at the sanoa-type verbs now, and something struck me as odd. absorboitua is said to derive from absorboida, and my first thought was that it was derived with the suffix -ua. But there's also an extra -t- in there which can't really be explained that way. Then there's aavikoitua, which could derive from aavikoittaa, except here one of the -t- goes missing instead. It can't be gradation as the -ua suffix doesn't trigger a weak grade.

So now I am wondering, is there a separate, but related suffix -tua, which both of these have been derived with? —CodeCat 19:03, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Dropping by: yes, -tua is a separate suffix of its own. Cf. also e.g. paleltua (← palele-), häikäistyä (← häikäise-). --Tropylium (talk) 00:33, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! I didn't want to bother you with more questions, so I asked Heka instead. —CodeCat 00:40, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Tropylium. But aren't they used more or less the same way, i.e. meaning the same? Why not treat them as allomorphs? The choice between -ua and -tua depends primarily of the form of the stem, or am I all wrong? --Hekaheka (talk) 00:46, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

And what about -utua (e.g. ajaa, ajautua? Is it a separate suffix as well? As you can see, Finnish verb formation is a mystery to me and I'm better in giving questions than answers. Thus, CodeCat, if you want someone who knows, keep asking Tropylium;-) --Hekaheka (talk) 00:57, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

The entry for -utua treats -ua, -tua, -ntua and -utua as synonyms. --Hekaheka (talk) 01:00, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Per Special:WantedPages, 166 entries like to -tua; should it be created as an {{altform}} of -utua? - -sche (discuss) 20:59, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Yhdeksäskymmenesyhdeksäs itsenäisyyspäivä

Could you say in Finnish that today is the 99th Independence Day of Finland? "Tänään on Suomen yhdeksäskymmenesyhdeksäs itsenäisyyspäivä". ~ heyzeuss 20:49, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Well, it's 98th (yhdeksäskymmeneskahdeksas), isn't it? Finland got its independency in 1917. But yes, next year on December 6th, you could say "Tänään on Suomen yhdeksäskymmenesyhdeksäs itsenäisyyspäivä". Note also the spelling of "itsenäisyys" - only one "n"! --Hekaheka (talk) 19:53, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

I was thinking that if you count the day that Finland declared independence as the first Independence Day, then today is the 99th Independence Day. Maybe I'm overthinking it, since we don't really do that for birthdays in English. If I am turning ten years old, then I would still just say that it is my tenth birthday. Here's a good discussion on the subject of a first birthday on StackExchange. Also see the etymology of birthday at Online Etymology Dictionary, which gives "from Old English byrddæg, anniversary celebration of someone's birth". I would then count Independence Days in the same way, including only anniversaries, and I might do the same for the Finnish word itsenäisyyspäivä. ~ heyzeuss 21:45, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

-nut, -ttu

We're currently missing entries for these rather important Finnish suffixes/endings. Could you create them? Maybe we also need -ttava. —CodeCat 20:47, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

I have a problem: I'm not sure which entry or entries to create. I'd say that -nut should or at least could be classified as form of -ut together with -lut, -rut and -sut. In addition there are the front vowel variants -yt, -nyt, -lyt, -ryt and -syt. One example of each of these: kuollut, purrut, juossut, tehnyt, niellyt, pierryt, päässyt.

Another approach could be to say that there are two suffixes -nut/-nyt and -ut/-yt and the choice between them depends on the conjugation class. As a further complication, we have "salata" -class. Is the ending there -nnut, -nut or -ut?

We run to similar difficulties with -ttu but I guess they become trivial as soon as we have figured out how to represent -nut. --Hekaheka (talk) 21:45, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

If we wanted to divide our current conjugation classes to -nut, -ut and -nnut -categories, we would get this grouping:

-nut: huutaa, juoda, kaivaa, käydä, laskea, lähteä, muistaa, nähdä, kumajaa, saada, saartaa, sallia, sanoa, soutaa, taitaa, tuntea, tupakoida, virkkaa, voida

-ut: juosta, olla, rohkaista, seistä, tulla

-nnut: katketa, salata, selvitä, valita, vanheta

--Hekaheka (talk) 22:05, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Similarly for -ttu and -tu

-ttu: huutaa, kaivaa, laskea, lähteä, muistaa, kumajaa, saartaa, sallia, sanoa, soutaa, taitaa, tuntea, virkkaa, katketa, salata, selvitä, valita, vanheta

-tu: juosta, olla, rohkaista, seistä, tulla, juoda, käydä, nähdä, saada, tupakoida, voida

--Hekaheka (talk) 10:13, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

I think this is pretty straightforward. The basic suffix is -nut, and the -n- assimilates to certain consonants: ln > ll (kuollut), rn > rr (purrut), sn > ss (juossut), tn > nn (salannut). This is mostly a Proto-Finnic process, so it's probably not productive in Finnish anymore. Consider that we don't have entries for assimilations in other suffixes, like the infinitive ld > ll (tulla), rd > rr (purra) and so on. We have no -la or -ra entries for these, only -a and -da. I have no problem if these are created, but they should only say something like "form of infinitive suffix -a that occurs after -l-" and point back to the main form.

As for vowel harmony, we always treat the back harmony form as the primary form, and create an entry for the front harmony form that links back to it. —CodeCat 00:00, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

@CodeCat Do you like what you see under -nut/-nyt, -ut/-yt and -nnut/-nnyt? --Hekaheka (talk) 13:27, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

It looks ok, but there is no -ut or -nnut as I mentioned. —CodeCat 15:30, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

sauvoa

It's currently not clear which of the meanings of pole is intended here. Could you disambiguate it? —CodeCat 00:11, 27 January 2016 (UTC) --Done. --Hekaheka (talk) 08:18, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

oheen

I fixed the format of this entry, which went against our normal practices. The headword must always be first on the line. In any case, I wonder if the label for the genitive is even necessary here. Are there any postpositions that don't use the genitive (or prepositions that don't use the partitive)? Perhaps we should only label the unusual cases. —CodeCat 22:49, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

I think I have copied the format from something created by Jyril, whose work I'm used to trust. I guess he figured that in case of a postposition this is the natural order: the headword (in different sense than you are using the word) comes before the postposition. Therefore it is natural that the case in which the headword is inflected is mentioned first. From the way you have written it, one might get a wrong impression. Rest of the Wiktionary community has been happy with this way of formatting for ten years and I don't think you have the authority to change it just by a whim. I don't think anybody else than Jyril has even given a thought on how to express the case of the headword of a postposition, because there are few postpositions in English, let alone the cases. I can quickly think of postpositions that take elative (huolimatta), elative or illative (asti), partitive (varten), illative (saakka) and genitive or partitive (ympäri). --Hekaheka (talk) 23:57, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

I think I found a way to make both of us happy, see oheen. --Hekaheka (talk) 07:30, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Deprecated parameters removed from Template:fi-adj

I cleaned this template up a bit by simplifying the code and removing parameters that were deprecated (according to the documentation). I fixed entries that still used these old parameters. I'm letting you know in case you were still using the old ones. —CodeCat 23:25, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for info. That's the form I'm been using. --Hekaheka (talk) 01:14, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

voitaa

Does this verb still exist in Finnish, or perhaps did it formerly exist? It's found in most other Finnic languages (see ), and voidella implies that it existed at some point in Finnish too. —CodeCat 19:27, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

It does not exist anymore, for sure. The Google hits are all typos of voittaa (“to win”). I would not have known it, but by studying BGC one may conclude that voitaa has existed, at least in dialects. It appears in Kalevala 14 times, but I'm not sure if it was ever regarded as acceptable in standard Finnish. Also form voitua (“to turn into butter”) was mentioned in a linguistic publication. --Hekaheka (talk) 07:19, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Since it's attested in old texts, I've created a basic entry for it, saying it's an obsolete synonym of voidella. I don't know if the inflection is of the muistaa, huutaa or soutaa type. —CodeCat 14:41, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

It's muistaa -type. --Hekaheka (talk) 17:38, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Odd IP Behavior

Take a look at the entries edited by this IP (using addresses 118.161.33.6 and 118.161.33.183), and tell me if there's any reason to remove their Finnish translations. I've been working on the assumption that this person is just randomly deleting any Finnish translations they come across- I have no idea why (strangely enough, they geolocate to Taiwan), but I thought I'd check with you. I only know a few words of Finnish, and these aren't among them. Chuck Entz (talk) 06:16, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

@Chuck Entz I don't understand what this person thinks he's doing. These are commonplace Finnish terms that could have been checked in a decent Finnish-English-Finnish dictionary. I completely agree with your undoing of the edits. --Hekaheka (talk) 08:57, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

law of the sea not the same as admiralty law/maritime law

FYI. ---> Tooironic (talk) 09:24, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

In Finnish they are. One can use kansallinen (“national”) and kansainvälinen (“international”) as specifiers if there's risk of confusion. --Hekaheka (talk) 10:02, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Uraauurtava

I am guessing that uraauurtava is a compound of uraa (partivive) and uurtaa. Is that about right? ~ heyzeuss 17:09, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

You are about right. Just note that uurtava present active participle of uurtaa. --Hekaheka (talk) 22:26, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

☣ discussed for deletion

Please start the discussion to delete ☣ at Wiktionary:Requests for deletion or withdraw the request. Do not leave the RFD tag without discussion. Thanks.Jusjih (talk) 01:29, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Sorry for the mistake. I usually do start the discussion. --Hekaheka (talk) 14:49, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

kemiri

Yes, Aleurites moluccana (L.) Willd. is the correct name, but not the most common one- not by a long shot. If you look at "Aleurites moluccana" in Google Books vs. "Aleurites moluccanus" in Google Books, the ratio is 14,300 raw hits to 50 raw hits. Even Wikispecies has the feminine form (so {{taxlink}} no longer takes you to the entry), and you can find Aleurites moluccana all over the place in the non-taxonomic scientific literature. Of course, the rules and all the authoritative taxonomic sites say it should be Aleurites moluccanus.

We've never really decided what to do in such cases. I'm not about to undo your edit because I honestly don't know which way we should go- I just thought I'd make you aware of the complexity of the situation. Chuck Entz (talk) 01:44, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

@Chuck Entz We could have both forms and write a usage note as an explanation. See the entry for one possible solution. --Hekaheka (talk) 14:57, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

nomen est omen

Hi Hekaheka, I was wondering if you could help out and shed some light on the questions I have aboutthe entry you created a while ago. See https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:Etymology_scriptorium/2016/April#Nomen_est_omen. Thanks, Edwininlondon (talk) 19:55, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

kotona

Would you be okay with removing or qualifying the usage note under kotona? I'm only a learner, but my learning materials show examples of it used without a genitive or possessive, for example Kotona ei ole isää in Karlsson's Essential Grammar or Onko Timo kotona? in Leney's Teach Yourself Finnish. --46.226.49.227 10:25, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Seems that some re-writing is necessary, because the usage is more complicated than that. The usage of possessive suffixes has become more relaxed, especially in 3rd person. However, a possessive suffix is still required whenever a possessive pronoun (minun, sinun, hänen, meidän, teidän, heidän) is used, e.g. Minun kotonani ei ole isää. In your second example, you would use the form kotona if it's clear that it is Timo's home that is referred to, like when you are standing at Timo's door asking his mom about his whereabouts. But, if you expected to find Timo on a sports field but he wasn't there, you could ask from his friends: Onko Timo kotonaan?. In the sentence Kukaan ei halua olla kotonaan juhannuksena (Nobody wants to be at home in the midsummer) one can use both forms. --Hekaheka (talk) 12:12, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

lerpattaa

Lerpattavat korvat.

What does this word mean? I can't figure it out. —CodeCat 20:16, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

It means "to hang loose", like e.g. the ears of some dogs. Synonyms include lerppua and olla lerpallaan. Related terms include lerppu (“floppy disk”) and lerpahtaa (“to become loose-hanging”), which may be used e.g. of a body part that suddenly starts to hang in an uncontrolled manner, and specifically of a failed erection. Yhtäkkiä hänellä lerpahti means "he suddenly lost his erection". If you can suggest English words for the red-linked terms, I can make Finnish entries for them. --Hekaheka (talk) 20:33, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

What kind of English words? I'm not sure what you mean. —CodeCat 20:47, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

I mean translations. --Hekaheka (talk) 20:52, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

You want me to translate Finnish into English? —CodeCat 20:58, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

No, I want you to figure out English equivalents to the red-linked Finnish words. I guess it should be possible on the basis of the explanations that I gave. --Hekaheka (talk) 21:16, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Another related term is the slang verb lerputtaa, which means "to shake something that is loose or soft", especially to shake one's dick after peeing in order to shake off the last drops of urine. --Hekaheka (talk) 20:52, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

olla jossakin

I'm coming across this in a bunch of translations, followed by some other word. Some examples:

• "olla jossakin pulleana"
• "olla jossakin pörröisenä"
• "olla jossakin hajallaan"
• "olla jossakin liian suoranenäisenä"
• "olla jossakin karvakuluna"
• "olla jossakin jalat harallaan"

The individual words don't make sense to me, "to be in something chubby"? "To be somewhere chubby"? I'm guessing that this is a kind of idiom but we have nothing in our entries. —CodeCat 20:47, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

You are obviously trying to figure out the meaning of Sami words on this net site [9]. I don't understand them either, unless it means e.g. that the Sami verb "rančát" (olla jossakin puolialastomana / "to be somewhere half-naked") requires an object that indicates the place where one is half-naked. I mean that the corresponding Sami construction for olin takapihallani puolialastomana / "I was half-naked in my backyard" would be: "I [proper form of rančát] my backyard". Another possibility is that there's some other difference in the way Sami and Finnish sentences are formulated, which the author of the word list fails to describe properly. I think I gave you earlier her name and some contact data. --Hekaheka (talk) 21:14, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

In fact it seems that I did not give that information. Here are you: Tarja Länsman, tel: +358 40 847 6090, email: tarja.lansman(a)gmail.com. --Hekaheka (talk) 21:26, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Yes it's the same list of words that I showed you a while ago, I just rearranged them. In Northern Sami, verbs ending in -át are often inceptives, indicating that one starts to do something. Do the Finnish translations make more sense in that context? I also came across "olla kierossa", which also uses the inessive but without the jokin. Could it perhaps mean "become crooked"? —CodeCat 21:29, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Olla kierossa means "to be crooked" (sense "set at an angle; not vertical or square")

• Tuo kuva on kierossa - voisitko oikaista sen?

• That picture is crooked - could you straighten it up for me?

The use of inessive indicates that the picture is in a crooked position as contrasted with the possibility that the picture itself were crooked (e.g. not square). In that case one would say kuva on kiero. If kiero were used attributively, one would not use the inessive. Thus kiero kuva may be crooked in either way, just as in English. --Hekaheka (talk) 03:51, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

preliminäärikoe

I think you may want to look at this entry. I noticed its etymology had different terms in the compound: "present" + "tense", literally, rather than "preliminary" + "exam", or whatnot. Also, special thanks for all of the Finnish contributions you've made. I really love to see dedicated users like you, and you make me strive to get Danish to have this much coverage. Philmonte101 (talk) 07:12, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this out. Seems that I have been working with a list of words beginning with "pre-", copied the base from another entry and forgotten to edit the etymology. --Hekaheka (talk) 09:17, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Tanska-Norja

I have recently created this Finnish entry as a translation of Denmark-Norway. I'm pretty sure it's okay, but could you please check it out for me, and add things, etc., you know, whatever you usually do? Thanks so much. Philmonte101 (talk) 14:24, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Done. --Hekaheka (talk) 22:21, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Translation request

Hi. Could you please translate this passage for me from en->fi?

"Hi. I am an 18-year-old bisexual girl looking for a sweet, older girl to talk to. I do not speak Finnish, but I'd like to learn the language. I am from the United States."

(I wouldn't ask what this is for though lol) Philmonte101 (talk) 19:52, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Hei, olen 18-vuotias biseksuaalinen tyttö ja etsin mukavaa vanhempaa tyttöä puhekaveriksi. En puhu suomea, mutta haluaisin oppia kieltä. Olen Yhdysvalloista. --Hekaheka (talk) 02:10, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Ensimmäinen kerros

AFAIK, "ensimmäinen kerros" refers to the floor immediately above the ground floor (UK first floor, US second floor), not the ground floor. In Finnish, the ground floor is called "pohjakerros", and the basement is called "kellarikerros". Is this true? The elevator floor number goes: K, P, 1, 2, 3, ... This may be because the first "ordinary" floor with apartments or offices is usually, if not always, one floor above ground. 139.193.145.12 08:42, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

As I tried to explain, in Finland it depends. I live in a building, where there is an underground basement (K) and six floors, no P. I think this arrangement was the mainstream till about 1960's, when the buildings were still constructed in situ out of bricks, mortar and timber. When the concrete elements became the standard, the functions that were earlier located underground were moved above ground. As this floor was above ground, it could no more be called "kellari" and the term "pohjakerros" came about. I stick in my opinion that the first living floor is normally called "ensimmäinen kerros" in Finnish. I've seen some exceptions in buildings that have been built in a steep slope. In such case the entrance floor may be called 1st and the living floors below that are numbered -1, -2.. That's not common, though. I work in a building in which the main entrance floor is the 3rd and there are two office floors under it. Still below them are two cellars, K1 and K2. --Hekaheka (talk) 09:04, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

And, of course, there are buildings which have other than living floors both under and above ground level. Then the numbering goes like you write: K, P, 1, 2... --Hekaheka (talk) 09:10, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

I think, by definition the term "pohjakerros" means the floor immediately below "ensimmäinen kerros", whether it is completely above ground, partially below ground or completely below ground. 139.228.120.124 10:30, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

As usual, you're making categorical, black-and-white assumptions about languages you don't know based on minimal information (how much Finnish do you use in Indonesia?). This is apparently the first time you've gone so far as to correct a native speaker on their own language, but it doesn't surprise me at all. I've blocked you, and will continue to block all of your IPs, because you're unable to recognize or admit that your methods for figuring out what words mean are completely inadequate for the purposes of a dictionary- especially since you have no real-world experience with the languages in question. Please find something better to do with your time. Chuck Entz (talk) 18:50, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks!

Just a brief note of thanks not only for defining

kylmäkiskoinen recently but for all your magnificent contributions and the help you give to the community of editors and non editors alike. Your work deserves higher recognition. Is there a system of honours in Finland like there is in the UK with awards like OBE and CBE? I'd like to recommend you.

Thanks for the recognition, it made my day. Sure there is a system of honours in Finland: Order of the White Rose of Finland. But I'm working with the English Wiktionary. Shouldn't it rather be OBE or CBE? Thousands of Finns have the SVR, but OBE would be real cool :-) --Hekaheka (talk) 01:00, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

milyen

Hi Hekaheka, can you give a source for the etymology you added? According to my reference books, it is not a compound word, but originates from mely. --Panda10 (talk) 13:00, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

I saw it explained that way somewhere when I was trying to find out whether this edit [10] and two others by the same anonym user make sense. It sounded plausible, because in Finnish millainen (“what kind of”) is derived from mikä (“what”) and -lainen (“kind of”), and Estonian milline (“what kind of”) is construed in a similer way. But you are a Hungarian Wiktionarist with a lot of experience in editing. If you say it's not a compound I have no grounds to claim otherwise. Just go ahead and change the etymology at your will. I already dropped a reference to "milyen" from the etymology of "millainen".

As for the other two edits, I was already able to figure out that the similarity between Finnish laatikko (“box”) and Hungarian ládikó is a mere coincidence. Could you also check whether this edit [11] makes sense to you? It claims that the Hungarian word for "horse's chest" is related to the word for "heart".

BTW, good that we got in contact. If I have further problems with Hungarian words, I trust I may ask from you about them. Likewise, I'll be available for any concerns you may have about Finnish. --Hekaheka (talk) 13:38, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

I updated all the mentioned Hungarian etymologies. The two words - szív (“heart”) and szügy (“horse's chest”) - are not related. We have to be careful with anonymous editors who do not provide any source. I'd be glad to help with your questions about Hungarian, feel free to contact me any time. Thanks for your offer about Finnish, it's good to know who can and is willing to help. :) --Panda10 (talk) 14:42, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Greco-Latinate prefixes in Finnish

Prompted by this edit, but it's an issue in more general: I am skeptical on if Finnish really has a prefix mono- or a suffix -oidi, or many of the other affixes currently found at Category:Finnish prefixes. I do not think we have native use for many of them. That they can be still analyzed thanks to the existence of words like monofoninen or deltoidi does not necessarily mean that the prefix is actually used in forming new words.

There's also a lot more than the current list that could be theoretically analyzed. E.g. comparing sekantti and sektio would allow extracting the pseudo-suffixes -antti and -tio (equal to Latin -antis and -tio); but I hope you can agree that this would be a bad idea.

Some Greco-Latinate ones have been taken up in active use of course, e.g. geo- in geotieteet or geokätkö, but I feel like we ought to be presenting some actual evidence in our prefix entries for this. There is no one-to-one relationship after all, e.g. a monorail is yksiraiteinen and not **monoraiteinen.

At minimum, I would suggest not removing loan etymologies even if you add suffix formatting. A morphological analysis is not, strictly speaking, an etymology — see e.g. ikävä or kaste for examples where a word clearly has both an etymology and a morphological analysis. Similarly any word like monoidi has not come into Finnish thru being formed independently from its parts, but as a loan. --Tropylium (talk) 17:17, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

I have actually been pondering the same, but the practice of treating mono- etc. as prefixes in Finnish wiktionary predates me. As I'm not a professional linguist I have not dared to challenge it. Changing the practice is ok for me. --Hekaheka (talk) 04:08, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

@Tropylium What, then, should be done with entries like -ismi? Should we continue to call it a suffix, or should we even delete the entry? --Hekaheka (talk) 09:17, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

I think if we wanted to clean these up, it would have to be on a case-by-case basis, depending on if some affix is being used in native words as well (which would take some separate looking-into). I suspect we might be able to find in many cases attestations for occasional derivatives either built on Finnish roots (Google e.g. finds some 200 hits for demarismi), or built from Greco-Latinate roots but coined originally in Finnish (perhaps svetisismi?). So no rush to delete anything, I suppose. I think my main point is that if you were to claim that e.g. klorofylli is kloro- + -fylli, this would be an anachronism similar to claiming that tytär is tyttö + -tär.

A particularly messy case is chemical nomenclature, which theoretically allows an infinite variety of terms, and there is no constraint (and often no way to tell) "in which language" a particular term was first formed. Dealing with these might warrant a wider BP discussion. --Tropylium (talk) 14:09, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

värkätä etymology

Hi Hekaheka. Derivation from the Swedish verk only really makes sense of the värk- element of värkätä. Is there, by any chance, a suffix like -ätä, which acts to form denominatives? — I.S.M.E.T.A. 08:18, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

According to the article on verk (noun) the verb verka (“to work”) has been derived from it. In reality it is probably impossible to know for sure which was derived from which. But if we accept this theory, we may think that värkätä was derived from the Swedish verb by adding the Finnish ending -ta (variant -tä for vowel harmony) to make it sound like a Finnish verb. The resulting Finnish verb would be värkätä even if one thought it comes from the noun. Then the -ä- in the middle could be thought of as a phonetic adaption as värktä would not fit well into Finnish language. There's also the word värkki (“widget”) which has earlier been used as a synonym of työ (“work”) at least in the noun taksvärkki (“day's work”). If a verb were derived from that, it would become värkitä. This would seem to support the idea that värkätä was derived from verka rather than verk. As you may notice my theoretical knowledge of etymology and phonology are self-acquired but I'm pretty sure I'm in the right ballpark. When writing the etymology I wanted to write only the part of which I could be sure: värkätä comes from verk by one path or another. After all this reasoning I dared to make it a little more complete. --Hekaheka (talk) 04:48, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

That's great, thanks. I added some more detail and a couple of categories; would you agree that that is also an improvement? — I.S.M.E.T.A. 15:20, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Looks good to me. --Hekaheka (talk) 21:01, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Education in Finland

Hi Hekaheka, Do you have idea of what education is like in Finland? What do students do there in a daily basis? And what tools do they use to learn English (immersion, software)? Kiitos – AWESOME meeos ！ ＊ （「欺负」我） 11:23, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Small question, but a huge one to answer. In principle, I guess the students do pretty much the same thing as their colleagues everywhere: sit in the classrom and do their homework. It's the quality of classroom work and homework which makes the difference between learning and not learning. As you may already see, I'm not an expert in education as it is today. I finished the university already back in 1983 and have since worked in other fields. But, if you could elaborate your question, I might be able to refer you to someone who is more knowledgeable, or possibly to some articles that you might want to read. Which level of education is your primary interest? What is your main interest in asking - are you educator, planner, administrator or something else? Are you chiefly interested in methods of teaching English or teaching in general? Anything else, which might specify your interest? --Hekaheka (talk) 13:12, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

@Hekaheka, Okay. Let me tell you some things I heard was true in Finland. I heard that they don't really do homework. Classrooms are also more relaxed, unlike the US or UK. Only one big test at the end of their schooling life. For the English part—let me ask you—what did it take for you to get an en-4? I am only asking this to compare with my education system, in Australia – AWESOME meeos ！ ＊ （「欺负」我） 21:14, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

I'll try to remember to ask my daughter next Sunday of the amount of homework the kids are coping with nowadays . She is elementary school teacher. I know that it isn't quite as easy as you describe. My kids went to school in 1990's and 2000's and they had tests throughout the year. The homework wasn't insignificant either, but they still had time for other activities. The amount of homework and number of tests increased gradually when they advanced to the higher grades.

My first foreign languages were Swedish and German. I have only had three years of English in the high school, I would say 2 - 3 hrs per week. I believe at least the following factors have contributed to my English skills:

• The foreign language films and TV programs are not dubbed in Finland. This exposes folks to foreign languages from the childhood.
• If you master German grammar, English grammar is a piece of cake.
• In the university we used many English-language textbooks.
• I had a summer job in Canada.
• I dated a Canadian girl for one year.
• I have worked in the Finnish Embassy in Washington D.C., and I have travelled the globe quite a bit on business trips.
• I've been an active Wiktionarian since 2006.

--Hekaheka (talk) 21:49, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

@Awesomemeeos Sorry for the delay, but I kept forgetting to ask her. This, of course, is just one opinion, but she believes it's important that an individual teacher has a lot of leeway in planning his/her teaching so that it suits the specific needs of the class at hand. The description of a course may consist of ten lines and beyond that it's up to the teacher to decide how he wants to get the message through. The amount of homework and number of tests during the academic year are decided by the teacher. At the end of the school (after grade 12) there's a standardized national test. You might find this article interesting [12]. --Hekaheka (talk) 18:40, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey

Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. To say thank you for your time, we are giving away 20 Wikimedia T-shirts to randomly selected people who take the survey. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.

Take the survey now!

You can find more information about this project. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email to surveys@wikimedia.org.

Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 22:25, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Talk:karhunpeijaiset

Reminder of an old ping. Thank you! —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 06:17, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

@Metaknowledge Like it? --Hekaheka (talk) 03:20, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

• Thank you! —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 03:30, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

torppari

Hi! Can you check if this change to the etymology is right? - -sche (discuss) 19:26, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

To be honest, I don't know. It could be understood as derived from Finnish torppa (“copyhold”) or as coming directly from Swedish torpare (“copyholder”). It may be best to keep both explanations. --Hekaheka (talk) 04:57, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

That sounds reasonable. Thanks for looking into it. - -sche (discuss) 06:32, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Special:Diff/42767747 and Jungfrukällan

Hi Hekaheka. Re “deleted sv:Jungfrukällan – it’s a name of a famous film by Ingmar Bergman, literally ‘maiden spring’, but we don’t carry names of works of art”, cf. Mona Lisa. But still, judging by google books:"jungfrukälla", google books:"jungfrukällas", google books:"jungfrukällor", and especially google books:"jungfrukällorna", jungfrukälla seems also to be a common noun. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 19:53, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

OK, I'll try to find a definition, wih minuscule "j". --Hekaheka (talk) 21:10, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

@I'm so meta even this acronym According to a folk history, two brothers accidentally killed their three sisters on a Christmas Eve near Landskrona in Scania. They buried their sisters by the river, and later three springs appeared on the site. These springs are still today called "jungfrukällor". Another history has it that three men attacked three sisters in the forest, but rather than letting the men have their way with them, the sisters committed a suicide and the springs arose from their blood. Bergman's film is based on the latter myth. A similar history has been told of three other springs near Växjö, of another three springs in Høje-Taastrup on the island of Zealand, Denmark and yet other sets of springs in some other places, e.g. in Jutland, Norway and on Faroe Islands. I don't know whether this makes jungfrukälla entry-worthy. --Hekaheka (talk) 22:13, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

That is awesome. Numbers-wise, it seems jungfrukälla easily satisfies WT:CFI. I would encourage you to make the entry; if you included a pronunciation and citation for it, I'd nominate it for WT:FWOTD. — I.S.M.E.T.A. 22:51, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

@I'm so meta even this acronym. First version published. Feel free to improve the wording. --Hekaheka (talk) 21:39, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

raato

Please check this edit. —suzukaze (t・c) 22:22, 27 May 2017 (UTC)

I'm not all too familiar with etymologies but looks good to an inexpert eye. --Hekaheka (talk) 02:59, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

First name consonant gradation

I'm not always sure what kind of consonant gradation to use with first names. For example, I've heard Finns disagree about whether to use "Jaakon" and Jaakkon." Is one of them more old fashioned or dialectical? ~ heyzeuss 09:27, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

I'm afraid there's no clear-cut rule. I would say that consonent gradation usually takes place (e.g. Jaakko - Jaakon, Pekka - Pekan; Mäki - Mäen, Virtanen - Virtasen), but the vowels often behave differently from ordinary nouns (e.g. Pilvi - Pilvin and not Pilven, Suvi - Suvin and not Suven). If "Jaakkon" exists, it's definitely dialectal. --Hekaheka (talk) 11:04, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Paikkeilla

This page on time expressions gives kello viiden paikkeilla (about 5 o'clock) as an example. Is paike or paikkeilla poetic or archaic or something? ~ heyzeuss 09:19, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

I believe it comes from paikka. Use of adessive plural indicates aboutness, a bit in the same way as the use plural in "whereabouts. Its synonyms include huiteilla, huitteilla, tietämissä, korvilla, vaiheilla, tienoissa, maissa, korvissa, seuduilla. --Hekaheka (talk) 20:56, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Time expressions with -lta

When using the -lta ending in time expressions, how do you use it in various cases, like with exact minutes? How do you write it in shorthand? How do you say it? Examples:

Tulen 3:lta.	Tulen kolmelta.
Tulen 3.30:lta.	Tulen puoli neljalta.
Tulen 3.20:lta.	Tulen kaksikymmentä yli kolmelta.

I would not write "3:lta". I would write it out as "kolmelta". The ablative is often omitted when one talks more exactly than with full and half hours. Written and spoken language often differ from each other unless the text is a quote. I personally prefer the Anglosaxon standard of using colon between the hours and minutes, because e.g. "12.10" might be understood as a date. Kotus recommends the dot but the use of colon is not a deadly sin. I would change your table as below (writing on left, speech on right):

Tulen kello 3. / Tulen kolmelta.	Tulen kolmelta.
Tulen kello 3:30. / Tulen puoli neljältä.	Tulen puoli neljältä.
Tulen kello 3:20.	Tulen kaksikymmentä yli kolme(lta).
Tulen kello 3:23.	Tulen kaksikymmentäkolme minuuttia yli kolme. / Tulen kello kolme kaksikymmentäkolme.

Would it be incorrect to leave out the -lta suffix in certain situations, such as:

Tulen klo. 3.20.	Tulen kello kolme kaksikymmentä.
Tulen 3.17.	Tulen kolme seitsemäntoista.

These are correct. Here [13] is a good text about expressions of time in Finnish, although it fails to discuss the use of ablative. --Hekaheka (talk) 21:44, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

~ heyzeuss 09:53, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

monsu

Apparently it means "monster"? —Rua (mew) 20:41, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

@CodeCat Perhaps a slang expression, but I'm afraid it's not attestable by our standards, unless you can provide the quotes. If you can, I'll be glad to translate them into English. --Hekaheka (talk) 20:44, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

I take back my comment. It actually seems to be role playing slang, and meaning "monster". I'll add it. --Hekaheka (talk) 20:47, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

It was the title of a video, Monsuaika, whose soundtrack was a song called Monster time. —Rua (mew) 20:54, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

jou!

Is that a word? Finnish guy said hello to me with that word, but maybe it was deliberate Internet misspelling or something. I assume it's a Finnicisation of "yo!". Equinox ◑ 04:23, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

You got it right. Added an entry for it. --Hekaheka (talk) 04:26, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Finnish anagrams

Would you like me to update these with my bot? I have the code written already and have run them for English. DTLHS (talk) 18:49, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

That would be very nice of you, thank you! --Hekaheka (talk) 18:51, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

OK, some questions about the rules. The full list of characters used in Finnish entry titles is ,-./0124:ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzÄÅÖáâãäåèéíîöûüŠšŽžș. Should I treat a and á/â/ã/ä/å as equivalent (and the same for the other diacritics?) Should I ignore punctuation (treat c.b.a and abc as anagrams)? DTLHS (talk) 19:08, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

No and yes - diacritics should not be treated as equivalent, but punctuation should be ignored. Diacritics other than ÄÖäö are only used in loanwords and the likelihood of finding anagrams among words using those other diacritics is small. --Hekaheka (talk) 19:15, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Great, I'll run it when the next database dump comes out (sometime this month probably). DTLHS (talk) 19:29, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Dates

I want to make sure that I am gettting it. As I understand it:

Dates are stated with days in the ordinal form.

-- Right

Months, when stated as numbers, are either cardinal abessive, such as yhdettä, or ordinal paritive, such as ensimmäistä. These words are the same for 4-12. When the names of the months are given, the ordinal partitive form is always used, such as tammikuuta.

-- Numbers of months are ordinal partitives. For first and second one can use also yhdes (“first”) and kahdes (“second”) in addition to ensimmäinen and toinen.

Cardinal abessive Alt. ordinal partitive	Ordinal partitive	Month name
yhdettä	ensimmäistä	tammikuuta
kahdetta	toista	helmikuuta
kolmetta	kolmatta	maaliskuuta
neljättä	neljättä	huhtikuuta
viidettä	viidettä	toukokuuta
kuudetta	kuudetta	kesäkuuta
seitsemättä	seitsemättä	heinäkuuta
kahdeksatta	kahdeksatta	elokuuta
yhdeksättä	yhdeksättä	syyskuuta
kymmenettä	kymmenettä	lokakuuta
yhdettätoista	yhdettätoista	marraskuuta
kahdettatoista	kahdettatoista	joulukuuta

Examples:

• Veronikan vauvaa odotetaan kahdeskymmenes maaliskuuta.
• 18.6. kahdeksastoista kuudetta
• 21.9. kahdeskymmenesensimmäinen yhdeksättä
• 18.7. kahdeksastoista seitsemättä
• 29.3. kahdeskymmenesyhdeksäs kolmatta

Here it states that days can also be given in the ordinal nominative: Ajanilmaukset - Päiväys ja vuosiluku.

22. päivä voidaan lukea joko kahdeskymmenestoinen tai kahdeskymmeneskahdes. Samoin esimerkin kuukausi on mahdollista lukea joko kahdetta tai toista.

I am a little confused about that. Is that referring to when I would say "kahdeskymmenestoinen päivä?"

-- I'm not sure if I understand what you are confused about - kahdeskymmenestoinen and kahdeskymmeneskahdes are both nominatives meaning "22nd". Similarly, you could use kahdeskymmenesyhdes for 21st and kolmaskymmenesyhdes for 31st. --Hekaheka (talk) 23:08, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

~ heyzeuss 11:44, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

I'll get back later, but here's one comment that may reduce your confusion:

• yhdettä and kahdetta are also partitives, from the words yhdes and kahdes respectively

--Hekaheka (talk) 11:55, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

That's great, thank you. :) ~ heyzeuss 06:53, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Shave and a haircut...two bits

Is there a corresponding Finnish lyric?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shave_and_a_Haircut

~ heyzeuss 17:03, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

The tune is familiar, but I don't remember any Finnish lyric other than tät-tä-rä-rät-tä--tät-tä. --Hekaheka (talk) 20:19, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

fi.wikt

Purely nosy, and I hope you never leave. You don't work on the Finnish Wiktionary, do ya? Why so? What is the nature of your interest in English? Equinox ◑ 04:47, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

I just think it would be important to compile a comprehensive English-Finnish dictionary. I have also heard encouraging feedback from the foreign students of Finnish. Many of them think that English Wiktionary is already their most useful aid. I have done less than 50 edits in the Finnish Wiktionary. I find it less important, because a good Finnish-Finnish dictionary already exists, i.e. Nykysuomen sanakirja. Its abridged web version is here [14], and it's one of the tasks of the Kotus institution to update it. --Hekaheka (talk) 05:08, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Have you spent much time in English-speaking regions? (Sounds like it.) Equinox ◑ 05:12, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

I have had a summer job in Toronto and I lived a year in Washington D.C. I have also traveled quite a bit and worked in international context. Currently I speak English with my son's Chinese girlfriend and my Peruvian son-in-law. --Hekaheka (talk) 06:02, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

(A curiosity: wiktionary.org has rank 124 in Finland, per http://wiktionary.org.hypestat.com/. That is probably Alexa rank, meaning, wiktionary.org is among 124 most visited websites in Finland. Among countries, Sweden is second as for wikt org with the rank of 138. The Finland result is in part due to your efforts, I guess. --Dan Polansky (talk) 13:45, 19 November 2017 (UTC))

purka

Hi, could you make a Finnish entry for this? I found it in a Sami dictionary and would like to know what it means. —Rua (mew) 21:11, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

I'm wondering, too. Could you give a link to the Sami dictionary? This does not appear to be a Finnish word. The closest I can think of is the slang word purkka (“chewing gum”). --Hekaheka (talk) 21:16, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

http://kaino.kotus.fi/algu/index.php?kkieli=en&t=lekseemi&lekseemi_id=74981 . It seems to be a cognate of the Sami term too. —Rua (mew) 22:06, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

The word is not in NSK. The sense given in the Sami dictionary appears plausible, because it might come from the same root as purkaa, purkaantua etc. I decided to trust the Sami dictionary and made the Finnish entry, labeling the term "archaic". --Hekaheka (talk) 12:00, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

I found a couple of books. It seems to mean the moult of the reindeer (possibly also other animals, but the usage I found was of reindeer) in Northern dialect. --Hekaheka (talk) 12:09, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Outbox (computing)

Hi, just stumbled upon the outbox page. It seems you changed the definition from "An electronic folder serving the same purpose, for electronic mail" to "An electronic folder holding the sent electronic mail" as part of this edit. That doesn't match how I've seen the term used, though: Usually, an email client has three folders for outgoing mail, named Draft, Outbox, and Sent. While composing a mail, it's stored in the Draft folder. Clicking the "send" button moves it to the Outbox. As soon as possible (nowadays, with always-online devices, that's usually instantly) the mail is sent to the server, and moved to the Sent folder. So at least in my experience, the electronic outbox does in fact mirror the purpose of its physical equivalent: Holding the mail to be sent out. --Tobias K. (talk) 15:41, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Seems that I've made an error. --Hekaheka (talk) 16:21, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

No problem, thanks for the quick correction! :) --Tobias K. (talk) 17:00, 25 November 2017 (UTC)