User talk:Nevermiand.

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wiktionary. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• Wiktionary Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to start a page
• Our layout policy (nicknamed “ELE”)
• Criteria for inclusion (nicknamed “CFI”)
• Wiktionary Sandbox (a safe place for testing syntax)
• What Wiktionary is not
• FAQ

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk (discussion) and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~, which automatically produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to one of the discussion rooms or ask me on my Talk page.

Did you know that Wiktionary can be adapted to fit your style? Go have a look at your personal preference page (nicknamed “PREFS”)! In particular, you can choose the option to show hidden categories, which will be of great help if you are looking for work to do.

Again, welcome! --EncycloPetey 05:29, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Yiddish

By policy, all Yiddish translations should be entered in Hebrew script, not in Roman script. --EncycloPetey 05:29, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Saanich

The Saanich that you entered was incorrect. That is not how Saanich is written. For one thing, Saanich uses only uppercase letters. An example of correct Saanich is: ÍY, C̸NES QENOṈE ṮÁ. What you entered was the the IPA pronunciation of Saanich. Please don’t enter that sort of thing. —Stephen ^(Talk) 15:43, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Ladino orthography

Hi Nevermiand

I saw you are, apparently, the only active Ladino user, specially in the haketia dialect. My question is about it, its orthography and the other orthographies of ladino.

See. I think most ladino entries emphasize in one or one set of dialects instead of all. Also, there are duplications of entries like shavón, which is problematic. There's not even an orthography common to all entries, since some uses the AY and some the french or the Turkish, and some use diacritics and some not.

I don't think I might contribute directly and consistently in ladino language but at least I'd want that people like you resolved this problem of orthograpies

There's nothing bad in creating a new one: i myself did the same with khalaj

Being you the only active user, what do you think about regularizing ladino orthography in Wiktionary?. I like somehow Haketia's, which is in part similar to spanish's Xenos melophilos (talk) 12:02, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Hey Xenos melophilos,

So a couple things.

1. Yes I would love to help standardize Ladino orthography on Wiktionary. Like 90% of scholars I've talked to say the Aki Yerushalayim spellings are more or less the standard nowadays. The old spellings with x's and c's aren't used anymore, and French and Turkish spellings aren't used outside of native speakers writing from memory in their countries' orthographies (e.g. I've seen djusto spelled custo a lot online from Turkish speakers).

2. I've wanted Haketia to be its own language on here for a while tbh. It's similar to Ladino but very different in orthography and pronunications - borrowing spelling from modern Spanish while preserving many Arabic sounds. If it's still under Ladino, it needs to have its own orthography - which itself is different in modern day from the Bendayan de Bendelac dictionary I've pooled most of the vocabulary from tbh. Alicia Sisso Raz runs vocesdehaketia.com and those spellings are more updated - which is what I've used in submitting here.

Hope that helpsǃ Let me know if you have any next steps in mind.

Thanks/Mersi/Gracias,

Joey/Yosef Nevermiand. (talk) 18:59, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

bro, thx

1. though AY seems more like a phonetic alphabet rather than an inclusive orthography, like the orc of franco-provencal. See. AY alphabet is used for transcribing a word in different ways. Some people say nozotros/nuevo, some mozotros/muevo, some familia, some famiya, some llave, some yave, some guelo, some welo, some aroz, some arroz, some suegra, some es.huegra, some avlar, some favlar. And the alphabet allows to write these words in these ways, which causes a sort of confusion. Also it isn't clear whether to use i or y as a consonant, and whether to use accents or not (shavon or shavón, probably cuz turkish accents in the last syllable?): komyendo or komiendo.

2. I have an idea, based on that of @Universal Life and my case on khalaj (see for ex. bâba). The idea it's to include forms that are very different from the other dialects (let's say "mainstream", with few differences) as "alternative forms" (see the case on khalaj). The main spelling, well, i'd say it could be the United Orthography (actually used only in wikimedia projects, see for ex the work of universal life or ladino wikipedia), with the other spellins / orthographies (french, turkish, AY, haketia, hebrew) using the template in bâba; haketia-only words don't need this template Xenos melophilos (talk) 20:31, 19 August 2024 (UTC)

Also see https://www.academia.edu/103703802/Diacron%C3%ADa_de_los_resultados_secundarios_del_diptongo_ue_en_judeoespa%C3%B1ol

Those secondary pronunciations are technically allowed by the AY to be written so. Therefore it allows dugeler, dugueler, dueler, sfuenyo, s.huenyo, esfuenyo, etc...

The academia nacional de ladino only did two things: promote the use of ladino and adopt an Alphabet, but didn't do the most important thing: create a standard Xenos melophilos (talk) 10:59, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

so wdyt Xenos melophilos (talk) 20:49, 20 August 2024 (UTC)

hi nevermiand

So how're u goin with it Xenos melophilos (talk) 21:35, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Heyǃ Sorry it's been so long. Just saw the replies. I like the table you used for your Khalaj word. Because there are so many variations and spellings of words in Ladino, I think it's an interesting idea to just have a space to list all of them. The truth of the matter is that it is hard to standardize, as you mentioned. But this might help. In general, though, I am still set on using AY as the default standard for the base word entry (not for Haketia obv. - I'll stick to the Voces de Haketia spellings). AY does have standards for those secondary pronunciations if used correctly. Those words you listed are more like dialectal differences. But yes, it can get tricky with accent marks and y vs i. In that case though, komiendo is technically the correct spelling - the other one is more phonetic/from memory. So if people want to fill in other ways of speaking and spelling, they could in a drop-down table like the one for bâba. I can start chipping away at that soon, esp. for new entries. Let me know what you think. Thanks. Nevermiand. (talk) 21:15, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

"if used correctly"?

wdym

what are secondary and main pronunciations anyway? based on what dialect, form or standard? Xenos melophilos (talk) 22:01, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

I mean that a lot of ppl forget the mechanics of AY from time and time. I've seen it. The system is straight forward but there are frequent errors (e.g. ppl will pull words from songs that are spelled wrong like in modern Spanish writing and post them).

You posted a link to a journal article on secondary pronunciations and I read the abstract. That's why I referenced it. And based on what dialect I mean the variety of dialects that pronounce those words differently, based on locality. For example in the Istanbul dialect, there is more adding of -gu- to words like dugueler, djuguar, etc. In Salonik and other Balkan cities, the e's at the start of words get cut off like s.huenyo, stá, etc. These are "secondary" pronunications, the "main" ones are shared across all dialects (to my understanding). Nevermiand. (talk) 02:10, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Anyway, do you think it'd be ok if I started implementing those tables like your Khalaj one? Bc right now the different spellings are all in the "alternate forms" section of the entries. Nevermiand. (talk) 02:15, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Of course

But i'd recommend also using those templates together with inclusion and the less alternative forms possible

like, let's say "suenyo" is main form and "es.huenyo" is alternative/common secondary form, and the other pronunciations like "esfuenyo, sfuenyo, s.huenyo, suguenyo (idk if it exists)" would be dialectal secondary forms and get in the table: esfuenyo, s.huenyo, sfuenyo, would be in the "dialectal pronunciations" table of the "es.huenyo" entry; while "suguenyo" in the table of the "suenyo" entry.

Together with all that stuff, in both two entries there should be a phonemic IPA transcription before the table

Keep in mind that, if i were u, i'd include in those templates/tables only the IPA transcription of dialectal pronunciations, not miscellaneous alternative spellings

idk if u got it xd Xenos melophilos (talk) 13:41, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

keep in mind also adding the name of the dialects/cities/villages in the table Xenos melophilos (talk) 20:27, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

now what about alternative spellings? (french, turkish, united [iberian if u prefer], hebrew, arabic, cyrillic, greek, etc...)

well, two options

1. each entry could have an alternative spelling on the top, like @Universal Life did

2. each entry could have an alternative spelling template, like in persian (actually standard forms), azeri, kazakh, uyghur

I'd choose 2 but this could be a problem depending of how many alphabets we are handling, like one doesn't want a large template with 5-8 scripts Xenos melophilos (talk) 13:46, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

hey see

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/loVuDCaYhQ0

one could re-use it for ladino no? 45.65.234.78 13:11, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

To be honest, I don't think introducing new accent marks like that is necessary. AY already has a standard for distinguishing consonants and secondary pronunciations. Some folks just have trouble following it. Interesting idea, though. Nevermiand. (talk) 21:21, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

hey that was me but i didn't log in xd

yeah i get it it's sort of obsolete and weird, though it could work...

but it's like anacronic Xenos melophilos (talk) 21:57, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi Xenos melophilos and Nevermiand.. I'm sorry, I came quite late to the discussion. I am a native JS/Ladino speaker. And I'm also a researcher in that field.

I would like to address a few things first :) You guys are right, Aki Yerushalayim is not a standard orthography, it's more or less phonetic. Although, it underrepresents many sounds, some of which even where represented with Rashi, the original orthography.

AY, has become quite famous since 2010 and especially since COVID on the internet. However, it's still not the most common way the native speakers write the language. For example, I personally know that there's a literary novel being written with the Turkish orthography (with ç, ş, and c) and not with the AY. You have to consider that most of the native speakers are over 70 or 80.

One of the reason we see so much AY presence on the internet is that, the moderators of social forums and social media groups (such as facebook groups) act as "language police" forcing people to write in AY and in some specific rules that they make up. When someone writes using different orthographic rules, they warn them and "correct" their spellings. For example, if I were to post something on Ladinokomunita and write the word "munço", they would change it to "muncho" before posting it and would write to me a note about how munço is wrong and muncho is correct. Same goes if I would write to El Amaneser something as "sej almas" they would "correct" it to "sesh almas". In both cases, my grandmother still writes them as "munço" and "sej almas". The latter is even pronounced as a voiced postalveolar fricative [ʒ] and not the unvoiced one [ʃ]. So, the policing since 2000, caused many to think that this is the "correct" way to write.

If we look at the most common Latin orthographies of JS neutrally, we can say that there are 3 most common tendencies of writing it.

1. Historically, Sephardim have come in touch with the Latin alphabet through French, due to Alliance Israélite Universelle. So, those who studied in those schools or had a higher socio-economic status and therefore was subjected to French, usually write JS with French orthography. The main features is that, it uses "ch" for [ʃ] (chavon), "tch" for [tʃ] (tchaptear) and "dj" for [dʒ] (djugete). However, there's little standardisation as the sound [u] can be written as "ou" or "u". (I've seen countless times "mountcho" as well as "muntcho"). C/K/Q can all represent "k" etc. Vidas largas is one of the few standardisation efforts of the French-style writing ,adopting "k" and "u" as standard.
2. Then there is Spanish or Iberic writing-style. Many people thinking that "as what we speak is Spanish, or a a language descending from Spain, when we switch to Latin letters, we shall adopt a Spanish orthography." Some even adopted the orthography of Old Spanish, some of Portuguese. This has also been historically the case, but also more modernly, due to those Sephardim living in Spain or Latinamerica. There are a few different standards. Some of them are extremely difficult. Ortografía unida partially also derives from here, but has some aspects that are missing in other standards here.
3. In the late 20s, there have been an orthography reform in Turkey, the Arabic alphabet being replaced with a Latin alphabet. As education was made mandatory with this new script, it also influenced JS, many Sephardim switching to the new Turkish alphabet for JS. Actually morpho-phonologically it's a bit problematic as the phonemes of Judaeo-Spanish is quite different then of Turkish. But, it was widely adopted due to government policies and even many novels were published in 1930s with this orthography. The newspaper Şalom (and other newspapers) used it till 2010. Turkish characters such as ş for [ʃ] (şavon), "ç" for [tʃ] (çaptear) and "c" for [dʒ] (cugete) are used in it. It's more or less standard, however, some writers use (or used in the past) "ğ" for [ɣ] such as amiğo and ḏ for the fricative [ð] - and actually most don't.
   1. Aki Yerushalayim was basically derived from this alphabet. But the intention was to make it look more international and not to use any diacritics so it would be keyboard friendly. So, they switched "ş" to "sh", "ç" to "ch" and "c" to "dj". They also tried to hispanise it as much as possible - with vocabulary, switching Turkish origin words with modern Spanish ones - but also in writing, writing i+vowel (dasio), where Turkish orthography would write (dasyo), [meaning tax, in Old Spanish was written as "dacio", from Latin "datio" the result of "dare" to give]. The name is so, because it was used in a magazine called Aki Yerushalayim.

OU (Ortografía Unida) could also be considered a standardised version of the Iberic way of writing, but not entirely. In my opinion, it is the only script that systematically tries to represent the spoken language in the most linguistically accurate way possible.

As a linguist, I'm aware that many languages treat terms from languages it considers "foreign" differently, some change its accent, some change its phonology based on it, some change the plural markers...I mean the morphophonological rules that the native speaker applies to non-incorporated words from other languages change enormously. I've seen this in English, Russian, Turkish and Japanese for example. Judaeo-Spanish has this also, but at whole different level. It has lexica from 4 different sources and somehow the native speaker, even if they don't know the origin of the word, systematically applies the same morphophonological rules to each lexicon according to the group they're in systematically. Even sometimes a word (garón) is from Hebrew origin, but the morphophonological rules of Iberic origin words are applied to it. For all intents and purposes, the native speaker considers it an Iberic origin word (s/he doesn't think of the origin, but the way s/he articulates it and combines it with other morphemes is the same as of words of Iberic origin). And these changes are reflected over dialects.

For example, there are some palatalisation rules that only applies to morphemes of Turkish origin (accross dialects) and some that only apply morphemes of Iberic origin (across dialects). If we take these palatalisations into consideration and write them purely phonetically in AY, for the number 5, we would have to write sinko, sinku, sinkyu, sintyu, sinchu each for a different dialect. But in OU, they're all written "cinco", but with the knowledge that any c/q letter coming after a stressed i would be palatalised in the Western dialects. Fijico would be read as [fi'ʒikʲo] in Sarajevo, but Saloniko would be read simply as [salo'niku]. Morover, in Istanbul JS, before -e and -i, there's a distinction between velar k [k] and a palatal k [c] (these are the IPA symbols not the letters on OU)...these and similar reasons are why there are c, k and q for "k" in OU.

So, the OU is a phonemic orthography with 3 other factors it considers: It's also morphophonemic, phonetic and multidialectal. It's the only JS orthography that's multidialectal, that is it doesn't base itself on a single dialect and neglects the others. When determining how to write a word, it compares the same word in each dialect, its phonology, its phonetics. If it finds that there's a regular sound change in the same phonological environment across dialects, it considers it as a rule and find the simplest way to write it, so that each dialect would read it in its own way. For example, the non-stressed vowels "e" and "o" have multidialectal properties in OU. In many dialects these are pronounced as [i] and [u], while in the Saloniko dialect they're always [e] and [o]. Madre is pronounced ['maðɾe] in Istanbul and ['madɾi] in Sarajevo. Dedo is pronounced ['deðo] in Istanbul and ['dedu] in Sarajevo. A more prominent example would the pronunciation of the environment "sue" as sue, es.hue, esfue, esue etc. The orthography is chosen so to represent all these dialects. However, some multidialectal features are not represented, especially when they don't have enough functional load (enough number of words) to justify a separate symbol (a diacritic mark). Such as the change from s to n/m in many dialects. Therefore dospués and dompués are considered both variants and valid, because there are very few words with systematic s to n/m change or vice-versa.

Also, the OU strives not to underrepresent a single phoneme or phone, so it callects all the sounds from all dialects. For example in some dialects there's a distinction between [j] and [ʝ]. But many dialects use just [j] or use both but in free variation. So in the OU, [j] and [ʝ] are represented differently, even though it could be just allophones in free variation for dialect X.

Anyway, this is it from the top of my head. Sorry for the wall of text. I agree that we need standard ways to write in the Wiktionary, but we can't disregard all those writing with the Turkish or French orthographies either. I'm here for any question and I'll try to help out as much as I can.

Cheers, --Universal Life (talk) 17:19, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

ok i read it all

now. the real question is: what do we do Xenos melophilos (talk) 02:26, 17 December 2024 (UTC)