Wiktionary:Information desk/2024/January

Initial Alif-Hamzah in Malay Jawi Spelling

Hello, a Malay friend recently contacted me about a possible mistake in the Jawi spelling of certain Malay words. For example, in the word ayam, the listed Jawi spelling is ايم. They say this would be read "im", and the correct spelling, used by Kamus Dewan, would be أيم, with a hamzah above the alif. This seems to be consistent across words starting with a Vowel-Semivowel sequence e.g. awan. Unfortunately I am not knowledgeable enough on Jawi to verify this and am not sure what the best way to correct this would be if it does turn out to be a mistake. Thanks in advance. Boershies (talk) 08:03, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotect X

Hi! Can someone unprotect X? I wanna add some Derived terms. Gimme a ping when you've done it. Fond of sanddunes (talk) 19:45, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This title is only protected for those who aren't autopatrollers. If you're interested in editing here long-term, maybe just becoming an autopatroller and leaving the entry protected is the better path. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:47, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, I'm not interested in long-term editing. Wiktionary is a scary place. Perhaps you can add Algorithm X|Australian X disease|Hosta virus X|Talcum X|X-caboquinho|X-tree to the Derived terms section, Justin? Fond of sanddunes (talk) 19:50, 2 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done, but I removed X-tree as the X there appears to stand for "extended", for which there is no corresponding sense at X (and probably should not be). This, that and the other (talk) 05:20, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

oer-Hollands

The entry "oerhollands" is very strange: the correct Dutch spelling is "oer-Hollands", with a hyphen and a capital "H".

Pim Bussink 87.52.109.237 07:23, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I've created oer-Hollands and marked oerhollands as a nonstandard spelling. Voltaigne (talk) 16:23, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

I do not quite understand the continuing presence of "oerhollands" though, and more precisely, its classification as the rather vague "nonstandard". Dutch has an official list of words, with their correct spelling (admittedly, the list is updated more frequently than non-speakers expect - my perfect school spelling is now wrong in places...). Could you enlighten me on this? (I am considering becoming an actively editing contributor.) 87.52.109.237 11:46, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Woordenlijst Nederlandse Taal – Officiële Spelling sets the standard for Dutch spelling in the Netherlands, and oerhollands doesn't conform to it, hence it is a nonstandard spelling, although its usage is attested online. There exists the option to strengthen {{nonstandard spelling of}} to {{misspelling of}} in this case. I'll leave it to the community to decide. Voltaigne (talk) 06:42, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Definition by synonym

Are labels implicitly included in definition-by-synonym?

For example, inapt#Adjective is defined as unapt, with two senses, both labelled obsolete (with few exceptions). So does that all apply, holus bolus, to inapt?

Explicit inclusion of part-of-speech in definition-by-synonym?

For example, tithe#Noun and tithe#Adjective both point to tenth, which takes the reader to the top of the entry, containing two languages (English and Middle English) and three parts of speech within the English section. Is that best practice, or is it preferred to link explicitly to tithe#Noun and tithe#Noun?

—DIV (1.145.231.64 00:42, 8 January 2024 (UTC))[reply]

@1.145.231.64: We have no formal scheme of 'definition-by-synonym' - synonymy can readily be debatable. Additionally, parts of speech can differ, especially between a non-English word and its English translation. Qualifying hyperlinked words in definitions or translation by fragment identifiers such as '#Noun' does not work in general, for a page may suddenly acquire a translingual section, into which these fragments will preferentially link.

In the case if inapt, the definition needs to be redone - we should not be using obsolete words to define other words. --RichardW57m (talk) 14:15, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If polysemy is a problem, a linking term can be disambiguated using the id= parametere of templates such as {{l}} and {{m}}, in conjunction with {{senseid}}. --Lambiam 15:27, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also {{senseno}}. Vininn126 (talk) 15:56, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that's good to know about. They don't seem to be very commonly used. I hadn't noticed them before. Couldn't find them on a few entries I thought they could be used on. Then went to Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:senseid, and checked two listed entries:

pound — nothing visible, but the template is used in the entry ...maybe it's referred to elsewhere (seems difficult to keep track of); and
cat — there seems to be a great example of usage in the caption right at the top ...until one realises that is all hard-coded ...and there the template is used twice, but not visibly referenced within that entry.

—DIV (1.145.128.215 10:04, 11 January 2024 (UTC))[reply]

I suppose I loosely interpreted inapt as if it were an "alternative spelling" of unapt. But that was not strictly what WT said. —DIV (1.145.128.215 10:06, 11 January 2024 (UTC))[reply]

It had a better definition until diff (by WF). FWIW (and you seem to have figured this out), I wouldn't assume that a label on one word applies to a second word which merely uses the first word in defining itself; I would only start to assume that if the second word defined itself in a non-gloss way, i.e. actually using {{synonym of}}, or {{inflected form of}} or {{alternative form of}}, and even then only if it doesn't have labels of its own that would contradict this assumption (e.g. normally, if foobar is a UK term for something, and barfoo is a {{synonym of|en|foobar}}, I would assume barfoo is also a UK term . . . but we could sensibly define something as a {{lb|en|US}} {{synonym of|en|some UK term}}). However, as Richard said, we should avoid using obsolete words in definitions where possible. - -sche (discuss) 08:45, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, - -sche.

RichardW57m, I have a feeling that eventually more attention should be on exactly where internal links go. E.g., latissimus dorsi contains an internal link (in the head word) to dorsi#English ...which seems like it might be appropriate (or not inapt), except that the anchor doesn't exist (but it's not redlinked, because the entry itself does exist; probably should be 'orangelinked').

—DIV (1.152.106.191 23:55, 16 January 2024 (UTC))[reply]

The best approach in this case may be to create an English section for the page dorsi and largely populate it using {{only used in}}. It's not so urgent in this case as anyone using wiktionary to fathom outside some English text would already have encountered the word when looking up latissimus or latissimi. (Of course, some would further point out that we shouldn't care about such users anyway.) I'm not sure what PoS it should be assigned - it needs one to stop it turning orange, the colour it currently has for me.--RichardW57m (talk) 10:32, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Meanwhile I learned something about orangelinks. Which I thought was my own novel idea. But perhaps there is nothing new under the sun. —DIV (1.152.106.191 11:18, 17 January 2024 (UTC))[reply]

French Capitalisation

Does Wiktionary anywhere enable users to capitalise French words? I was expecting é to capitalise to É, but was recently surprised to find a recentish (c. 1999) learned paper where it was capitalised to E. As I don't often read French, I'd like to get some idea of whether this is merely an eccentric spelling. I was taught that accents were normally dropped when capitalised - except for é!--RichardW57m (talk) 12:54, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@RichardW57m: We have a template, {{U:fr:É}}:

In older French practice, capital letters did not take diacritics, so É becomes E. This was mostly done because of technical constraints. Formal orthotypography maintains the diacritics.

It is used, e.g., at Etats-Unis. J3133 (talk) 13:06, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@J3133: Interesting. So I was taught an intermediate form. It looks as though that paper might back a dozen entries in Wiktionary without delving into rare technical words, with half-a-dozen from the reference list alone! --RichardW57m (talk) 13:35, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

NIGLET, as opposed to NIGGER or TEENIGGER

There is a list of pages like "niglet," "teenigger," etc. that as a whole (and they are most saliently viewed as being of a single body) only constitute a racist joke taking up bandwidth on this site, rather than dictionary entries. These pages use deceptive editing practices with their hyperlinking to create the illusion that these are accepted words by more sources than actually affirm this, with urbandictionary being the only cesspool - besides this one - to actually carry them. 2601:602:A380:7C50:D99E:9438:8C90:D113 04:19, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are wrong and engage a deceptive opinion practice, abusing the concept of bandwidth. We decidedly disregard what is “accepted” according to the Overton window. Nazi to English dictionaries are a basic necessity to find out what alt-right brigaders are talking about, where then you are free to decide if and how you want to counter them, or join them for whatever reason, and apparently you weren’t deceived either since you recognized their fringe nature. Fay Freak (talk) 12:20, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Let's try to rise above ad hominem phrasing. It's not helpful. —DIV (1.152.106.191 11:43, 17 January 2024 (UTC))[reply]

English words derived from "花"

How can I do an advanced search for this? I need two things: 1) find only Wiktionary pages containing the subtitle "English" (filter) 2) amongst these pages, find only the ones containing the character "花" PS: the page "Category English terms borrowed from Japanese" is NOT complete: that's why I ask for the advanced search Vincenzo3808 (talk) 11:04, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I too am interested in how to perform this kind of search. Here are some I could manually dig up among Mandarin to English loan words: Hua, Huaxi, Huayuan, Lianhua, Panzhihua, Shihua, Songhua. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:34, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you are just looking for pages containing the character "花", then incategory:"English lemmas" insource:花 finds them (incategory:"English non-lemma forms" insource:花 finds eight entries but they're all also found by the lemmas search, since only lemmas should have etymologies, translations tables, or other places where CJK characters would be mentioned). You will notice that this includes pages where "花" is in a translations table. - -sche (discuss) 19:24, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible to search incategory:"English lemmas" insource:花 EXCLUDING results where "花" is in the translations table? Vincenzo3808 (talk) 10:45, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bolding pronoun in example translations from more inflected languages

Should words implied from the inflection of a bolded word in the example be bolded in the translation. E.g., in the acabar por entry, would the example "Acabaré por volverme loco" be written as "I'll end up going crazy" or "I'll end up going crazy"?

240claytongearhart (talk) 15:08, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I go for the latter. Part of the argument is that the emboldened parts then correspond. The one exception is that when words in Indic scripts run together, I end up emboldening all the characters in the orthographic syllables providing part of the inflected word (smart rendering is too dumb to highlight only part), but ignore these excess characters in the transliteration and translation. General practice seems to be to disprefer such quotations. --RichardW57m (talk) 17:20, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Missing UK audios

I bet we could easily make a list of the 500 most used words that don't contain audio from UK. Demonicallt (talk) 20:03, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And then what? —DIV (1.152.106.191 11:44, 17 January 2024 (UTC))[reply]

A British person records 500 audios and gets a new list, this time of 5000. P. Sovjunk (talk) 11:47, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

setting default display font

Hi. Where do I go to change my default Latin display font, for the bold lemma and section headers? I'd like to change it to something that supports diacritics. Thanks. kwami (talk) 20:15, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anything at Special:Preferences? —DIV (1.152.106.191 11:45, 17 January 2024 (UTC))[reply]

Not that I can find. kwami (talk) 11:52, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Kwamikagami If you "view page source" a page, you can see what classes are assigned in the HTML to any particular thing on the page, and then set fonts for those classes in your Special:MyPage/common.css (like this). In this case, if I correctly understand what you're looking to change, you can put

.mw-headline {
	font-family: 'Segoe UI Historic', BukyVede, Dilyana, 'Noto Sans Glagolitic', sans-serif;
}

to make the text of pages' ==English==, ===Noun===, and other headers appear in the fonts that are used for Glagolitic, and/or put

.headword-line {
	font-family: 'Mongolian Baiti', 'Noto Sans Mongolian', sans-serif;
}

to make the headword itself display in the fonts that are used for Mongolian. Change this to whatever fonts you actually want, obviously. - -sche (discuss) 20:28, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, -sche! kwami (talk) 01:25, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Need a German translation

How do I get a Germany translation for one particular page? LoveMunich (talk) 11:33, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not 100% sure what you're asking, but maybe you're saying something like this: there's a word in English, like, airport, where you know the German word for it, but we don't have it already listed. If there is already a translations section, you can use a number of gadgets in your preferences to make adding translations easier. If there is not translation section, it will need to be added. Can you tell us which term you have in mind to add? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:54, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I want to edit ~900 entries - what is the best way to approach this?

While working on my project based on data extracted from Finnish entries from wiktionary, I came across a problem that I'd like to fix. In etymology sections of some words, some suffixes, prefixes, etc. lack "-", what makes automatic processing problematic. I could fix it only on in my extracted data, but I'd like to contribute.

Example: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/kyseenalaistaa

In etymology section it says: kyseenalainen + -taa, and links to appropriate suffix page.

At the same time in the page code it says:

===Etymology===
{{suffix|fi|kyseenalainen|taa}}

^ note that taa is missing the "-"

I identified over ~900 pages with this problem. Is there some automated tool which I can use to make edits? I have a list of affected words and tags. Krkrrr (talk) 22:19, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This sounds like a parsing/logic issue on your end - {{suf}} and {{suffix}} automatically add a leading hyphen, if missing, to all entries after the first one. (Likewise, {{pre}} and {{prefix}} automatically add a trailing hyphen, if missing, to all entries except the last one.) — SURJECTION ^{/ T / C / L /} 22:23, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting! What confused me is that in some entries the hypens are missing while not in others. Anyway, now it's clear, thanks! Krkrrr (talk) 22:30, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The hyphen is required when the template is "affix"/"af", apparently optional otherwise.--Urszag (talk) 01:00, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Difference between alternative form and alternative spelling

Could someone tell me the difference? I really don't understand. Amanyn (talk) 19:28, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In theory, and only in theory, "alternative spelling" is supposed to be used when only the spelling differs but the pronunciation is the same (like with fortuneteller vs fortune-teller), while "alternative form" is supposed to be used only when the difference in the form of the word is enough that the pronunciation also differs. In practice, this distinction is widely ignored (possibly even more often than it is followed), to the point that I can't even find an entry that correctly uses {{alternative form of}} to give you as an example, because scrolling through hundreds of results for e.g. English "alternative form of"... counterattack, infraorder, worshiper, Marines, postop, shmear, snow plough, crossbreed, road test, air mail, redhaired... all only differ from the lemma form in spelling, not pronunciation. (The one entry I spotted which differed in pronunciation should've use "synonym of" instead). - -sche (discuss) 20:27, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for clarifying me! I think that's something we should change, so alternative form and spelling get to be used correctly. But for now I'll just correct it whenever I find it being used wrongly, it isn't that of a big problem. Amanyn (talk) 14:52, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strange translations.

From time to time I like to add words from little-known languages, however sometimes I encounter very specific and strange translations. For example the Aleut word "amálax", meaning a "spear with stone head for big animals". How should I translate something like that? "A spear, specifically with a stone head for big animals.", "spear" or " A spear with a stone head for big animals". And in any case, can I even add such words to the translations page, since the word does not directly mean "spear"?

Lsdyk (talk) 15:28, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One approach would be to use that as a gloss, i.e. [[spear]] with [[stone]] [[head]] for [[hunt]]ing [[big]] [[animal]]s and follow up with {{rfeq}} if you think there's an equivalent. If you don't, then leave it at the gloss (or some variation thereof). Vininn126 (talk) 15:31, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Northern English/Geordie

I'd like to add Geordie and possibly other Northern English (e.g. Yorkshire and Cumbrian) words to desc trees.

Geordie is a descendant of Northumbrian Old English, therefore more closely related to Scots, but are considered English dialects for cultural and political reasons.

What would be the best way of doing this? To list Geordie words as subsections of English, as in:

English: bone
- Geordie English: byen
Scots: bane, bean, bain
Yola: bane

DogOfDoom (talk) 16:20, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps @Theknightwho could weigh in. Vininn126 (talk) 19:32, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DogOfDoom @Vininn126 We already have a code for doing this: en-geo. In cases like this, they're called "etymology-only languages", but that's just jargon for "language variant". They don't get their own main headings on pages, but we can mention them in etymology sections, descendant trees etc, and they often have their own labels (e.g. a Geordie entry would be under "English", but you'd give it the right label).

Specifically in relation to Geordie, I'm in two minds over whether we should call it that. On the one hand, it's a common term for English as spoken in the North-East, but in its strict sense it only refers to Newcastle, and not Sunderland (Mackem), Teesside (Smoggie), [the rest of] Northumberland (Northumbrian) or much of County Durham (Pitmatic), and a lot of people get really pissed off if you call them Geordies when they're not. Theknightwho (talk) 19:45, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One problem I have with this is that currently Geordie is not a direct descendant of English. Vininn126 (talk) 19:49, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose if English isn't an ancestor of it, then Geordie would sit on the same indentation as English, Scots, and Yola. Vininn126 (talk) 22:48, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Vininn126 It's definitely not as divergent from standard English as Scots or Yola, and is definitely a dialect - intelligibility is nearly 100%, though it might take someone a bit of time to adjust to it if they're not used to it. The difficulty is that it clearly comes from Northern Middle English. Theknightwho (talk) 00:16, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I mean as it's set up now. English is not set as the ancestor of Geordie currently. Vininn126 (talk) 00:45, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DogOfDoom Okay, the current set up is

Old English:

Middle English: term
- English: term
- Scots: terms
- Yola: term
Northern Middle English: term
- Geordie English: term

Or, if not Northern Middle English is present,

Middle English: term
- Geordie English: term
- English: term
- Scots: terms
- Yola: term

Vininn126 (talk) 11:20, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks both for your input. I agree it's a difficult term because in a maximalist sense it can refer to Northumberland and Durham (Tweed-Tees) but is often restricted to Tyneside and rejected by people further north/south. "Northumbrian" is also difficult because in a narrow sense it refers to Northumberland, but can also be used to designate the Tweed-Tees area, including Durham. Durham/Northumberland dialects are fairly diverse, and 'byen' is specifically Geordie, so I agree overall that Geordie is probably the best designation. By any chance do you know if we could get codes for desctrees for Cumbria, Yorkshire, Lancashire? DogOfDoom (talk) 15:59, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This would need to be raised in the Beer Parlour or Wiktionary:Requests for moves, mergers and splits. Beer Parlour would get more attention. Vininn126 (talk) 16:04, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Isn’t that what dialect tags are for? * {{desc|ka|შალღამი|tag=Javakheti,Meskheti,Chveneburi|bor=1}} in شلغم (şalğam). There are less than a hundred in Ottoman entries, editors are likely not to be acquainted with the technique. Fay Freak (talk) 16:32, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

page deleted

I made Bliarism but someone deleted it and now ignores my question. But it's real, you can google it. Morris Major (talk) 12:00, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All that glitters ain't gold. Just because something is Googleable doesn't mean it meets CFI. Even how the article was built was subpar – the sense was, and I'm paraphrasing here – Bilarism means Bilarism. Robbie SWE (talk) 19:14, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are a bunch of results in the news and on the Web for this term. It exists, and has a meaning (Blairism and him lying). CitationsFreak (talk) 23:22, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I found one cite in a book, assuming it's not a typo: Citations:Bliarism. There seems to be another in the New Statesman. Maybe RFV? - -sche (discuss) 00:40, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The user also posted on my talk page about this (because I deleted the entry) and I have commented there. Q.V. bitches! Equinox ◑ 02:00, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which languages have the full Roman set of weekday names?

<A> Speaking of the days of the week, recently found out that Welsh is the only language that preserves the Roman names.

<Eq> how do you mean? most of them seem to pop up in the european day names. dydd Mercher ahh there's mercredi, it's always interesting how unexpectedly french welsh is. all that sneaky west-side (is the best side) trading

<A> French has six of them but instead of Sunday it has Dimanche (sabbath). Welsh has the full set (Sun, Moon, Mars, Mercury, Jupiter, Venus, Saturn).

<Eq> oh yes the strange dimanche outlier. and then german has the highly unmythological Mittwoch. based welsh! there must be some other obscure language that has the full set. Manx? Occitan? i'm going to go and ask wiktionary.

Over to you. Equinox ◑ 01:47, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Equinox: Yes, it looks like Breton also preserves them. I figured that out by starting with the descendants at dies Solis, because I figured of all the days of the week, this is the one that would most likely be changed in Christian countries, given that Sunday is a sacred day. Only four languages are listed there: Breton, Cornish, Welsh, and Proto-West Germanic. The latter has a lot of further descendants, but the other Proto-Germanic days of the week are mostly drawn from Norse mythology, so presumably none of the Germanic languages would have exclusively Roman names. Cornish seems to have a different name for Thursday, otherwise it's also close to having the full set. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 02:42, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sanskrit Injunctives

(Notifying AryamanA, Bhagadatta, Svartava, JohnC5, Kutchkutch, Inqilābī, Getsnoopy, Rishabhbhat, Dragonoid76): How are Sanskrit injunctives currently supposed to appear in the Sanskrit inflection tables? For example, for the second word of मा शुच: "Do not sorrow", should I have a second table for augmentless aorists at the entry for the corresponding aorist अशुचत् (aśucat)? I currently have an example in the quotation at அஶுசத் (aśucat); the inflection table there is slightly wrong because of a data error I am hoping to fix this weekend, though perhaps @sbb1413 can explain that it is not a data error. --RichardW57 (talk) 03:46, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Notifying AryamanA, Bhagadatta, Svartava, JohnC5, Kutchkutch, Inqilābī, Getsnoopy, Rishabhbhat, Dragonoid76, RichardW57): From the silence, I'm assuming it's not yet catered for. I've added the injunctive and the subjunctive to the 'to do' list at the documentation of {{sa-conj}}. --RichardW57m (talk) 10:31, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Macaronic derivations

I'm looking for a model for derivations which consist of a borrowed element (which is not otherwise present in the language as an independent lemma) combined with one or more native or nativised elements. For instance, German has a huge number of borrowed verbs where the infinitive ending of the source term is replaced with the suffix -ieren, e.g. French changer → changieren, Latin ēruō → eruieren. In these cases, the practice is simply to use {{bor}} and add the pages to the Category German terms suffixed with -ieren (and I'm not suggesting we change this), but I know I've also seen instances where the source term and source language are nested within a derivational template indicating suffixation. Does anyone else know what I'm talking about? Essentially I want to use a single template for the Etymology of a term like Cheondoist, where currently two ({{bor}} and {{suffix}}) are being used. Linguoboy (talk) 18:20, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Linguoboy: Re Cheondoist: I was told at Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2023/September § Should terms with borrowed parts be in a borrowing category? that “if the entire word hasn't been borrowed, it shouldn't be in a borrowing category”; e.g., alphabetical. J3133 (talk) 19:09, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the link! You provided exactly the sort of model I was looking for in the Etymology of quartal. Adding a parameter for source language adds the page to the Category of derived terms for that language, which is a fuzzier category than "borrowed". Linguoboy (talk) 19:15, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]