Diskussjoni:Glossarju ta' termini lingwistiċi, psikoloġiċi, u filosofiċi

X'inhu?

Could you explain the point of this page please, because I don't get it? I understand having a glossary of terms in Maltese, but why the English one? Is it supposed to be a combined English-Maltese dictionary as well as a glossary? Thanks :-) MaltaGirl 15:32, 23 Mej 2005 (UTC)

Hi Mlle... I wanted to write...but you caught me before :). Thanks for finding 32 more spelling mistakes in antonio sciortino. :))). I'll add a note in the talk there later. If you keep this up I'm going to have to send you some beer or other specialities from Kraut-land.

Ok.. the point of this page is that I'm not convinced about it yet.... but on the whole I think it makes sense. I guess that a lot of Maltese tend to rely on English for technical terms - that's the impression I get when reading Maltese blogs - which I gladly found through your article :)). Yet the given corresponding Maltese variants on these blogs span between bad gimmicks or else interesting creations which would be worth listing, elaborating on and standardizing. Some wise guy or girl said somewhere that standardization is the basis of language development.

So we usually go by some English reference word, either keep it as is, italicise it, or put it in quotes or else, for the courageous, try and fit it within our world-view= +-grammar.. you know those funny, nice sounding patterns which we grew up with and with which we are inclined to stencil anything coming in form a different world view.

Eh bien.... lets keep this down to earth... I' have a few articles I wrote in English which I would like to translate and put under category linguistics.. and I'm completely HASSLED. just like the bloggers I'm trying to find the right words going by an English reference word: hence the double index EN and MT.

So if we try to agree on something we might do this together... in the post-modern way: every view is valid until it's contested. C'est ça le wiki :))

Ok.. do we call it a glossary or a dictionary? I think it's something in between, some sort of special case for a bilingual society.

The technical stuff is a completely different issue - I'm still not happy with the templates and the way they work.

għidli x'taħseb, forsi qed niġġennen :P li-lejl it-tajjeb G. --Joelemaltais 23:00, 23 Mej 2005 (UTC)

HI

Hi, just on a spam patrolling run. Sorry I haven't done a lot recently (besides check for spam and abuse etc) Maybe it would be better at http://mt.wiktionary.org which IS a dictionary? ?? S^rl | lblb 00:16, 24 Mej 2005 (UTC)

Hi Thanks :) well I don't like wiktionary - I think the concept is faulty and basically I wanted to try something like this (see template improvements)... especially semantic Markup and RSS. However I'll have a look at the wiktionary template.--Joelemaltais 00:27, 24 Mej 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure who (if anyone) is updating that wiktionary. it's the same software as runs here, so if you say 'the concept is faulty' do you mean the current structure/form is faulty? (i.e. it can take templates, etc etc etc.) S^rl

no. If one goes's into the trouble of setting up a electronic dictionary you have to force structure using a mask with input fields etc. Anything else is hacking... just as my glossary is by the way.--Joelemaltais 08:51, 24 Mej 2005 (UTC)

Also, Wikipedia has a policy that Wikipedia is not a dictionary (that's the English Wikipedia's policy, but still it is a good reference to look at en's policy). I hope that makes some sense. I must admit I am not familiar with the ins and outs of wiktionary policy, but i think you could probably define them as noone else is doing anything with it right now. S^rl | lblb 00:46, 24 Mej 2005 (UTC)

Well en.wikipedia have glossaries en masse. However I might look into the wiktionary policy, I would be intersted to know if they have a standardized template for all wiktionaries or a styleguide of some sort.--Joelemaltais 08:51, 24 Mej 2005 (UTC)

Template improvements

Fix the bug with multiword references
Add a template for sublemmas
Add a template for a.k.a
Improve the presentation Markup
Make sure the templates generate semantic markup (possibly dublincore)
pull out an RSS-feed

--makeshifts last longest :P

something to sleep on

Hi again Monsieur S^rl , I had a look at it - wow you were quick with that.. but why don't you use __NOTOC__ ? are the mumbers there for something? and how did you pipe in all the English stuff? are you using a bot?

I'm not really sure if It really is usable. Both solutions have their pro's and cons. I'll sleep over it.--Joelemaltais 00:39, 24 Mej 2005 (UTC)

Sur Joe, I'm not sure what exactly you are referring to here. What numbers? What English stuff? I'm not using a bot, I know that much. As to __NOTOC__, my personal opinion (without knowing what you are referring to) is that it should only be used on pages like Paġna prinċipali that have a specific layout to them, and that the normal TOC should be allowed in other cases.. you can turn off ALL TOCs in your preferences page should you desire. Regards, S^rl | lblb 00:51, 24 Mej 2005 (UTC)

something I slept on

għaziz Srl, 62.143.85.68 IS --Joelemaltais when he's to lazy to log in.

I was referring to this: [1]. The 1,2,3.... which have no meaning there could be turned off with __NOTOC__ ... but one would have to add an alphabetical index in a template... thats how the glossaries on en.wikipedia do it - that's how I did it too w:mt:Template:CompactTOC2-en-mt

ok.. so what I DO like about the wiktionary is that every lemma is indexed and is searchable with 'mur' - What I don't like is that you have to click on every lemma and wait for every entry to load which is tedious at times. With the anchors they are all in one page and it's quick. of Course I could scrape the page and put them somewhere else in a format of my taste :P. but that would be-offwiki

Bei it Wik-tionary or -ipedia, I definitely would use a template:

to make sure the people follow the structure given
to make them type less

entry:grammammatical information;semantic field; meaning sub-entry: grammatical information; meaning synonyms

I'll have to read and think about this ab bit more. But today I'll be busy. cheers--Joelemaltais 08:51, 24 Mej 2005 (UTC)

Joe, qatt ma rajt dak il-artiklu. On it it says it is made by 'Kampagnol'. Maybe you should post a comment on that page? as to glossaries on en.wikipedia.org i will answer that there. S^rl | lblb 15:32, 24 Mej 2005 (UTC)

New Suggestion

Hi,

this glossary buisness kept me sleepless yesterday. Ok we definitely have to move to wiktionary, and there apparently is no real styleguide i.e. we could use an improved glossary template. Yet With the present possibilities, structured entries in wiktionary are not possible - you never know if sbdy will use the template properly - the more complex it becomes, the more likely they would mess up... ans loss of structure in a Dictionay would be fatal.

I decided to talk to Magnus Manske (the creator of mediawiki) today - (he works only 3 blocks away from my office in the Dpt. of Biology) and asked him why nobody ever took care of a decent edit mask for wiktionary. He says that for some time people were working on a new concept called 'wikidata' which was supposed to be deployed for wikispecies and wiktionary but which would entail complete refactoring of mediawiki an thus remained just a concept and will probably not be implemented soon.

I mentioned my dictionary schema and asked if we could tweak a special editmask for dictionary entries. This is possibe without much trouble. So there is a file in includes called editpage.php. If you fumble around there, you can split the editmask into multiple fields - the data itself however is saved in one single field. The tricky bit, is that you have to stop anybody from editing them in the standard mode and somehow embed a template for additional structural markup - the basis for successfully reediting.

Somehow this solution, although still a hack, guarantees data integrity and if one day people agree on the wikidata model we should be able to port to that solution.

I'll be meeting up with Magnus next week and we'll see if we can tweak this together. In the meantime Im going to leave this glossary where it ist.

cheers, --Joelemaltais 14:48, 25 Mej 2005 (UTC) --Makeshifts last longest

p.s. are some of you guys - and girls :) - going to be at wikimania? Nieħu gost ħafna niltaqa magħkhom.

I was just in Berlin a couple moons ago. But that won't help. Sorry :] So what you're saying is that Maltese wiktionary will be the most advanced one! As to moving it, I was mainly concerned that if it had to move it would be painful at that point. Also, you might want to set up some pages on mt.wiktionary.org to notify users there of the intended or possible changes - you could link it here. Also, if the php needs to change you might need to work with the techs. Good work.. S^rl | lblb 15:18, 25 Mej 2005 (UTC)

we moved

this talk moved to:

wiktionary:mt:Wiktionary:New Dictionary Structure

2008 discussion

hmm, naqbel mal-kummenti t'hawn fuq. Din il-paġna mhux posta fil-Wikipedija inutli jekk Joe jaqbel jew ma jaqbilx mal-kunċett Wikizzjunarju.

Barra minn hekk din il-ħaġa li qiegħed nara nofs il-paġna bl-ingliż u firem l'hawn u l'hemm fuq paġna mhux tad-diskussjoni aktar tagħtini raġun għala din il-paġna m'għandiex tkun fin-namespace tal-artikli.

Jien għalhekk nipproponi tħassir ta' din il-paġna immedjat.

--Gian 13:15, 4 Settembru 2008 (UTC)[wieġeb]