Wikidata talk:Wikidata Lexeme Forms/Portuguese

Brazilian Portuguese?

Hi Ederporto, Carybe e Joalpe, muito obrigado por criar esta página! :)

I just have one question: is the verb template really specific to Brazilian Portuguese? If yes, then I think that should also be reflected in the identifier (portuguese-verb → brazilian-portuguese-verb) and perhaps this page should be moved accordingly as well – but I don’t know if the differences are significant enough to make this necessary. (According to Wikipedia, the second-person forms with tu and vós which are included in this template have fallen out of use in Brazilian Portuguese more so than they have in European Portuguese, so to me this looks more like a general Portuguese template – but I don’t know enough about other differences between the two.) --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 12:23, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

@Ederporto, Carybe, Joalpe: any updates on this? Or perhaps Chicocvenancio or Waldir can help out? --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 15:24, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Unless we want to capture differences in informal speech, I don't think the conjugation specification warrants explicit distinction between pt and pt-br. The formal rules are the same AFAIK. --Waldir (talk) 20:32, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Alright, thanks – I’ve edited the page to make it just Portuguese, and unless anyone else objects I’ll add that to the tool soon. --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 12:33, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

@Ederporto, Carybe, Joalpe, Waldir: it’s live! Thanks again :) --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 21:11, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

@Lucas Werkmeister: It appears to be working :) Great job! -- Lexeme:L52324. --Joalpe (talk) 11:22, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Portuguese adjective

@EnaldoSS: regarding the template Adjetivo em português (permalink) – shouldn’t there be some more forms? I would know at least altíssimo/a, and Wiktionary has some more as well (augmentative and diminutive). Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 18:50, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

@Lucas Werkmeister: Yes, that's correct. And the same is true with nouns (I will write them later).

Adjectives (superlative forms):

• Eu vi um homem [alto]. (masculine gender and singular, no superlative)
• Eu vi um homem [altíssimo]. (masculine gender and singular)
• Eu vi homens [altíssimos]. (masculine gender and plural)
• Eu vi uma mulher [altíssima]. (feminine gender and singular)
• Eu vi mulheres [altíssimas]. (feminine gender and plural)

Masculine adjectives (neutral, aumentative and diminutive forms)

• Ele tem um relógio [pequeno]. (neutral, m.)
• Ele tem um relógio [pequenininho]. (dim. m.)
• Ele tem um relógio [pequenão]. (aum. m.)

Feminine adjectives (neutral, aumentative and diminutive forms)

• Ele tem uma mochila [pequena]. (neutral, f.)
• Ele tem uma mochila [pequenininha]. (dim. f.)
• Ele tem uma mochila [pequenona]. (aum. f.)

These adjectives in diminutive and augmentative degrees are in the singular, but they can also be written in the plural by adding "-s" or putting "ões" in place of "ão" (pequenininhos, pequenões, pequenas, pequenonas...). I can write more examples if you want. Enaldodiscussão 20:22, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

@EnaldoSS: Thanks, I deployed the template just now :) --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 19:32, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

@Lucas Werkmeister: I'm not sure if the positive (Q3482678) degree is applicable to Portuguese. A grammar book I have says that the language has only two degree inflections. The closest term with this meaning that I was able to find by searching was grau normal (normal degree) on this website. However, I didn't find any item for that term on Wikidata and I believe it was used on the site for educational purposes only. Personally, I would leave without, as this "normal degree" is the word itself in its simplest form. What do you think? Enaldodiscussão 22:04, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

@EnaldoSS: Well, if the forms that I tagged positive (Q3482678) don’t have some item, they’re harder to query for – after all, “form with feminine (Q1775415) and singular (Q110786)” matches not just alta but also altíssima, altinha and altona. Maybe positive (Q3482678) isn’t the right item, but I think some item is needed, and I think it makes some sense to use (unless we find something better) – the meaning seems to be the same as in other language with positive (Q3482678), at least. --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 18:39, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

If I understand correctly that positive (Q3482678) is meant to apply to the basic/primary (non-comparative, non-superlative) form of an adjective, I agree that it makes sense to tag Portuguese adjectives with it. --Waldyrious (talk) 09:23, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

"positive" marker for nouns

FYI, I have removed positive (Q3482678) from the noun templates. I initially assumed those were added by mistake, but there's an ongoing discussion in the "Wikidata Lexicographical data" Telegram group, about how to properly identify nouns in their regular form vs their augmentative/diminutive forms. It appears that positive (Q3482678) may not be the right property to tag them with. I'll follow up here once the discussion there reaches a consensus. --Waldyrious (talk) 10:17, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

@Waldyrious For the record, I haven’t applied this change to the tool yet. Please ping me when there’s an update. Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 18:55, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the follow-up. The conversation on Telegram sort of fizzled out, actually. I've started a thread in Wikidata talk:Lexicographical data to discuss this. --Waldyrious (talk) 10:30, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Portuguese noun

@EnaldoSS: About the template for nouns that you added (the ping didn’t work, by the way) – are you sure it makes sense to have a template with masculine and feminine forms for every noun? As far as I know, most nouns in Portuguese only have one grammatical gender (e.g. caso and casa are different nouns, not masculine and feminine versions of the same one). Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 18:28, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Regarding what you wrote below: I’m aware caso and casa are different words, that’s why I was skeptical about the template :D but I’m not convinced that it isn't necessary to edit the labels and the URL – aren’t most nouns non-biformes? To me it seems like it would be better to have all four noun templates with the “specifier” (masculine, feminine, common, biform(?)) in the label and URL; the original noun URL could redirect to the biform one. (Not sure if “biform” is a good word to use in English for the URL.) Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 17:46, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

@Lucas Werkmeister: If we are to edit URL and label of the nouns template, then the adjectives template must be edited as well, right? It's the same concept: one lexeme with both masculine and feminine forms. And I think it's okay to use "biform", this dissertation uses it (and it's talking about both nouns and adjectives as being biforms, by the way). I already made all those edits, ok? Enaldodiscussão 05:14, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

@EnaldoSS thanks for the reply and for the link to that dissertation, that helped me understand it. What do you think about borrowing the term “uniform” from there, instead of “common of two genders”? (The item could stay the same, but I feel like “uniform” sounds nicer in contrast to “biform” in the template URLs and labels.) Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 18:29, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

@Lucas Werkmeister: Alright, done. Enaldodiscussão 18:58, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

@EnaldoSS: Alright, it took me a while, but I think the Portuguese templates should all be updated now. Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 16:49, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Portuguese idiom

@EnaldoSS: Please ping me on the talk page when you add a new template. The ping in Special:Diff/1523543216 didn’t work (pings only generate a notification if a signature is added in the same edit). (I also have the page on my watchlist anyways – the more important information is whether the template is ready, or whether you still consider it work in progress. A ping without a further message doesn’t really make that clear.)

About this specific template: doesn’t the example sentence only work for some idioms? E.g. you already created amigo da onça (L618584), but João confessou que quer amigo da onça doesn’t make sense because amigo da onça isn’t a verbal phrase (not sure if that’s the right term). Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 17:47, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

@Lucas Werkmeister: I edited the example and now it fits into more idioms. It's translated as João didn't quite understand what she meant by "[]".Enaldodiscussão 18:35, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

That works, thanks! Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 19:47, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

@EnaldoSS: deployed – I feel like we might want to remove the quotation marks, I don’t like how they interact with the border around the input field when it’s focused. What do you think? Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 19:54, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

I agree. They are just a detail for the sentence and can be left out. Enaldodiscussão 21:00, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

@Lucas Werkmeister: Something went wrong and the idioms are being created with that statement of modal adverbs ("instance of: modal adverb"). Enaldodiscussão 21:29, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Oops, thanks, that one should be fixed now. Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 22:46, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Alright, done. Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 22:51, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

New templates

@Lucas Werkmeister: I'm replacing the idioms template for these four new phrases templates: nominal, verbal, adjectival and adverbial. The reason is that creating idioms this way makes it more clear how these phrases are used and relate to other parts inside whole sentences. Besides, some phrases can have two types of senses: one literal and another idiomatic (e.g. morrer de fome), so it makes more sense to add statements like language style (P6191)idiomatic (Q110983878) under these idiomatic senses as they are created. Also, I wrote a new template for proverbs, its example sentence reads: "If she was here, she would say that... [proverb]".

Now, concerning that template I wrote in April of last year: I know what you meant by that "caso" and "casa" example, but actually these two lexemes have nothing to do with each other (completely different senses, etimological origins, etc.). That new template is intended to be used most for nouns related to occupations of people and names of some animals. These lexemes always will have only slightly different forms for male and female, the same etimologies, and identical senses (we call them substantivos biformes, but I think it isn't necessary to edit the labels and the URL). Therefore, they have not differences enough to split them in two. It can be easily seen within dictionaries, where only the masculine singular form appear (as lemma) and the plural and feminines are just implied by that (Wiktionary put these main forms together inside parentheses: compare, for example, doutor and pavão to caso and casa).

Lastly, I wrote two new templates (for nouns and adjectives) for lexemes with common of two genders as grammatical gender. They have only two different forms for singular and plural (masculine and feminine are distinguished just by articles put before the word) and most of them have very common suffixes like -ista, -ense, -ente and -al. Finally, I left out augmentative and diminutive forms because for most of these lexemes they will be only potential form, used rarely and even a bit weird to read/hear (I'd rather use "um grande dentista" than "um dentistazão", for example). That's all, and thank you for reading. Enaldodiscussão 18:18, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

@EnaldoSS: 1) I don’t like to remove or rename templates without leaving a redirect behind; do you have an opinion on which of the new templates portuguese-idiom should redirect to after I replace it? 2) Let’s continue that discussion above to avoid combining too many threads here :) 3) Alright, I’ll add those now. Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 17:43, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

Oh, and another question… is positive (Q3482678) really the right grammatical feature for nouns? I usually only know that from adjectives and adverbs. Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 18:11, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

Also, all the common forms (for the noun and adjective templates) just have the same label as the template, instead of a label describing the particular form. Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 18:13, 5 March 2022 (UTC)

If it's not possible to redirect the idioms template to a page where the four new are shown, then using the verbal phrase one sounds fine to me. It certainly is going to be the most used of them. And yes, "positive" can be used in both nouns and adjectives just like the augmentatives and diminutives forms are present in the two as well. I know it might seem that should there be two different "positives", one for superlative/comparative and another for augmentative/diminutive, but it's not the case for Portuguese (the language kind of mix together these comparisons). I corrected the labels, thanks for pointing that out. And I also added "normal" to the labels of the positive forms of the existent nouns templates (there was nothing indicating it). Enaldodiscussão 05:16, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Alright, the new templates should be available now. toolforge:lexeme-forms/template/portuguese-idiom is now a kind of disambiguation page. Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 16:50, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

It's exactly what was needed. Thank you very much! Enaldodiscussão 23:05, 16 April 2022 (UTC)