As an anonymous user, you can only add new data. If you would like to also modify existing data, please create an account and indicate your languages on your user page.

DefinedMeaning talk:how (5495)

From OmegaWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Icon tools.png
This article (how (5495)) needs attention because:
Imho this Definition is highly problematic and usually not helpful. It is completely grammatical but should not be. It refers to a "modified verb". (Which verb? How is it modified? How to tell that is has been modified?) Does this Definition only apply to languages having a concept "verb"? At least one "translations" deviates a lot.
It has been added to this category for attention. Thank you for your patience.
Icon tools.png
This article (how (5495)) needs attention because:
Diese Definition ist hoch problematisch und nicht hilfreich. Sie ist ganz grammatikalisch, was sie nicht sein sollte. Sie bezieht sich auf ein "modifiziertes Verb". (Welches Verb? Wie modifiziert? Wie wird erkannt oder entschieden, daß es modifiziert wurde?) Gild diese Definition nur für Sprachen, die ein konzept "Verb" besitzen? Wenigstens eine "Übersetzung" weicht deutlich ab.
It has been added to this category for attention. Thank you for your patience.
Icon tools.png
This article (how (5495)) needs attention because:
Dat eß këijn Övversätzong fun däm Täx.
It has been added to this category for attention. Thank you for your patience.


Icon tools.png
This article (how (5495)) needs attention because:
First Expression (how) is not in the SynTrans table--Sannab 10:41, 2 October 2006 (CEST)
It has been added to this category for attention. Thank you for your patience.


Well, I agree that the definition on itself is not really helpful. But I can't think of a better one and suggest that example sentences be used. (I've added one for German)
By the way, is this word an adverb?

Well, for the ksh translation, how else would you translate "the verb" than "wat do en däm Saz_jedonn weed" (literally: what is being done there, in the sentence) The definition is not making much sense anyways, since one must avoid the definendum, it becomes foggy. Apparently, we want to only refer to the use with a verb, which makes a not much sense for the average ksh native, since use with single nouns, ajectives, adverbs, or noun expressions, adverbial expressions, etc. is not distinguished, You also cannot resort to words like "antonym" here, because you most often do not have any ("she does not sing" may be used, when she's talking, quiet, rather dancing, etc., depending on context.)

Another definition that is still grammatical, and using metalanguage, which I would like more, was: When this (i,e, the definendum) is attached to another word or expression, the thus newly created compound expression sematincally deviates from the original such that the new compound states the non-facticity of the other. -- admittedly quite abstract but at least, I believe, correct. --Purodha Blissenbach 19:37, 25 September 2010 (UTC)