Wikidata:Property proposal/noun
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
identical noun for this English verb
[edit]Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Lexemes
Withdrawn
| Description | noun that goes with this English verb |
|---|---|
| Data type | Lexeme |
| Domain | Lexemes for verbs |
| Allowed values | Lexemes for nouns |
| Example | "question" (Lexeme:L48) → "question" (Lexeme:L784) |
Motivation
See Wikidata_talk:Lexicographical_data#English_verbs_and_identical_nouns.
--- Jura 07:53, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Discussion
Why only english words? I think, same situation should be in many other languages. And do you want to use this in situation, when noun and verb have same writing or also in situation, where is it different ((to) walk - walking)? JAn Dudík (talk) 09:10, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
- What alternative do you suggest?
--- Jura 09:12, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
Comment I do not see why it should be restricted to English. I also have a problem with "identical". I think that "corresponding" would be better. In Danish, we have "lege" (basic form, lemma, for the verb for "play") and "leg" (basic form for the noun for "play"). I think we would like to have a property that links lege (verb) -> leg (noun). Wouldn't "corresponding noun for this verb" be better? What about links between other word classes? — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 09:52, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
- I don't mind expanding it as long as we can find a reasonable definition such as the one you suggest.
--- Jura 10:39, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
- I don't mind expanding it as long as we can find a reasonable definition such as the one you suggest.
Oppose. We don't need another property to encode "identical" - we should have properties to link between different lexical categories (I think these are proposed elsewhere) and the reader (or a script) can distinguish for themselves whether the verb form and the noun form are identical. Deryck Chan (talk) 14:59, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
- Can you give a sample how this would apply?
--- Jura 18:04, 29 May 2018 (UTC)- I would support a more generic property "noun form of this verb" which links e.g. en:produce(v.) to {en:product(n.), en:produce(n.), en:production}. This property can be extended to other languages, e.g. de:essen(v.) -> de:Essen(n.). We don't need a property to encode "identical spelling". Deryck Chan (talk) 16:30, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
- Can you give a sample how this would apply?
- Oppose I think the following proposed enhancement from the developers: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T195411 needs to be discussed and tried first, it may resolve this and a number of related issues. ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:29, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
- phabiverse seems to be about a different use case.
--- Jura 18:06, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
- phabiverse seems to be about a different use case.
- Oppose The description doesn't define what's meant (are heterophones included or aren't they?). I also see no reason to make this property targeted on English. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 08:26, 12 June 2018 (UTC)