テンプレート・トーク:de-decl-noun2

出典: フリー多機能辞典『ウィクショナリー日本語版(Wiktionary)』
ナビゲーションに移動 検索に移動

Linking? / Dative? / More plural forms?[編集]

When using this template the genitive is like "[[Stücks|Stück(e)s]]" (Stück(e)s) while the dative is like "[[Stück]]" (Stück).

  • What is when one wants to go directly to Stückes, e.g. to see the pronunciation? To click on "Stücks" and then on "Stückes" could be kind of annoying, so something like "[[Stückes]]<br />[[Stücks]]" should be better.
  • What is with the dative singular? In case of words which have a gentive like "des Stück(e)s" the dative can be "dem Stück(e)". The forms with -e are rare nowadays, but sometimes do occur, and maybe there are people who (want to) read older german literature.

This template, like テンプレート:de-decl-noun, does only accept one singular and one plural form. But what if there are more forms? Wort can be "Wörter" and "Worte" in plural, Ding "Dinge" and "Dinger", Denkmal "Denkmale" and "Denkmäler", and Herr can be "Herrn" and "Herren" in genitive, dative and accusative singular. The usage in Ding is not good (wrong linking of the plural forms):

So, one could use the template several times in one entry like this:

But sometimes* having parameters like "|nominative plural 1=Denkmale |nominative plural 2=Denkmäler" might be better. Examples of possible tables:

単数 複数
主格 Denkmal Denkmale Denkmäler
属格 Denkmals
Denkmales
Denkmale Denkmäler
与格 Denkmal
Denkmale ()
Denkmalen Denkmälern
対格 Denkmal Denkmale Denkmäler
単数 複数
主格 Herr Herren
属格 Herrn Herren Herren
与格 Herrn Herren Herren
対格 Herrn Herren Herren

Regarding "sometimes*": In some cases it is most likely better to have two tables, namely if there are two singular forms and two plural forms. E.g. if there would be "das Denkmal, des Denkmalen, die Denkmalen" ("weak declension") and "das Denkmal, des Denkmal(e)s, die Denkmale" ("strong declension"), two tables would be better as "das Denkmal, des Denkmalen, die Denkmale" and "das Denkmal, des Denkmal(e)s, die Denkmalen" would not exist. A table like this would be misleading and irritating:

単数 複数
主格 Denkmal Denkmale Denkmalen
属格 Denkmals
Denkmales
Denkmalen Denkmale Denkmalen
与格 Denkmal
Denkmale ()
Denkmalen Denkmalen Denkmalen
対格 Denkmal Denkmalen Denkmale Denkmalen

-eXplodit (トーク) 2015年7月4日 (土) 10:54 (UTC)

Yes check.svg 対処 ([1], [2]). I've updated both of the templates, trying to realize all of your requests. See my subpage as a preview. However, regrettably there are somewhat bothersome features due to personal technical limit.
  1. You have to choose a proper script for entry on each template page.
  2. You have to tolerate slash(/) as separators instead of border.
If you find these facts unacceptable, I'll try again for improvement. Regards, Eryk Kij (トーク) 2015年7月5日 (日) 08:31 (UTC)
Thank you very much.
  • IMHO slashes are okey.
  • Should genitive (and dative) singular be splitted, and can they be splitted? I guess the problem is that changing [[{{{1}}}s|{{{3}}}]] ([[{Stücks|Stück(e)s]]) would require the change of all entries where the template is used.
  • New idea: テンプレート:de-decl-noun2 is intended to be used for words with genitive in "-(e)s". Then (regarding present German) only three parameters are required:
単数 複数
主格 "1" "2"
属格 "1"s
"1"es
"2"
与格 "1"
"1"e ()
"2""3" (3 = n or empty)
対格 "1" "2"
A second plural would require two further parameters.
I've tested something with the source code from 利用者:EXplodit/test at テンプレート:de-decl-noun-test (that doesn't exists as I only used previews there and didn't save anything).
Problems:
  • "older" needs to be replaced.
  • I don't know what {{{複数|{{{2}}}}}} does. I've pretty much copied it from the templates here. So I don't know if {{#if:{{{複数|}}}{{{2|}}} | THEN | ELSE}} can/should be something like {{#if:{{{複数|{{{2|}}}}}} | THEN | ELSE}}.
  • In case of older Modern High German (16th and 17th century, like from Justus-Georgius Schottelius ([ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/ユーストゥス・ゲオルク・ショッテル]) ca. 1660, and Laurentius Albertus ([de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurentius_Albertus]) ca.1570 there were other inflections than used nowadays. But Germans nowadays usually don't know about those old declensions anyway.
Regarding Schottel: Schottel has words with genitive singular -es and dative singular -e, but doesn't dropped the e. If the e can be dropped, and compared with Albertus' forms I'd guess they can be dropped during Schottel's time, then there are three problems:
1. Schottel also lists a vocative (equals nominative) and an ablative (equals dative), and also declines the articles der (die, das), ein (eine, ein) differently than Germans do since at least ca.1750 (Gottsched, Antesperg). Should vocative and ablative still be listed or ignored?
2. Schottel sometimes has dative plural as -en instead of just -n, as "Bücheren" instead of "Büchern" (dative plural of Buch). I don't know if the e in dative plural can be dropped. So there are these possible dative plurals: (a) empty (Staaten), (b) -n (Büchern), (c) -(e)n (Büchern or Bücheren) [doubtful] or (d) -en (Bücheren) [Schottel].
3. In case of some words with genitive other than -es Schottel has also other unusual forms, e.g. in case of genitive plural of Bürger. So maybe there were words with genitive singular -(e)s and an unusual genitive plural.
Modern declension compared with Schottel's:
単数 複数
主格 Buch Bücher
属格 Buch(e)s
Schottel: Buches - also Buchs?
Bücher
与格 Buch(e)
Schottel: Buche - also Buch?
Büchern
Schottel: Bücheren - also Büchern?
also Häuseren, but just Stükken (= Stücken), Schiffen
対格 Buch Bücher
Regarding Albertus: Albertus text is in Latin. What is easy to see: He also declines the articles differently. Regarding substantives ("nouns"): In genitive and dative singular he sometimes drops e, but it seems that he doesn't do that in dative plural. But: His genitive plural is different than Schottel's and the current one, e.g. "Götteren" like dative plural and not "Götter". Also: In case of words not with genitive in -es or -(e)s Albertus has a real vocative (der Herr, vocative o du Herre). So, maybe in case of Albertus inflections other templates should be used, namely templates which always list a vocative even when it equals the nominative.
Open questions regarding old forms - more like rhetorical questions -: How are the old inflections? Could e be dropped in dative plural? (Don't know, so maybe.) Could e be dropped in the singular ca.1650? (Don't know, but I'd guess that the answer is "yes".) Were other cases different too? (In case of "Bürger" Schottel has an unusual genitive plural too, so maybe genitive plural of words with genitive -(e)s can also be unusual.)
Well, maybe one could add more parameters so that one can change every single form if needed, like: "if there is a accusative singular, then use it, else simple use singular" ({{#if:{{{対格単数}}} | [[{{{対格単数}}}]] | {{#if:{{{単数|{{{2|}}}}}} | [[{{{単数|{{{2}}}}}}]] }}). Technically this should be possible, but the source code becomes ugly, and I don't know if there can be any performance problems.
(The text was changed several times, became quite long, most likely isn't written in a good style and maybe became a bit confusing. I'm sorry for that, and hope that it can still be understood. If not, please tell me, so I can try to do it better.)
PS:
  • According to an older book which explains German from the 15th till 17th century the genitive singular isn't -(e)s but only either -es or -s in case of Albertus' and Schottel's spellings. But: IMO the book is doubtful and there were other people besides Albertus and Schottel.
  • It seems like it also was genitive singular -(s) in older literature and maybe there are even three forms, -es, -s, -.
  • In [www.zeno.org/Literatur/M/Wenz,+Dominicus/Werk/Lehrreiches+Exempelbuch/Andere+auserlesene+Exempel/56.+Exempel] it is "von denen Burgern" and "von denen Burgeren", so dative plural can be -(e)n and maybe this is true in case of words with genitive singular -(e)s. So most likely instead of just adding the dative plural (empty, -n or -en) there needs to be a switch. This might work:
{{#switch:{{{n|}}}
|n=[[{{{pl}}}n]]
|en=[[{{{pl}}}en]]
|(e)n=[[{{{pl}}}n]]<br />[[{{{pl}}}en]]
| [[{{{pl}}}]]
}}
Well, maybe plural genitive can be like "Burger(e)n" too. Then it also requires some kind of a switch.
  • Maybe it's better to ignore older German forms, at least for know, as I doubt that there will be an answer to the question how declension was in older German (15-17th century) in the near future. If accusative singular, nominative plural or accusative plural had unusual forms, one could add further parameters for that (like "対格単数" or "主格複数"), and similar could be done for genitive and dative plural.
  • Maybe the parameter "n" should be renamed into something more specific (like "dative plural ending") and into something Japanese ("与格複数語尾"?).
    If one changes the dative plural in "another way" one could use a parameter like "与格複数", namely it could be done this way: "if 与格複数 is used, then show this form, else show the usual plural". So for "Staat" one simple needs "Staat|Staaten", but for "Denkmal" one needs "Denkmal|Denkmäler|Denkmälern". But with a parameter like "n" it should be easier to change the template to include old German forms if one wants to add them.
-eXplodit (トーク) 2015年7月5日 (日) 18:50 (UTC), PS: 2015年7月5日 (日) 23:08 (UTC)

Now I can say something about older German declension. It is like this:

old new
単数 複数 単数 複数
主格 Gott Götter Gott Götter
属格 Gottes, Gotts Götteren, Göttern, Götter Gottes, Gotts Götter
与格 Gotte, Gott Götteren, Göttern Gotte, Gott Göttern
対格 Gott Götter Gott Götter

So four parameters are needed for one singular/plural: nominative singular, nominative plural, dative plural resp. the information whether n (or en) has to be added or not (die Götter - den Göttern, but die Augen - den Augen), and maybe genitive plural.
Changing the template, one could use this for the modern forms: {{de-decl-noun2|Gott|Götter|Göttern}} or {{de-decl-noun2|Gott|Götter|n}}, {{de-decl-noun2|Aug|Augen|}}.
If one wants to include old forms in this template, one could change the template to have it like this: {{de-decl-noun2|Gott|Götter|en|gen}}.
But in my humble opinion it should be better to exclude old forms in this template and to use another one for them:

  • Most Germans don't know about the old German declensions (I don't know any persons who knows about the old declension). So:
    • It is kind of unlikely that old forms are added.
    • Having support for old forms in this template would irritate most users.
  • Excluding the old forms here makes it easier to use the template.
  • If one uses an own template for the old forms, one could easier add some title, which notes that the declension is old, and one could have an easier to use template for them.
  • The current template isn't made for old forms too, so there's no loss of anything.

Also regarding some other details:

  • There are words which have two genitives in singular, but just one dative, or words which have to datives, but just one singular. Example for the first: der Fluss, des Flusses (not: des Flusss), dem Flusse/Fluss. So a parameter could be added which replaces the genitive/dative if there is some exception. These parameters could also be used for traditional spellings like this one: der Fluß, des Flusses, dem Flusse/Fluß.
  • In case of words with genitive singular -(e)s, I can only think of words with two plurals like Denkmal (Denkmäler, Denkmale). But well, one kind of possible exceptions comes into my mind: * das Numeral, gen. des Numerales/Numerals, pl. die Numeralia/Numeralien/Numerale; (*) das Prinzip, des Prinzipes/Prinzips, die Prinzipia/Prinzipien/Prinzipe.

Examples of possibile usages:

  • {{de-decl-noun2|Gott|Götter|n}}
  • {{de-decl-noun2|Aug|Augen|}}
  • {{de-decl-noun2|Fluss|Flüsse|n|gen-sg=[[Flusses]]}}
  • {{de-decl-noun2|Fluß|Flüsse|n|gen-sg=[[Flusses]]|dat-sg=[[Flusse]], [[Fluß]]}}
  • {{de-decl-noun2|Denkmal|Denkmale|n|pl2=Denkmäler|n2=n}}

So, can the template and all embeddings be changed to use this easier and more complete form? I'd also be willing to change all articles/entries which currently use this template (more than 100, but less than 150 articles/entries)?
-eXplodit (トーク) 2015年7月26日 (日) 23:27 (UTC) & 2015年7月27日 (月) 00:56 (UTC)