Projects > Coptic Wiki Dictionary

Words to include in the Coptionary

<< < (2/2)

Admin:
I know the work has stopped for a while
I am worried about the "examples" and the way we will place them
I feel that putting different examples for different dialects (with Translation) exactly under each word's meaning will make the page a little bit "messy"
since we have started in this project neither you nor any body else tried to actually make a page
how about changing that now
choose a word that you want to write about, add entry for it in the index
but try to choose a word that has different meanings like "ⲕⲱϯ"(ⲕⲱⲧⲉ in sahidic)
design the page in the way you like
put the examples in Bohairic and Sahidic along with their translation anywhere u want
(you could use examples from the bible from here http://unbound.biola.edu/index.cfm?method=unbound.welcome )
When you are done, let me know I want to see how will you organize the page
if it was OK with me we can start using it or else we can discuss how it can be improved
until we reach a page that we can call "the standard"
P.S.
You can also check the pages I have made to know how a some things can be done (like bullets list for example)

mariag:
page: http://danacbe.com/Wiki/index.php/ⲕⲱⲧⲉ

I have two concerns

* The order of words in the index- should we use Crum's order (which doesn't include the vowels) so for example ⲕⲱⲧⲉ would be under ⲕⲧ and not ⲕⲱ? If not, then would we just use the primary spelling in the dictionary entry?
* For a word such as ⲁⲃⲉ in http://danacbe.com/Wiki/index.php/Index:Coptic/%E2%B2%81#.E2.B2.81.E2.B2.83, does it really make sense to say (meaning unknown) as the qualifier in the index? That just feels weird :/ I think putting the word type might be best.. although it may be less clear in the case of multiple words of the same type and spelling.. but they presumably are from different dialects? (http://danacbe.com/Wiki/index.php/Index:Coptic/%CF%A3#.CF.A3.E2.B2.81) what do you think?
As for giving the translations for the examples, i feel that as long as we're including bible verses it wouldn't be too difficult to look up the meaning- that it would be sufficient to just include the Coptic sentence.

Finally, we should come up with a systematic way to fill this in, though I feel going in alphabetical order might not be the best way

vagrant:
I think it have no sense to include greek words into dictionary - there is many good greek dictionaries, primary target is to make a coptic dictionary, no greek. This idea of coptic dictionary on wiki is very good, many users can to add words, dictionary will still grow. But iam not sure, how tools on wiki can protect data before inapropriate editing. On example, three users are editing a word on the same page - and if all of them upload their page, addition of the first and second user will be lost. Here is no information about creator of word. so, anyone can delete or modify word, which was created by anyone else. And many others problems. For this is perfect MySql, can protect any item, so is no possible for 2 users to edit the same item, into each word date and username can be added, so if is any problem with it, anyone can inform creator, and so on. Also is little confusing, that morphs of one word are splitted unto diferrent letters - ϩⲟⲧⲉ is under ϩⲟ , ϩⲣⲧⲉ under ϩⲣ , ϩⲁⲧⲉ under ϩⲁ . I think that is better, if all morphs of one words are founded on the same place. Anyway, if is there interest, i can made web with php and java, or application for creating this dictionary.

mariag:
So the reason we wanted to include Greek words is to make it easier for Coptic learners who may not know Greek or know enough to figure out if a word is Greek!

In terms of simultaneous editing, the wiki actually takes care of that. It lets multiple people access the edit page for a document, but if one submits changes then those changes come up when the next person tries to submit her changes and she is told to look over the two versions and merge them... so it doesn't automatically block people from accessing a file that's being edited but it also doesn't overwrite older edits :D

For keeping track of who edits a page, the wiki does that as well- it doesn't allot someone to edit anything unless they're logged in... and you can look up the history of changes to a page by time and person who did the change.

As for the morphs thing, I'm not actually sure what you mean... the way the index is set up, you can look up words by first two letters then those words are listed there.. Can you clarify on that a little bit?

Wiki is good because it would evolve as more people are involved :D

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page

Reply