Maldiskusjon:fr-verb-topp

Hello,

Improvements to be performed:

• a/e for avoir/être: this is a key information to know with auxilliary verb to use.
• with this template, this is not possible to understand the relationship between tenses and modus. Laurent Bouvier 9. jun 2009 kl. 21:13 (CEST)

• Instead of numbers, why not using a nomenclature such as: "ind/imp/kond/konj:pre/imp/..:1s/2s/3s.../3p ? Example: je dors → je {{ind:pre:1s}} Laurent Bouvier 9. jun 2009 kl. 21:42 (CEST)

• instead of just displaying the different forms why not creating a link (I have created already a lot of such verb flexions) Laurent Bouvier 9. jun 2009 kl. 21:45 (CEST)

• the group information is missing (there are 3 groups + auxillaries and among the 3rd group we have the distinction between the "verbes défectifs" (= verb for which all forms are not existing such as gésir (gésir). The title could be a good candidate for this information (Bøyning is short and not carrying any real information) Laurent Bouvier 9. jun 2009 kl. 21:49 (CEST)

• We need to be able to have a remark on the spelling of 1990 that are affecting a lot of verbs Laurent Bouvier 9. jun 2009 kl. 21:50 (CEST)

• the perfektum partisipp has three or four forms. The presens partisipp only one. Laurent Bouvier 9. jun 2009 kl. 21:55 (CEST)
• The gender is also affecting the forms of the composed tenses. therefore I would not put il/elle.
• If it would be too much to display the two genders, the choice of the feminine form could also be taken: the perfektum partisipp reflecting the gender and the number in conjunction with auxilliary être it would be even more obvious. Laurent Bouvier 9. jun 2009 kl. 21:55 (CEST)

These are all useful points: I know of them all, but it's not always that one remembers them when making a template. :-) I have now replaced «a/e» with the conjugation of avoir and être, if the parameter aux-être is activated.

• When it comes to the spelling of 1990, I am not sure, but I would believe that there would have to be some consistency: So that connaître → connaît, while connaitre → connait, while connaître cannot give connait. If this is the case, the two different conjugations would be on the different pages connaître and connaitre. If I am wrong, then it should be added: I am following the development of the template for conjugating Portuguese verbs (as that conjugation is more related to French conjugation than Norwegian conjugation). In those templates, there is sometimes added a form preceeded by an asterix, to highlight the Brazilian spelling, we could do the same for the 1990-orthography.
• The participe does conjugate with être, just as with the forms of être/avoir for anteriority, one could activate adding an ending -e/s/es to the participe. This would be true, not only for il/s and elle/s, but also je/tu/nous/vous. It would be somewhat unappealing, but something like «nous sommes allé(e)s» should be possible to add.
• Creating like, will be easy, if deemed necessary/attractive. I think it would be a good idea.
• Group info+auxiliary is also something which needs to be added. I will have a look at fr/en to see how it has been done.
• Exchanging the numbers with a nomenclature, will be quite a heavy process, but it wold be possible, and could be advantageous, if things are moved around a bit (to change the layout etc.)
• What do you mean by the relationship between modus and tempus is not visible? How do you propose that the template be changed to better display this relationship? V85 9. jun 2009 kl. 22:20 (CEST)

• changing the display to something more compact would help. What I meant is the relationship between the different past such as: j'ai bu + past => J'avais buLaurent Bouvier 9. jun 2009 kl. 22:28 (CEST)
• As I was looking as {{pt-verb-ar}} I was thinking that the Portuguese template is definately clearer. Laurent Bouvier 9. jun 2009 kl. 22:28 (CEST)

I am a bit doubtful of the Portuguese set-up: Usually French conjugation is presented in two columns, as here: The simple tense on the left, the perfect tense (antériorité) on the right. This is why I kept it as here. It would be possible, but require some work, to change the set up to the horizontal set-up used for Portuguese verbs. Or, we could change more towards the set-up used on leconjugueur.com: put two tenses next to each other.

présent	imparfait
passé simple	future
subjonctif	subjonctif imparfait
conditionnel

Which do you think is better? Considering it, I think the horizontal layout would be clearer. V85 9. jun 2009 kl. 23:22 (CEST)

I have designed the layout also for reflexive verbs, but still need some time to work through the template to make all the necessary changes. I have also changed the set up, so it's not so long: four instead of two columns for each row. V85 10. jun 2009 kl. 10:18 (CEST)

It looks far better. For reflexive verb, be careful there are two categories (with or without agreement). I have noticed that the plural agreement of the past participum is currently not reflected. Laurent Bouvier 10. jun 2009 kl. 21:14 (CEST)

Because it takes time. For the time being, it is only some of the inflections which will actually react to the parameter ref=ja. It took some time to figure out how it would work, and it should be easier to add it all in. V85 10. jun 2009 kl. 21:33 (CEST)

aller

Hello, I have created aller with your template. This verb was selected as youy have most of the current problems visible:

• elision (j'vais)
• agreement of plurals
• mixte of auxilliaries Laurent Bouvier 11. jun 2009 kl. 01:14 (CEST)

Ce n'est pas grave : tous les Français que j'ai rancontré prononcent [ʒve] :-P [o va ty ? ʒve a lekɔl] Donc, c'est plus réaliste que nous écrivons «j'vais». I have made the change necessary for it to display «je vais»; for the moment, it only works for the first person singular of indicative present, but the scheme can added for other conjugations if desired.

I am still thinking about the agreement of plurals: how to get them to either be shown or not shown, depending on the verb. I.e. so that a pronominal verb with an indirect construction can also be shown with the auxiliary être, but without agreement. V85 12. jun 2009 kl. 09:49 (CEST)

I have now a similar problem with être, this time with imperfektum. Laurent Bouvier 13. jun 2009 kl. 15:31 (CEST)

I have corrected the template for the agreement of the past particip plural Laurent Bouvier 13. jun 2009 kl. 17:39 (CEST)

The problem has been solved by making another template: {{fr-verb-reg}} which will be the basis of conjugation templates for regular verbs. For verbs related to aller, we will désormais use {{fr-verb-aller}}. Similar templates will be made for other families of very irregular verbs, such as être, and possibly also avoir (though it is less necessary, because it always starts with a vowel sound). I have also changed the layout of what you did for past participle, so that it reacts to the parameters aux-être and ref</ref>. V85 14. jun 2009 kl. 19:37 (CEST)