Talk:ir

Spanish Imperfect Plural Second Person

I believe the imperfect plural second person form of ir is "ibais," with no accent over the first "i." (The current one is "íbais").

Fixed. —Stephen 09:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Portuguese

Past participle

	Singular	Plural
Masculine	ido	idos
Feminine	ida	idas

MGFE Júnior 20:16, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Interlingua

This article doesn't list an imperative of "ir".

Can anybody add this to the article?

--Zaimoon

PORT

Vou comprar um sapato.ONLY1??

Latvian

I was talking to a native speaker, apparently all the usages for Etymology 2 listed are archaic and not used in Modern Latvian. Could any other native speakers confirm this?Strombones (talk) 07:12, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

RFV discussion: December 2018–February 2019

This entry has survived Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).

Please do not re-nominate for verification without comprehensive reasons for doing so.

---

ir (iuwēr, iu, iuwih)

as polite form which needs one of these plural forms with singular meaning. --Berliner 586 (talk) 15:16, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Wright's Primer, which is the only grammar of OHG I own, makes no mention of a T-V distinction. @Mnemosientje, perhaps? —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 23:58, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

@Metaknowledge, Berliner 586 From a quick Google, one Johannes Helmbrecht mentions on page 318 of Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage (OUP 2014) that "the first attestation of the use of 2PL pronouns as a polite form of 2SG address can be found in the Old High German (OHG) period around the ninth century. This use became more and more regular in the Middle High German (MHG) period." In another source, Diachronic Perspectives on Address Term Systems (Taavitsainen & Jucker 2003, pp 88-89, it's on libgen), it is mentioned that there are very few attestations for reasons of genre: in the literary genres that have survived the test of time, this usage was not standard. The attestations, a handful in number, are all either nominative (ir) or dative (iu) plural. But we don't have entries for those yet, so I can't add them anywhere right now. TLDR: This usage clearly existed, but cites for the genitive and accusative plural specifically don't exist. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 14:15, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Diachronic Perspectives on Address Term Systems gives two sources: "letter to Bishop Salomo of Constance which accompanies the biblical epos by Otfried of Weissenburg" having ir, iu and "Altdeutsche (or Pariser) Gespräche" having ger. Für eine grammatische Kategorie ... mentions the same. Competing Motivations in Grammar and Usage, You und thou. --84.161.24.37 15:32, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

Yes, as I noted above the attestations are only nominative and dative plural. Since we only have entries for the genitive and accusative plural, for which this polite usage is not attested, I concluded that while it exists, the attestations cannot be added as citations to any entry we have now. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 15:35, 27 January 2019 (UTC)

RFV passed: I have added a usage note to du and created the plural pronoun entry ir, where I added the same note and a citation which attests the polite usage. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 11:44, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

Spanish second person plural informal reflexive imperative

There are currently 2 forms registered for this: idos and iros. There also exist another form, albeit a bit archaic but completely regular: íos. I don't really know how to edit thus, but I'd really appreciate it as it's the form I use the most in my spoken idiolect. Orangenarange2 (talk) 19:17, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

(Spain) Informal second-person plural (vosotros or vosotras) affirmative imperative form of ir.

Cf id and iros Backinstadiums (talk) 09:29, 15 July 2022 (UTC)

Spanish Derived Terms - Dubious?

Not really sure where to put this, since it's related to a bunch of terms, but a lot of the derived terms for Spanish seem... dubious at best. The literal translations on their individual pages are not accurate. For example, "cuando tú vas yo vengo de regreso" is translated as "I know what I'm talking about" which, while it might be accurate idiomatically (I am not a native Spanish speaker!) is almost certainly not literally accurate. Furthermore, a bunch of the phrases were posted by sock puppet accounts that have since been banned.

Is it worth going through and tagging these, or would someone who is better at Spanish wanna do it (preferable at least to me!)? I don't wanna get smacked for spamming RFDs! 2601:4A:C001:87A0:E48A:59C0:43F2:F8B0 22:04, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

See User:AryamanA/Wonderfool for more information about the accounts. The editor in question has a long history of abusing multiple accounts and block evasion, but we eventually came to an understanding: he keeps to one account at a time and (mostly) avoids vandalism, and we let him do his thing. When he gets bored with an account, he gets blocked so he can come back with a new one. Very odd, but it works better than any of the alternatives. He does seem to know quite a bit about Spanish as spoken in Spain. All the indications are that he's lived there, if he isn't there now.

As for the terms in question: definitions are for telling what they mean, not necessarily their literal translations. Usually the literal translation will go in the etymology. These are very idiomatic, so the literal translation can be completely misleading. The phrase "cuando tú vas yo vengo de regreso" is basically saying "I've already been there", which is an indirect way of saying "I already know about that". It seems plausible to me.

As for challenging them: the correct venue would be WT:RFVN. If you don't believe an entry or a sense has been used with that meaning, you take it there and we look for evidence that it has been. If it hasn't, we delete it. Chuck Entz (talk) 23:29, 30 September 2022 (UTC)