Talk:Bulgarian vocabulary

Vocabulary or Lexis?
Isn't lexicon the more usual term? --Ptcamn 1 July 2005 10:26 (UTC)


 * Probably. Alexander 007 06:54, 3 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Standard usage is "vocabulary" as in Spanish, Turkish and Portuguese vocabulary. Using obscure or very narrow terms ("lexis" excludes morphology) is not the least bit encyclopedic. I urge VMORO to stop making such inconstructive reverts and to start discussing these things in a civilized manner.
 * Peter Isotalo 17:07, 3 January 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree with Peter. Alexander 007 02:36, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

VMORO is insisting on the title "Bulgarian lexis" to the extent that he is making cut'n'paste moves of the article right now and is regarding my move as unjustified since I did not make an inquiry about it on the talkpage. I would like to point out that the move was very uncontroversial, since "vocabulary" is the most commonly used term and is the most desierable since it is both more general and better known than "lexis". If anyone wants to insist on "lexis", then you'll have to build consensus on the talkpage rather than revert warring and making crude and unsatisfying moves of article content. Currently, the consensus is very clearly that "vocabulary" should be used. Peter Isotalo 17:57, 5 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Lexis is such an inkhorn term that I can't even find it in my English dictionaries, though we can infer what it means. Maybe some people (one people) like it because it sounds cooler (Lexis-->Lexus; a Bulgarian Lexus, rolling down Rodeo Drive). Alexander 007 00:06, 6 January 2006 (UTC)


 * The other possible term is lexicon, vocabulary is totally inadequate. Check before you make inappropriate jokes. And see my letter to the administator who took the liberty to protect the article. As for you, Peter Isotalo, and your personal crusade against me (as that is what it really is), you don't know what you have started;-))). VMORO 14:21, 6 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Okay, the joke was inappropriate, and you probably do believe that lexis is the better term, and not just the term with the nicer ring. But vocabulary is not totally inadequate: it is in fact totally accurate, according to my American Heritage Dictionary, 1982, ISBN 0-395-32943-4, pg. 1353 (verbatim quote, no kidding):


 * "Vocabulary 1. A list of words and often phrases, usually arranged alphabetically and defined or translated; lexicon or glossary. 2. All the words of a language. 3. The sum of words used by, understood by, or at the command of a particular person or group. 4. A command or reserve of techniques; repertoire. "


 * ---Alexander 007 14:55, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Unjustified protection of an article
I would like to get an explanation as to why the article Bulgarian vocabulary was blocked by you after User:Peter Isotalo repeatedly moved the content of the article Bulgarian lexis to the new name, Bulgarian vocabulary, without justification and without giving a plausible reason for that. Let's look at the meanings of the two words in the first online dictionary I came upon (it happened to be wordreference [www.wordreference.com ]):


 * Vocabulary: (1)a language user's knowledge of words. (2)the system of techniques or symbols serving as a means of expression (as in arts or crafts); "he introduced a wide vocabulary of techniques. (3)a listing of the words used in some enterprise


 * Lexis: (1)all of the words in a language. (2) all word forms having meaning or grammatical function:

As the article refers to the whole body of words in the Bulgarian language, I would like to ask you: which word refers better to the meaning of the article, vocabulary or lexis? Don't tell me - because the dictionary has already stated it explicitly, it is lexis!!!

In view of the above, could I get an explanation as to why, you, in your capacity of administrator, have sided with an editor in order to institutionalise a wrongful edit? I would like to ask you to remove the protection of the article or give me a very reasonable explanation as to why this protection has been effected in the first place and as to why, since it institutionalised a wrongful edit, which wreaks damage to the overall understanding of the article, continues to be in place. I don't think it is proper and adequate of an administrator to side with an user and I will contact other administrators so that measures compliant with Wikipedia policies can be taken against the wrongful steps taken by you and User:Peter Isotalo. VMORO 14:16, 6 January 2006 (UTC)


 * He protected the article because you refused to recognize consensus about article titles and made inappropriate cut 'n' paste edits. Right now there's four people who want to delete Bulgarian lexis outright in an AfD vote. Please take the hint. You're the one engaging in personal attacks, fighting consensus, threatening retaliation and being generally unconvincing in your factual arguments.
 * Peter Isotalo 12:59, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Removing page protection
I have unprotected this page. Please see my comments at Wikipedia:Administrator's noticeboard#User:VMORO, User:Peter Isotalo, Bulgarian lexis, and Bulgarian vocabulary for further explication. I encourage all parties involved in this situation to discuss the issue and seek consensus before any further page moves are made. Ξxtreme Unction |yakkity yak 15:19, 7 January 2006 (UTC)


 * So far we have VMORO saying that "lexis" is the only reasonable option and everyone else saying that it's too obscure or narrowly-defined, that "lexicon" would be more correct and a precedent of multiple equivalent articles using XXX vocabulary (Portuguese vocabulary, Spanish vocabulary, Turkish vocabulary). On top of this VMORO doesn't want to recognize any dictionary definition presented other than by himself.
 * I think more than just good will and strict neutrality is needed to define the current sitution as anything but one user refusing to recognize a de facto and common sense "vocabulary"-consensus.
 * Peter Isotalo 12:33, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

RfC
I've listed this article at Requests for comment/Language and linguistics in an attempt to resolve the conflict.

Peter Isotalo 17:10, 8 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Hello, I saw the RfC and thought I'd take a peek. Could someone please summarize what the concern is?  Elonka 07:29, 9 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Whether the most appropriate title for this article is "Bulgarian vocabulary" or "Bulgarian lexis". The other comments on this talk page relate directly to this question. Ξxtreme Unction |yakkity yak 12:55, 9 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you for summarizing. Based on a brief view of the debate, I feel that I can see both sides.  The term "lexis" is indeed more precise for what is being discussed; however it is definitely not a word that is in common usage.  Looking at other examples on the Wikipedia, the term " vocabulary" seems to be the standard that is being used (at least, if there is a " lexis" article, I am unaware of it).  Doing a Google search on the terms, I got 170 hits when searching on "Bulgarian lexis", and 430 hits when searching on "Bulgarian vocabulary".  Another related term seems to be "Bulgar Vocabulary".  My own feeling at this point is that really either title would be appropriate, but if it were put to a vote, that I would choose "Bulgarian vocabulary", with redirects set up from the terms "Bulgar vocabulary", "Bulgar lexis", and "Bulgarian lexis".  It might also be worth setting up a Straw Poll on this page so that other wikipedians could take a look and easily vote.  I know that when I first followed the RfC link, I was a bit bewildered as to what exactly I should be commenting on, but a Straw Poll would help focus the question. Elonka 00:58, 10 January 2006 (UTC)


 * "Bulgar" isn't the same as "Bulgarian", see the article about Bulgars, who were a people of Central Asia, whereas the modern Bulgarians are a Slavic people, who got their name from the Bulgars. [[Image:Flag of Bulgaria.svg|20px]] → Тодор Божинов / Todor Bozhinov → Talk 08:22, 12 January 2006 (UTC)


 * As the article is now, "lexis" is not more precise, it has the same value that "vocabulary" can have: all the words of a language. See these entries from Merriam-Webster, and I rest my case:, [, (for the definition of lexis Merriam-Webster directs one to the 2a definition of lexicon, which has the same meaning as the 2a definition of vocabulary...). I would like someone to bring proof that lexis is more precise for the current purpose of this article. Vocabulary has the same value, is extremely more common, and is even used in some linguistic textbooks as we intend to use it; and it is the standard in Wikipedia. [[User:Alexander 007|Alexander 007]] 01:06, 10 January 2006 (UTC)


 * The words are different in certain situations. For example, if someone were learning a language, they might say, "So far, I have a vocabulary of 75 words," or "my child has a vocabulary of 500 words".  To my knowledge, no one ever says, "I have a lexis of 75 words".  But even though the word "lexis" might be more precise for what this article is about, I would still vote for the more common term of "vocabulary".  For example, the Wikipedia page on dogs is labeled simply "Dog", not "Canis lupus familiaris", which is set up to redirect to the "Dog" page.  The general Wikipedia guideline is always to go for "most common English usage", which is why I think that the title of "Bulgarian vocabulary" is more appropriate.  Elonka 01:31, 10 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Agreed, it is more common and sufficient. What I meant was that as the article is now, the term vocabulary under its 2a definition is as precise as needed ("all the words of a language"). VMORO's wordreference.com link gave two definitions for lexis 1) all the words of a language (see vocabulary) 2) all the morphemes of a language. At present, the article is not discussing any morphemes that are not full words; and a definition of vocabulary can conceivably include "all the morphemes of a language" (though I have not found this explicitly stated yet). If somehow we agree to Bulgarian lexis or Bulgarian lexicon, then it will have to be applied to all such articles, but it seems kind of pedantic to me. Alexander 007 02:06, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, since a word is a unit of language that carries meaning, and no one can fully agree on what is and what is not a word, then any morpheme (=the smallest linguistic unit that can have a meaning) can also be considered a word; so "all the words of a language" (cf. vocabulary) is sufficient and precise. But anyway, such morphemes are not discussed in the article yet. Alexander 007 02:18, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

Lexis and vocabulary
Peter Isotalo blames me that "I allow only the use of the dictionary", again a statement without any justification (as usual). Check Bartleby, check American heritage, check the large Oxford, then make statements like this. Lexis has only the meaning of "all words of a language", vocabulary can have that meaning, as well - among 4 to 5 others. But the widest used meaning of "vocabulary" is the "number of words, which a speaker of a language is familiar with". Lexis is a more scholarly term and it is the only one used in linguistic literature, so the "google criteria" has only a restricted application here. I am moving the article to Bulgarian lexis where it originally belonged until the dispute is resolved. Peter Isotalo did not have the right to move the article to a potentially disputed name in the first place. VMORO 01:58, 11 January 2006 (UTC)


 * As is plain from the talkpage, there is no consensus for this. That it happened to be created as "lexis" doesn't give it some special status to protect it against the opinions of editors other than the creator.
 * Peter Isotalo 04:34, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * May I suggest a straw poll? I can invite some other linguists in to cast a vote one way or the other on page title.  Elonka 04:41, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I think that would be a capital idea if you can actually drum up some participation. Ξxtreme Unction |yakkity yak 12:42, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Straw Poll
Should the title of this article be "Bulgarian lexis" or "Bulgarian vocabulary"? Please place your vote below.

In favor of "Bulgarian vocabulary"

 * As far as I can tell, the choice of terms like "lexis" (and "word-stock" in Bulgarian language) stems from its usage in The Slavonic Languages (Routledge 1993) where "lexis" is used consistently. Quite appropriate for a book intended for academics, but not for a dictionary intended for the general public. / Peter Isotalo 17:57, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * (via Current surveys) I'd go with "Bulgarian vocabulary" on the grounds that more people consulting a general encyclopedia such as Wikipedia would have an idea of the article's content than the overly technical "Bulgarian lexis". The article could benefit from a brief introductory paragraph, which could then contain the clarification from "vocabulary" to "lexis". "Bulgarian vocabulary (or, more accurately, Bulgarian lexis) is ..." Best wishes, David Kernow 13:13, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Strongly in favor, at least for en.wikipedia.org. Ikkyu2 00:50, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
 * WP:CS Use English, which is "vocabulary". Lexicon is an abuse; it means a kind of book. Lexis is a pretentious loan-word. Septentrionalis 01:31, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

In favor of "Bulgarian lexis"

 * I strongly favor either lexis or lexicon in this meaning. While vocabulary can have this meaning as well, it’s not usual, and I would understand Bulgarian vocabulary to mean nothing more or less than Bulgarian words. Lexicon is better known than lexis, and therefore it might be the best choice ... but lexis is almost as good. &mdash;Stephen 08:19, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Bulgarian words is exactly the meaning we want to convey. I fail to see the problem with choosing the less academic term. / Peter Isotalo 09:35, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * If that’s all you want it to mean, then it’s okay to say Bulgarian vocabulary. In this case, I think a better choice would be Bulgarian glossary. However, I thought we were trying to convey the idea of a complete inventory of words in the language, with attention to sources of word-stock (such as Turkish, Bulgar, OCS, Romanian), how the words developed, and past and current processes for word production (such as prefixing, compounding, and so on). If this is what we’re attempting to say, then lexis or lexicon would be a better choice in my opinion. In particular, I don’t believe that any consideration at all should be given to how common or rare the word is ... we should select the best word for the job, and then people will easily learn it if it is of interest to them. You may recall the term Rump Yugoslavia that was popularized not long ago ... when the media first began to use rump in this sense, it was an unusual and generally forgotten meaning, but people understood it instantly and they liked it ... because it was the best word for the job. &mdash;Stephen 08:49, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
 * "Glossary" is a form of word list. It's a publication format, not the combined mass of words in a given language. And there is simply no way for anyone misunderstand "vocabulary" unless there's a clear intent to split hairs. It's just a simpler choice of words, not a different meaning and our interest is not to spread certain vocabulary (heh), but first and foremost to inform about a topic. Popularizing ink horn terms is something best done in your own work and writings or Wiktionary, not in Wikipedia. / Peter Isotalo 08:03, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I disagree that there is no way for anyone to misunderstand "vocabulary", splitting hairs or not. To me, it’s a stretch to use "vocabulary" to mean what you want it to mean, the combined mass of words in a language. On the few times that I have encountered this usage, it always surprised me, because I expected it to mean a form of word list (glossary). I agree with you that it is not our job to spread vocabulary, but neither should we shrink from taking the best word without regard (as I explained above) to how rare or common the choices of word might be. You are implying that my motive is popularizing ink horn expressions, and that is incorrect and unjustified. I’m not going to argue with you anymore ... I said I strongly favor lexis or lexicon over the alternatives, and that’s how it is. Vocabulary is at the bottom of my list and nothing you say can change my understanding of good English and my feel for the language. This is my last word on the subject. &mdash;Stephen 07:54, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Comments

 * Of the two, lexis is actually more correct than lexicon if it is agreed that this article will detail lexis in the full linguistic meaning of the term. Alexander 007 08:59, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Sound changes in loans
I'll get back to the dispute over the title, which is not a big deal, but should be standard for all Wiki articles of this type. Back to the article's text itself, the sound-change patterns on loanwords entering Bulgarian should be detailed. Alexander 007 03:47, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Turkish
I thought the Bulgarian word for kidney was of Turkish origin (böbrek). --AimLook 15:50, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Old History
The old history of this page from before the 2019 page move can be found at Talk:Bulgarian vocabulary/Old history — Wug·a·po·des​ 08:26, 25 January 2020 (UTC)