Property talk:P5238

Documentation

• Start a query
• Current uses
• Statistics by class
• List of qualifiers
• Count

combines lexemes
lexemes combined in this lexeme

Represents	compounding (Q29445010), compound (Q245423), contraction (Q126473)
Data type	Lexeme
Example	According to this template: en:metadata -> en:meta, en:data According to statements in the property: no label (L9838) → no label (L4589) no label (L3817) no label (L9441) → no label (L1886) no label (L9426) no label (L2379) no label (L9393) → no label (L9442) no label (L9171) When possible, data should only be stored as statements
See also	derived from lexeme (P5191), word stem (P5187), object form (P5548), syntactic dependency head relationship (P9763), syntactic dependency head position (P9764), subject form (P5830)
Lists	Items with the most statements of this property Count of items by number of statements (chart) Items with the most statements Items with the fewest statements Count of items by number of sitelinks (chart) Items with the most sitelinks Items with the most sitelinks, but no link to one Wikipedia (sample: Welsh Wikipedia, cywiki) Items with the fewest sitelinks Most linked wikis Items with the most identifier properties Items with no other statements Most recently created items Items with novalue claims Items with unknown value claims Usage history (total) Usage history (main statement) Chart by item creation date Database reports/Constraint violations/P5238 Map Random list
Proposal discussion	Proposal discussion
Current uses	Total 163,223 Main statement 163,206 >99.9% of uses Qualifier 17 <0.1% of uses
Search for values

[create Create a translatable help page (preferably in English) for this property to be included here]

Allowed entity types are Wikibase lexeme (Q51885771): the property may only be used on a certain entity type (Help)

List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P5238#Entity types, hourly updated report

Qualifiers “series ordinal (P1545), object form (P5548), object sense (P5980), mode of derivation (P5886), reason for deprecated rank (P2241), reason for preferred rank (P7452), object has role (P3831), syntactic dependency head position (P9764), syntactic dependency head relationship (P9763), requires grammatical feature (P5713)”: this property should be used only with the listed qualifiers. (Help)

Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P5238#allowed qualifiers, SPARQL

Multi value: this property generally contains two or more values. (Help)

Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P5238#Multi value, SPARQL

Scope is as main value (Q54828448): the property must be used by specified way only (Help)

Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P5238#Scope, SPARQL

Utilisation pour des locutions

Voir Wikidata_talk:Lexicographical_data#d'ailleurs_à_merveille.
--- Jura 04:57, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Use for prefixes/suffixes

Please see Wikidata_talk:Lexicographical_data#Prefix/suffix.
--- Jura 04:57, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

• New proposal: Wikidata:Property proposal/combines lexemes.
  --- Jura 10:08, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Use for forms?

@Fnielsen: I hope you don't mind that I move the discussion here (Started at repülőtér (L31634)). Should this property be used for forms? I currently don't know if that is a good idea or not. --Tobias1984 (talk) 18:12, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

For som reason I thought that this property was about compound (Q245423), i.e., where there are two or more stems in a word. The German would "Kompositum" seems to indicate that, while the English word for the property might be more general. Doesn't the original discussion support the narrower interpretation Wikidata:Property proposal/compound of? Now I have seen this property being used for both words in phrases and pre- and suffixes of words. I think we are now extending the scope of the property and I think it might be better to create separate properties. — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 18:24, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

@Fnielsen: It just might get confusing when there are multiple properties based on which lexemes types are merged. And I assume it is easy to query if a compound is only nouns or a noun and a suffix for example? --20:55, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

@Tobias1984: If we take more than the stem then how many compound parts does udvalgsformand (L31872) have? It may be separated with "udvalg|s|formand" where the middle 's' is just a form of glue. Should this 's' be included in combines lexemes (P5238)? — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 16:11, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

@Fnielsen: It might be a good idea to add those glue letters. More difficult are words that drop letters when the are part of a compound or have suffixes. Not sure what to do in that case. --18:33, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

There is a proposal for dropped letters, see Wikidata:Property_proposal/Kompositionsfuge#suffix_removed_in_compound. --- Jura 18:35, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

I have now created a Danish -s- -s- (L34278) and used it, e.g., here forretningsudvalgsmedlem (L31525). I have set the -s- to the lexical category infix (Q201322), but this might very well be wrong. What should the lexical category of such a "lexeme" be? — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 12:43, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

I see it is interfix (Q1153504). — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 12:46, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Useful P5830 here?

I tried to represent accurate forms used in proverb with P5238 so I used P5830 like here: Lexeme:L733871. What do you think, it is correct? Gower (talk) 11:45, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

multiple possible options

@Reosarevok, Duesentrieb, ArthurPSmith, Okkn, VIGNERON: @Dhx1, JakobVoss, Fnielsen, Zitatesammler:

unfortunatly we can't group statements of the same property.

Verschwörungstheoretikerin (L934534) could either be a combination of

Verschwörungstheoretiker (L791471) + -in (L204276)

or

Verschwörung (L497991) + Theoretikerin (L73035)

Here is a source for both

Unfortunatly there is no way to group them:

Verschwörungstheoretiker (L791471) + Theoretikerin (L73035)

makes no sense.

Can we agree that a group should be preferred if there is more then one? –Shisma (talk) 16:34, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

@Shisma: oh that's an interresting case. And I see DWDS does the same for several other words. What does other sources say? (dictionaries but also grammars). My (wild) guess is that Verschwörungstheoretiker (L791471) + -in (L204276) make more sense as it's more universal (all feminine noun can be decomposed based on -in but only a few have a second possible cut like in this case) and it maybe indeed should be in the preferred rank. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 17:40, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

It often occours in compount nouns that are occupations (because they can have a female variant):

Landarbeiterin (L930932), Handarbeiterin (L616331), Softwareentwicklerin (L590971), Elektromechanikerin (L493510), Modedesignerin (L72931)

Unfortunatly I don't know any other dictionary that lists word components. somebody else? – Shisma (talk) 19:52, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

@Shisma: my guess (maybe wrong ?) is that most occupation are not compound (Ärztin (L21065), Lehrerin (L34168) usw) so we should follow the model that fit the most case.

Maybe in grammars (or scientific publication) and not in dictionaries? (indeed morphology is often not a strong point of dictionaries)

Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 08:08, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

@VIGNERON: I think you are right. Here's an idea on how to group them using qualifiers:

Verschwörungstheoretiker (L791471) + -in (L204276)
criterion used (P1013) considering affixes

or

Verschwörung (L497991) + Theoretikerin (L73035)
criterion used (P1013) not considering affixes

not sure about the wording though – Shisma (talk) 09:29, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

@VIGNERON: I applied this pattern in Autofahrerin. Let me know if you have a better idea – Shisma (talk) 06:45, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

I am not sure what criterion used (P1013) one should use for professortiltrædelsesforelæsning (L254507) (professortiltrædelses+forelæsning or professor+tiltrædelsesforelæsning) — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 15:14, 3 November 2023 (UTC)