Wikidata:Property proposal/adjective of

adjective of

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Lexemes

   Not done

Description	item that this sense is an adjective of
Represents	adjective (Q34698)
Data type	Item
Example 1	invalid ID (L30901#S1) → white (Q23444)
Example 2	invalid ID (L3272#S1) → white (Q23444)
Example 3	invalid ID (L10686#S1) → gratitude (Q2728730)
Example 4	invalid ID (L12256#S1) → competence (Q2015382)
See also	demonym of (P6271)

Motivation

Most items represent nouns. It would be nice to have a way to link the senses of the adjectives with the corresponding item. Micru (talk) 10:28, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Discussion

•  Comment others argue that there should be concepts (items) for adjectives and then senses linked by item for this sense (P5137) KaMan (talk) 10:33, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
• @Micru, KaMan: This might be a good place to have a more detailed discussion of how best to model this. Is the concept of "adjective" sufficiently language-neutral that it could work at the general concept level? Options I see are:
  1. This proposal: each language with a lexeme sense for white as an adjective points to white (Q23444)
  2. Adjective items: each sense uses item for this sense (P5137) to point to a new adjectival white item, which in turn should have some relation to white (Q23444)
  3. Confine with lexeme namespace: in a given language, lexeme sense for white has a relation like this to the noun sense for white (but many adjectives do not fit this pattern)
• I think actually any of these models could work - and each one needs at least 1 new property to fully describe the relations. What are the advantages/disadvantages of the different approaches? ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:22, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

  @ArthurPSmith: I admit the more I think about it, the less I know what's the best way to model this. In Polish I often already have connection between adjective and noun through combines lexemes (P5238) property (like in antylopi (L5735)) but it not considers senses. Somehow I feel uncomfortable with adjectival items in fear that we could end with copy of lexeme namespace in items. Hmm, I like the idea of keeping it in lexeme namespace between senses. KaMan (talk) 17:53, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

@ArthurPSmith, KaMan: My view about this is pragmatic and based on the "Principle of least effort". It seems too much effort to create adjective items at this stage where there are not that many lexemes in different languages, so for now I would choose #1. When the number of lexemes is around millions in different languages I would consider moving to #2. The idea of #3 is interesting, however it doesn't connect well several languages, so I don't prefer this one.--Micru (talk) 23:28, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

•  Comment Not all languages use adjectives to describe things like "white". Stative verbs are also widespread around the world. Would we have to have a separate property "stative verb of" or even an entirely separate set of items to describe "being white"? This needs more thought. —Rua (mew) 23:48, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
•  Oppose I understand the idea but don't see the added value compare to item for this sense (P5137) combined with the indicated lexical category (which is easy to infer). And if we create "adjective of", we would need the same for all lexical categories "noun of", "verb of", "adverb of", "preposition of", "affix of", and so on (we have 95 lexical categories right now), this would be a nightmare to use and query. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 11:33, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
  • @VIGNERON: I see your point, and that would keep things simpler. We already have multiple lexeme senses in the same language and lexical category pointing to the same item via item for this sense (P5137) (i.e. synonyms); for translation purposes you would just need to filter on the lexical category to find matches. Does it seem sufficiently clear that grateful, thankful etc. point to the same Wikidata item as gratitude, thank, thankfulness, etc.?
•  Support if it furthers productivity in lexeme namespace.--- Jura 12:01, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
•  Comment @ArthurPSmith, KaMan: I think it's about time that items for adjectives and verbs (and also possibly adverbs) begin being created. I believe we've been working with the current Sense framework long enough to realise that this is a necessary next step. I think that option #2 makes the most sense. Liamjamesperritt (talk) 10:44, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
•  Comment I've done work adding items for processes or activities like "knitting (Q6033694): forming and interlacing of loops using needles according to a prescribed manner or pattern, either by machine or by hand" (verb) <product or material produced> (noun) "knitwork (Q29048022): handmade works or material created by interlacing loops of a long or continuous piece of yarn or thread by means of needles", <practiced by> (agent noun) "knitter (Q58321742)". I am less certain about adding adjectives - the fact that a dress in a collection is "knit" (adjective) can, I think, be better described using <fabrication method>. - PKM (talk) 20:37, 11 January 2019 (UTC)