Edniwung fram 23:33, 23 Haligmonað 2020 adiht Gottistgut (motung \| forðunga) 6,356 edits ly →‎New word documentation ← Yldre adihtung		Edniwung fram 22:37, 19 Winterfylleð 2020 adiht undo Gottistgut (motung \| forðunga) 6,356 edits →‎Regarding date format: new section Niwre adihtung →
Líne 682: See [[Wæterþoðer]] for a good example of neologism documentation I've just tidied up, with [[bysen:niwuword]] at the top of the list. I think it should be put just above "fruman". Going forward, I think all articles which contain new words, should use that documentation. -- Gottistgut -- [[user:Gottistgut\|Ƿes hāl!]] 23:32, 23 Haligmonað 2020 (UTC) == Regarding date format == I can say with confidence that there are '''no''' examples in the entire Toronto corpus, of any dates being given with the month in nominative such as "10 Winterfylleð". On the other hand, there are these examples: "þæt is se forma dæg on Martio" "On þam oðrum monðe, þe we Aprilis hatað, se teoþa dæg is..." "On Iulius se þreotteoða..." These all belong to a short text on the appropriate days to bloodlet. This fully verifies the "se Xa dæg on MONTH" construction, which would be grammatical anyway, if not idiomatic. We also find these examples from Alfric: "Se eahtateoða dæg þæs monðes þe we hatað martius þone ge hatað hlyda wæs se forma dæg þyssere worulde. " "he ða mid þam tige his gast ageaf. on þam þreotteoþan dæge þises monðes." We also find many such examples in translations of certain Biblical books. And examples from other authors: "þa hine mon slog þy fiftan dæge Agustus monðes." "On þone fif and twentigoðan dæg þæs monðes byð sancte Lucian tyd." "On þone XXXan dæg þæs monðes bið þæs bisceopes gemynd sancti Felicis" (over 100 additional examples in the exact same format as the one immediately above, from the same text: the Old English Martyrology) This leads me to the conclusion that: The most succinct grammatically correct and attested ''Anglicized'' date format is: "(þy) Xan dæge Xmonðes" And that's what I'd find most desirable, but ofc "on þone X dæg Xmonðes" is also perfectly fine". Note that most examples don't have a declensional suffix for dates where the number is given in Roman numerals, but such examples do exist, and I think the suffix improves readability and speed to distinguish ordinals from cardinals. I think that addresses your question. -- Gottistgut -- [[user:Gottistgut\|Ƿes hāl!]] 22:37, 19 Winterfylleð 2020 (UTC)

Hogweard