The guidelines at https://en.numista.com/help/banknote-name-147.html about using the language of the banknote are quite old and are not aligned with the general guidelines and the guidelines for coins.
Using the local language in the title was needed before we had a way to have the denomination (and ruler) in the local language in order to allow search with either the English spelling or the local spelling.
Now that the denomination field supports both the English name and the local name, we should update the guidelines for the title of banknotes and use only English there.
Now that the denomination field supports both the English name and the local name, we should update the guidelines for the title of banknotes and use only English there.
Ok. Is this a directive to change all the titles to English?
Now that the denomination field supports both the English name and the local name, we should update the guidelines for the title of banknotes and use only English there.
Ok. Is this a directive to change all the titles to English?
Let's hope not. Things are bad enough as it is. How any one can think Zloty is acceptable anywhere is beyond me. Why would we want to ban accents and modified letters from titles? If we have the “English” name in the denomination field alongside the real name, that's surely enough? Let the titles show the real names to maximize both accuracy and accessibility.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
Now that the denomination field supports both the English name and the local name, we should update the guidelines for the title of banknotes and use only English there.
Guidelines were updated, and indeed we should use english spelling in titles :-)
Now that the denomination field supports both the English name and the local name, we should update the guidelines for the title of banknotes and use only English there.
Guidelines were updated, and indeed we should use english spelling in titles :-)
Why? What good does it do?
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
Now that the denomination field supports both the English name and the local name, we should update the guidelines for the title of banknotes and use only English there.
Guidelines were updated, and indeed we should use english spelling in titles :-)
Why? What good does it do?
Seriously, we have to redo the entire conversation again?
Using english in titles in the only way to ensure consistency in the catalogue, especcially in all times and places where rulers and denominations can have different modern spelling due to national history starting 19th century.
Me and @Jarcek already gave you many extensive rationales about this topic, backed with precise examples, in several other threads. I wont do this work again sorry :-)
Seriously, we have to redo the entire conversation again?
Using english in titles in the only way to ensure consistency in the catalogue, especcially in all times and places where rulers and denominations can have different modern spelling due to national history starting 19th century.
Me and @Jarcek already gave you many extensive rationales about this topic, backed with precise examples, in several other threads. I wont do this work again sorry :-)
Yes, we do, because you still haven't understood the damage the policy will do.
Your argument boils down to consistency? So does mine. Consistency with reality. This policy cannot be implemented without create huge discrepancies across the catalogue, with different ideas about what the “English” name for something is. If the spelling of a name has changed since a coin or note was issued, that's something for the comments. A catalogue must record the details of the actual piece.
A lot of people are going to be shocked by the effects of this policy, so you really do need to try and explain why you are demanding this change. In particular, you are going to have to convince a lot of referees to spend many hours changing correct titles to “English” ones. You will also have to spend many hours explaining to ordinary members why certain pages have been "vandalized" when they were previously correct.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
I have read and refuted all the examples you have raised. When I do, you ignore me and then claim, as here, to have provided examples that I've ignored. Your link goes nowhere, by the way. As to the German names, I still see Pfenning, Thaler, etc., so no anglicization there (yet). Are you referring to the personal names? These are, of course, ridiculous and seriously degrade Numista's credibility, but you did not implement a wholesale change there, since many had been "English" to begin with. What will cause a furore is anglicizing every title, as members try to work out what the “English” name is for hundreds of different denominations whose real names they already know.
One point you've avoided is how to determine the “English” name. In this particular example, you apparently want Zloty, which is neither Polish nor English. The Polish is Złoty, the English translation is Golden. How can we describe Zloty? The Polish name with the stroke removed from the “l”? Is this what you actually want the guidelines to mean:
Use the real singular name with all non-standard English letters replaced and then pluralize with an “s”.
If it is, at least put that out for discussion.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
My point is consistency. Yes for Zloty my understanding is that a standard english form would be Zloty. It can be something else maybe, but I dont consider Złotych an english form.
I think our objective is not to let Numista become a mosaic of national spellings, based on modern national languages and national feeling.
- robot can help, no human have to do it all manually
To what extent would Mr robot be of help. Doing it manually would be a long task, I think.
We can apply in one click through SQL queries any recurring change of characters' string in titles. It means we have only one manual task per string (for instance “5 Złotych” is a string), instead of one manual task per entry. Its why such recurring fix should be reported to admins, instead of applied manually :-)
You could do it with Finland easily – nice regular grammar :) 1. Change ‘Markkaa’ to ‘Marks’ – This will change the bulk of the titles for Finnish banknote plurals. 2. For singular change ‘Markka’ to ‘Mark’.
Poland would require some manual changes, as the endings vary according to the number. However, changing ‘Złotych’ to ‘Zlotys’ would work for the bulk of the plural entries. Similarly, changing ‘Złoty’ to ‘Zloty’ will catch all the singular titles.
Shall we do this now? Or should I open a special thread for Poland, and another for Finland? Once the changes are made, I could check through all the entries for anomalies and fix them, as well as changing the irregular plurals to the English form.
You could do it with Finland easily – nice regular grammar :) 1. Change ‘Markkaa’ to ‘Marks’ – This will change the bulk of the titles for Finnish banknote plurals. 2. For singular change ‘Markka’ to ‘Mark’.
Poland would require some manual changes, as the endings vary according to the number. However, changing ‘Złotych’ to ‘Zlotys’ would work for the bulk of the plural entries. Similarly, changing ‘Złoty’ to ‘Zloty’ will catch all the singular titles.
Shall we do this now? Or should I open a special thread for Poland, and another for Finland? Once the changes are made, I could check through all the entries for anomalies and fix them, as well as changing the irregular plurals to the English form.
All done.
Please create a new thread or write me in DM if you spot other needed recurring changes :-)
Status changed to Done(Compendium, 4 2月 2024, 11:43)
My point is consistency. Yes for Zloty my understanding is that a standard english form would be Zloty. It can be something else maybe, but I dont consider Złotych an english form.
I think our objective is not to let Numista become a mosaic of national spellings, based on modern national languages and national feeling.
What’s the problem you're trying to solve here? What is it you're trying to be consistent with? The only thing should be the coins and notes. Are you doing this solely to stop people replacing the real names with modern local spellings, by instead replacing everything with imaginary “English” names? That really is an over reaction.
As to Numista being a linguistic mosaic, that's exactly what it should be, because the real world is a linguistic mosaic. You aren't a monoglot, so why treat other collectors as if they are incapable to using terms from other languages? All the changes rushed through here will, hopefully, be as easy to reverse as they were to implement once accuracy becomes the standard we apply in Numista.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
You could do it with Finland easily – nice regular grammar :) 1. Change ‘Markkaa’ to ‘Marks’ – This will change the bulk of the titles for Finnish banknote plurals. 2. For singular change ‘Markka’ to ‘Mark’.
Poland would require some manual changes, as the endings vary according to the number. However, changing ‘Złotych’ to ‘Zlotys’ would work for the bulk of the plural entries. Similarly, changing ‘Złoty’ to ‘Zloty’ will catch all the singular titles.
Shall we do this now? Or should I open a special thread for Poland, and another for Finland? Once the changes are made, I could check through all the entries for anomalies and fix them, as well as changing the irregular plurals to the English form.
All done.
Please create a new thread or write me in DM if you spot other needed recurring changes :-)
Nicely done, just checked through all the listings, and it all looks good. A quick look inside some of the pages shows the Finnish versio also.
I'm reminded of a child writing bringed instead of brought. The gross inconsistencies that have now been introduced show how poorly thought through this decision is. Oh for an undo button.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
I'm reminded of a child writing bringed instead of brought. The gross inconsistencies that have now been introduced show how poorly thought through this decision is. Oh for an undo button.
Please make sure to share your nice and constructive thoughts with Mint of Poland directly
If only you stopped to think about it, you'd understand just how relevant and constructive my comment is. You've fallen into the same trap as the Polish Mint, using a bad translator and coming up with words that don't exist.
The purpose of a catalogue is to record, not translate. Once you take that fundamental principle on board, we can recover the situation.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
If only you stopped to think about it, you'd understand just how relevant and constructive my comment is. You've fallen into the same trap as the Polish Mint, using a bad translator and coming up with words that don't exist.
Yes, I can see that in your mind everyone is soooo wrong… except you! A true preacher :-)
The purpose of a catalogue is to record, not translate. Once you take that fundamental principle on board, we can recover the situation.
No, the goal of a catalogue is to make sense of what it records. All the records are here in dedicated fields (lettering, unabridged legend, etc), and the title is obviously written in the language of the website.
[Edit] i saw your answer below, but have no wish to go again in an endless debate with you so, if you ever see this, my last advice would be: create your own catalogue, if guidelines of this one are such non sense.
If only you stopped to think about it, you'd understand just how relevant and constructive my comment is. You've fallen into the same trap as the Polish Mint, using a bad translator and coming up with words that don't exist.
Yes, I can see that in your mind everyone is soooo wrong… except you! A true preacher :-)
No, just you. You are the one bringing a quasi-religious aspect to Numista with your linguistic ideology, not me.
The purpose of a catalogue is to record, not translate. Once you take that fundamental principle on board, we can recover the situation.
No, the goal of a catalogue is to make sense of what it records. All the records are here in dedicated fields (lettering, unabridged legend, etc), and the title is obviously written in the language of the website.
Finally, we have the real problem. You don't know what acatalogue is. From the OED:
Now usually distinguished from a mere list or enumeration, by systematic or methodical arrangement, alphabetical or other order, and often by the addition of brief particulars, descriptive, or aiding identification, indicative of locality, position, date, price, or the like.
"Making sense" is the job of a historian. However, a historian cannot do their job if we don't do ours properly, that is accurately record what is there. We are free to choose how we arrange the data (within reason) but not to alter it in the way you are doing. The title is the first thing seen by a visitor to the site and it is therefore the most important element for us to get right. Having the real name hidden away somewhere isn't enough. Furthermore, your titles in no way aid identification since they use entirely imaginary words that appear nowhere on the pieces being catalogued.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
So, i have a question, you have changed Złotych to Zlotys and what about the rest ? What about change swedish Korona, norwegian krone, danish kroner and rename to Crown ?
…the Polish Mint, using a bad translator and coming up with words that don't exist.
Which words are those?
It reads ok to me - a very slight touch of Polish grammar around the edges perhaps. And ‘August’ for ‘Augustus’ might be considered a bit weak.
"Zlotys" is the problem. We all know that word has never appeared on a single coin or note. It just makes that site and ours look infantile. Yes, the real name appears elsewhere but the title is the most important field, since it's the first one we see. That's why getting it right is so important.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
My thought would be that if an arm of the Polish state uses the term ‘Zloty’ (plural Zlotys) to spell its unit of currency in English, then it is ok for others to use it.
So this is strange: złoty is translated (also in plural), grosz kept in polish language… That's true what doc_man wrote: it could be better to keep the original name in title, similar as it's written on the coins and banknotes.
My thought would be that if an arm of the Polish state uses the term ‘Zloty’ (plural Zlotys) to spell its unit of currency in English, then it is ok for others to use it.
Whereas my thought is that if we know the correct form, we should use it. There's no imperative for us to use any “English” form at all, just a unjustified demand from the adminstrators.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
Nowhere in the guidelines we say title should copy characters used on coins and banknotes.
By the way, it would lead to have arabic, chinese, cyrillic etc characters in titles.
We cannot make as if anything written in latin script is english language.
The guidelines need to be rewritten to ensure that nothing fictitious is used. When the denomination is written in the Latin script, there's simply no excuse for writing anything else.
When other scripts are used, we already transliterate when no “convenient” “English” name exists. That principle should be adopted as the standard.
I'm not really sure what you mean in your third point but you seem to be clinging to the idea that every name has to be turned into English. Once you drop that idea and adopt the correct concept of a catalogue, this problem vanishes.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
Nowhere in the guidelines we say title should copy characters used on coins and banknotes.
By the way, it would lead to have arabic, chinese, cyrillic etc characters in titles.
We cannot make as if anything written in latin script is english language.
The guidelines need to be rewritten to ensure that nothing fictitious is used. When the denomination is written in the Latin script, there's simply no excuse for writing anything else.
When other scripts are used, we already transliterate when no “convenient” “English” name exists. That principle should be adopted as the standard.
I'm not really sure what you mean in your third point but you seem to be clinging to the idea that every name has to be turned into English. Once you drop that idea and adopt the correct concept of a catalogue, this problem vanishes.
Yes, guidelines state that titles are to be written in english language; I'm pretty sure everyone here already understood your disagreement about the guidelines ^^
Repeating it over and over is your right, but mine is to go answer other requests in other threads. Wish you good night! :-)
We don't add anything “fictious” to the catalogue, only words that are present in official documents or recognized English dictionaries. We aim at producing a catalogue in English language (using English words!) while also showing the words as written in the banknote (that's the very purpose of the lettering field) and showing the name of the denomination and the ruler in the language of the country of the banknote.
We don't add anything “fictious” to the catalogue, only words that are present in official documents or recognized English dictionaries. We aim at producing a catalogue in English language (using English words!) while also showing the words as written in the banknote (that's the very purpose of the lettering field) and showing the name of the denomination and the ruler in the language of the country of the banknote.
This is the problem. A catalogue doesn't change the information it's recording. By insisting on fictitious “English” names like zlotys and groszys, you give the clear impression that you don't care about what you're cataloguing. If the terms were real, they would appear on the currency. Remember, that's what we're cataloguing. The fact that you can find these terms on a badly translated website doesn't justify using them. You can find all sorts of rubbish online, some of it on seemingly respectable websites. A coin and banknote catalogue must stick to cataloguing coins and banknotes. The lettering field isn't visible until you view the individual piece, whereas the title is there straight away and, in these cases, gives entirely the wrong impression.
You've created a very good website here. Let us help you create an accurate and accessible catalogue within it.
Former Numista referee for banknotes from Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales and Saint Helena.
We don't add anything “fictious” to the catalogue, only words that are present in official documents or recognized English dictionaries. We aim at producing a catalogue in English language (using English words!) while also showing the words as written in the banknote (that's the very purpose of the lettering field) and showing the name of the denomination and the ruler in the language of the country of the banknote.
Xavier, just a quick question what in english will be livre tournois ? Tourspound? will you change that currency too ? Sol will be solidus ? denier will you change to penny ?
Regarding the Mint of Poland, I forgot to mention that this is now private mint (sold by state partially in 1994, fully in 2005) and the issuer of polish coins is the Polish National Bank (NBP), not the Mint which only producencoins. NBP use in English the single form without Polish letters:
I would say zloty/grosz is ok as nobody outside Poland have the keaboard with our letters. It's obvious.
Zlotys looks a little wired, groszys is, as I already wrote, a monster (hope that this will never be translated like this).
Anyway, the most important to me is to be able to search by with local name. All other is only a visuality.
Xavier, just a quick question what in english will be livre tournois ? Tourspound? will you change that currency too ? Sol will be solidus ? denier will you change to penny ?
Oh no, you already did this - you created the fictional plural form based on Polish plural form - who did this translations?
I wrote that this is visuality only but my eyes starts to cry when look at this… the most wired is 1 groszy (polish plural form with -y used for one piece). Please keep only grosz / zloty (don't add -y or -ys to grosz and don't add the -s to the zloty). As indicated on the official website of National Bank which is the only issuer of coins in Poland:
In general: 1 grosz, when at the end is 0, 1, 5, 6, 7, 8 or 9 we added “y” to the singular form and when at the end is 2, 3, 4 we added “e” (exeption is 12,13,14 with “y”).
for złoty, this is the similar but note, that y at the end is a part of the singular form (for grosz was not) and the adding is “e” or “ch” (we have many different options to create the plural, not 2 or 3 like in English):
1 złoty,
2, 3, 4 złote
5, 6, … 21 złotych
22, 23, 24 złote…
Using polish single version without local letters “zloty” / "grosz" and adding english -s / -es for plural is obviously better than what we have now. I'm not specialist of English language, so to be honest, I don't know how the English manage with foreginers words in plural.
In general: 1 grosz, when at the end is 0, 1, 5, 6, 7, 8 or 9 we added “y” to the singular form and when at the end is 2, 3, 4 we added “e” (exeption is 12,13,14 with “y”).
for złoty, this is the similar but note, that y at the end is a part of the singular form (for grosz was not) and the adding is “e” or “ch” (we have many different options to create the plural, not 2 or 3 like in English):
1 złoty,
2, 3, 4 złote
5, 6, … 21 złotych
22, 23, 24 złote…
Using polish single version without local letters “zloty” / "grosz" and adding english -s / -es for plural is obviously better than what we have now. I'm not specialist of English language, so to be honest, I don't know how the English manage with foreginers words in plural.
You dont need to explain this to me as for me this is obvious but for people who dont speak polish its mind blowing. We should give them something that they can understand so for me Złoty and Grosz, Grosze will be good, for me Zlotys sound ridiculous and about Groszys - well, will not leave a comment :D
It's totally normal english and french spelling for foreign currencies sound awful to people who can speak the native language. We can't expect them to be happy about it, as they use Numista in English not by choice, but by force. Zlotys hurt your eyes the same way Złotych hurt my eyes when used in a title mixing english/french and local languages; and it's perfectly normal.
Maybe I'm wrong but I feel Polish people or any other nationality don't really care about how their national currency is spelled in english or french websites; issue here is not “what is good english?" obviously, it is “I would love a Numista in every language of the world, or at least in languages that I speak”, and as it does not exist, “I'll use the English Numista and try to bend its rules to make it look like acceptable for both foreign and native speakers”.
I don't think it's a good solution to look for middle grounds case by case, for every denomination based on very inconsistent existence of terms in dictionaries as of today; dictionaries were not invented to say what's "authorized", they exist to give definitions to people about words lexicographers see in the real world. In a nutshell: as soon as groszys will be more used (we find already a good amount of occurences on Internet), it's just a question of time before we find it in dictionaries, not because it's “right”, but because it simply “is”. Same for every spelling evolutions and new word introductions and new meaning of words which enter dictionaries every year.
As always, it's the root issue we need to adress, and not some corollar consequences of the issue; if we want Numista to be used worldwide by users not familiar with English or French language, we could plan for a massive translation in dozens of languages (translation would include any field like title and description, not just the interface wordings like we do currently for spanish and german). AI could probably help here.
But we cannot chose a solution not satisfying anyone (english or french speakers nor native speakers); there has to be an S for plural in french language for instance, any other way won't ever sound natural to a french native speaker. And, as Groszs is simply not pronounceable, and because in the native polish language I believe the word is statisticcally very often used in plural, Groszys seems the natural linguistic solution for an introduction in french lexicon.
I had the luck to visit 2 times Poland in my life, and I always talked about one groszy being one groszy, not one grosz; it's just not possibly french to have different plural forms depending on number of items, even if while reading the coin I clearly see it's not polish way, and that's fine.
I have a knowledge of both English and Polish, having lived in both countries. Polish grammar is a lot of fun at times – it is actually not dissimilar to Irish grammar.
doc_man explains it well. That said, in English, for plural s to be easily pronouncable, it is necessary sometimes to add a vowel to a consonant-ending word, generally letter e, before adding the s. I would say that Grosz is such a word. While 'sz' is a pronouncable particle in Polish, it isn't in English, so an e would need to be added to pluralise Grosz in English. Thus, Grosz - singular, Grosz + e + s = Groszes – plural.
If we want to be historical about it, the spelling of Grosz would have been altered by an English speaking conqueror, to phonetic spelling, giving 'Grosh' and 'Groshes' – note, I do not recommend this in this instance.
Maybe I'm wrong but I feel Polish people or any other nationality don't really care about how their national currency is spelled in english or french websites; issue here is not “what is good english?" obviously, it is “I would love a Numista in every language of the world, or at least in languages that I speak”, and as it does not exist, “I'll use the English Numista and try to bend its rules to make it look like acceptable for both foreign and native speakers”.
As for Zlotys well to be honest i think the best solution is just to use name Zloty no matter- if this is 1,2,5, 200, 1000 - it will be looking visual good by both native and foreigner. Zlotys looks very comic for polish people. Not sure how to say it politely, but Zlotys sounds like not very smart decision and i bet that every Pole u ask about this will agree with me. ( correct me if my wrong)
Maybe I'm wrong but I feel Polish people or any other nationality don't really care about how their national currency is spelled in english or french websites; issue here is not “what is good english?" obviously, it is “I would love a Numista in every language of the world, or at least in languages that I speak”, and as it does not exist, “I'll use the English Numista and try to bend its rules to make it look like acceptable for both foreign and native speakers”. - as you can see in this conversation, there are people who care.
I don't think it's a good solution to look for middle grounds case by case, for every denomination based on very inconsistent existence of terms in dictionaries as of today; dictionaries were not invented to say what's "authorized", they exist to give definitions to people about words lexicographers see in the real world. In a nutshell: as soon as groszys will be more used (we find already a good amount of occurences on Internet), it's just a question of time before we find it in dictionaries, not because it's “right”, but because it simply “is”. Same for every spelling evolutions and new word introductions and new meaning of words which enter dictionaries every year. - Xavier send the link from dictionary he is the Boss, so please use this dictionary. Yes i know what you want to say. A lie that is repeated 1000 times become true. Question is if you want to copy lie or provide quality data.
That is why i recommend to use the dictionary that Xavier provided with little change Zlotys to Zloty. Grosz and more then 2 Grosze Groszys is wrong. If you want to change do it right and not copy a lies.
Xavier is from France, so I prepared the example how it looks "groszys" in French version with centime for comparition:
Of course, French and English for of plural is similar in this case, so for locals this looks much better 5 centimes than 5 groszes
My recommendation: Keep Zloty / grosz for all denominations, as listed by NBP on the list of Polish coins - I provided link previously.
I would say “groszes” are rather from ponglish (mix of polish and english used be people who know a little both and don't know perfetly any of them) ;-)
My recommendation: Keep Zloty / grosz for all denominations, as listed by NBP on the list of Polish coins - I provided link previously.
I would say “groszes” are rather from ponglish (mix of polish and english used be people who know a little both and don't know perfetly any of them) ;-)
Have a nice day!
I would agree totally with this – if a state institution is already using a particular form which is not incorrect, then that ought to be used [I didn't follow the link there]. There are many instances of English language plurals which do not add ‘s’. Not adding ‘s’ to Zloty and Grosz is similar to Euro and Cent when spelt in English.
The same form for singular and plural would be the best compromise for most currencies. You also don't always use 2 dollars or 2 pounds but 2 dollar and 2 pound.
Like a 2 dollar bill or a 2 pound coin.
This would also get rid of the god awful marks in the German section.
The same form for singular and plural would be the best compromise for most currencies. You also don't always use 2 dollars or 2 pounds but 2 dollar and 2 pound.
Like a 2 dollar bill or a 2 pound coin.
This would also get rid of the god awful marks in the German section.
Just my two cent without an s. 🫡
Thank you for showing we can still appreciate humor during a difficult discussion.
In the examples “2 dollar bill or 2 pound coin” dollar and poound are used as adjectives, not nouns (not quite splitting hair … 😉).
I see this as more of working the problem than as a difficult discussion. We will work through the suggestions, and Numista Team will decide on which one to adopt.
And, it's great that it can be done with a script and doesn't need to be carried out manually.
I should make mention of Polish notgeld ,in the banknote section, which has yet to have its English titles implemented.
As wrote above if you change tp Zloty and Grosz . Im good with this and this is the best solution.
Regrads,
Damian
OK but with which plural form? As Tdziemia explained above, in the title we don't use denomination as adjectives, but as nouns, which need a plural form in both English and French languages.
We can keep Groszys in french and change english plural (because indeed, as a french locutor I may have under evaluated the weirdness to use a Y as transition letter, even if it's what Mint of Poland used on their website) to Groszes for instance (Groszes being impossible in french due to pronciation)
As wrote above if you change tp Zloty and Grosz . Im good with this and this is the best solution.
Regrads,
Damian
OK but with which plural form? As Tdziemia explained above, in the title we don't use denomination as adjectives, but as nouns, which need a plural form in both English and French languages.
We can keep Groszys in french and change english plural (because indeed, as a french locutor I may have under evaluated the weirdness to use a Y as transition letter, even if it's what Mint of Poland used on their website) to Groszes for instance (Groszes being impossible in french due to pronciation)
Well i know someone who speak polish and french perfectly and what i can recommend for french side is Zloty(Zloti) and Groszy ( Gro chy)
As wrote above if you change tp Zloty and Grosz . Im good with this and this is the best solution.
Regrads,
Damian
OK but with which plural form? As Tdziemia explained above, in the title we don't use denomination as adjectives, but as nouns, which need a plural form in both English and French languages.
We can keep Groszys in french and change english plural (because indeed, as a french locutor I may have under evaluated the weirdness to use a Y as transition letter, even if it's what Mint of Poland used on their website) to Groszes for instance (Groszes being impossible in french due to pronciation)
Well i know someone who speak polish and french perfectly and what i can recommend for french side is Zloty(Zloti) and Groszy ( Gro chy)
polish sz( fonetic szy) is french ch
Yes, in french it is currently Zloty/Zlotys and Groszy/Groszys, and I think it's fine.
The question is which plural we should use for English as Groszys seems debatable. Groszes?
Seems like there should be a dance happening here. A dance between Numista and the collector. But a dance that also involves the standard use and method of the country in question.
If someone was building a catalog of US stuff for example, a relationship with the American Numismatic Association, as well as educated collectors of United States numismatics, would be important for an authentic catalog that would be more likely to be used by collecters of and within the country in question.
So while Numista is a world wide database…shouldnt there be a mechanism that allows Polish coins to be “polish” the way the Polish would write and collect it? It seems a big work if the Polish themselves do not use numista because it is not written or translated as well as their own local references.
When I volunteered with Krause, there was always a dance between the catalog and the collector. I hope that the music does not become unrecognizable to the listener…
I have an extenseive collection of polish coins. I struggle with all the spellings, but I let the Polish names that Polish people use be the standard. So I am always looking things up, but I somewhat enjoy getting elbows deep into the research process…
I think in small ways I can appreciate the catalog administrators…but I also can appreciate Ceh's position. He did phenominal work in the Irish listings of banknotes. I hope that he is not just being dismissed out of hand. He has a heart for numista, and he makes good points. I have never heard specifically these Polish plurals used in english. They are very odd, and I suspect not user friendly for casual visitors to numista, and unecessary for more than casual users of the Polish listings for numista.
It reminds me how much fun the “gunayas” of Egypt and the Pingin? of Ireland were all those years ago.
I hope we can remember that we are all of a mind about the success of Numista…I like all who are working for that goal…
Library Media Specialist, columnist, collector, and gardener...
As wrote above if you change tp Zloty and Grosz . Im good with this and this is the best solution.
Regrads,
Damian
OK but with which plural form? As Tdziemia explained above, in the title we don't use denomination as adjectives, but as nouns, which need a plural form in both English and French languages.
We can keep Groszys in french and change english plural (because indeed, as a french locutor I may have under evaluated the weirdness to use a Y as transition letter, even if it's what Mint of Poland used on their website) to Groszes for instance (Groszes being impossible in french due to pronciation)
Well i know someone who speak polish and french perfectly and what i can recommend for french side is Zloty(Zloti) and Groszy ( Gro chy)
polish sz( fonetic szy) is french ch
Yes, in french it is currently Zloty/Zlotys and Groszy/Groszys, and I think it's fine.
The question is which plural we should use for English as Groszys seems debatable. Groszes?
The question is which plural we should use for English as Groszys seems debatable. Groszes?
This might help.
In English, “If a singular noun ends in –y and the letter before the –y is a consonant, you usually change the ending to –ies to make the noun plural.” https://www.grammarly.com/blog/plural-nouns/
Seems like there should be a dance happening here. A dance between Numista and the collector. But a dance that also involves the standard use and method of the country in question.
If someone was building a catalog of US stuff for example, a relationship with the American Numismatic Association, as well as educated collectors of United States numismatics, would be important for an authentic catalog that would be more likely to be used by collecters of and within the country in question.
So while Numista is a world wide database…shouldnt there be a mechanism that allows Polish coins to be “polish” the way the Polish would write and collect it? It seems a big work if the Polish themselves do not use numista because it is not written or translated as well as their own local references.
When I volunteered with Krause, there was always a dance between the catalog and the collector. I hope that the music does not become unrecognizable to the listener…
I have an extenseive collection of polish coins. I struggle with all the spellings, but I let the Polish names that Polish people use be the standard. So I am always looking things up, but I somewhat enjoy getting elbows deep into the research process…
I think in small ways I can appreciate the catalog administrators…but I also can appreciate Ceh's position. He did phenominal work in the Irish listings of banknotes. I hope that he is not just being dismissed out of hand. He has a heart for numista, and he makes good points. I have never heard specifically these Polish plurals used in english. They are very odd, and I suspect not user friendly for casual visitors to numista, and unecessary for more than casual users of the Polish listings for numista.
It reminds me how much fun the “gunayas” of Egypt and the Pingin? of Ireland were all those years ago.
I hope we can remember that we are all of a mind about the success of Numista…I like all who are working for that goal…
Im on Numista more then decade, i saw many things. I saw when people came and go. I saw when numista grow and i can see clearly when dont grow. The last polish coin added to the catalog was if good remember when i was a referee - last year - many coins were released since that time and are not in the catalog. What were debating is how to properly write something that already was made properly. Some words have no equivalents in another language. ie :
Zadufany (adj.) - Overly self-assured, arrogant
This Polish word describes a person who is arrogant, proud, and often excessively self-confident. There isn't a single word in many languages that precisely captures this nuance.
Zgrzytanie zębami (n.) - Teeth-gritting
A Polish phrase describing the sound of teeth grinding together, often due to stress or cold. Many languages lack a single word for this phenomenon.
Szmuglowanie się (v.) - Sneaking, slipping through
This Polish word denotes the action of passing through a place unnoticed, often with a clever maneuver. There isn't a straightforward equivalent in many other languages.
Kombinować (v.) - To scheme, to figure out, to finagle
While similar expressions exist, "kombinować" in Polish has a specific connotation of acting in a sometimes creative but often dishonest or tricky manner.
Zaloty (n.) - Courtship, flirtation
This Polish word refers to the subtle expression of romantic feelings or flirtatious behavior, often in the early stages of a romance. There isn't a direct equivalent in many languages.
Cringe (v.)
Expresses a feeling of embarrassment or discomfort in response to someone's behavior or a situation. There isn't a single Polish word that precisely captures this emotion.
Awkward (adj.)
Describes a situation or behavior that is uncomfortable, clumsy, or makes people feel uneasy. There isn't a single Polish word that fully encompasses the range of meanings of "awkward."
Hustle (v., n.)
Signifies hard work, enthusiasm for achieving goals, often associated with entrepreneurship. While it can be described, there's no single Polish word that precisely conveys the same meaning.
Spoiler (n.)
Information or plot detail revealed prematurely, often pertaining to a movie, book, or TV show. There isn't a Polish equivalent with the same level of precision.
Small talk (n.)
Casual conversation on trivial topics, intended to initiate social contact. While it can be described in Polish, there isn't a single word that is as specific as "small talk."
Mindset (n.)
A way of thinking or an attitude towards life. Although it can be expressed, there isn't a single Polish word that precisely captures this concept.
Fallback (n.)
An alternative plan or option to be used in case something doesn't go as planned. While it can be described in Polish, there isn't a single, unambiguous word to convey this concept.
As Tdziemia explained above, in the title we don't use denomination as adjectives, but as nouns, which need a plural form in both English and French languages.
As Tdziemia explained above, in the title we don't use denomination as adjectives, but as nouns, which need a plural form in both English and French languages.
As Tdziemia explained above, in the title we don't use denomination as adjectives, but as nouns, which need a plural form in both English and French languages.
As Tdziemia explained above, in the title we don't use denomination as adjectives, but as nouns, which need a plural form in both English and French languages.
Pursuant to Article 31-33 of the Act of 29 August 1997 on Narodowy Bank Polski, banknotes and coins denominated in złoty and grosz issued by Narodowy Bank Polski are legal tender on the territory of the Republic of Poland. The design and nominal value of banknotes, the design, nominal values, the alloy, finesse and weight of coins, as well as their volume of issue and dates for putting them into circulation are determined by the Governor of NBP by means of an ordinance.
Narodowy Bank Polski puts into circulation coins of nine denominations:
1 grosz
2 grosz
5 grosz
10 grosz
20 grosz
50 grosz
1 złoty
2 złoty
5 złoty
On 1 January 1995, pursuant to the ordinance of the Governor of NBP, coins of nine denominations were put into circulation: 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 50 grosz, and 1, 2 and 5 złoty.
In 2017, Narodowy Bank Polski introduced into general circulation coins with the denominations of 1 grosz, 2 grosz and 5 grosz (1 January 2017), 10 grosz (15 February 2017), 20 grosz and 50 grosz (23 January 2017), and 1 złoty (20 February 2017) with the same image of the obverse as in 1 grosz, 2 grosz and 5 grosz coins put into circulation in 2014.
On 2 January 2020, Narodowy Bank Polski put into circulation 10 grosz, 20 grosz, 50 grosz and 1 złoty coins made from copper and nickel-plated steel. The image, edge, diameter and weight of the coins did not change.
Narodowy Bank Polski issues circulation banknotes with the nominal values of:
As Tdziemia explained above, in the title we don't use denomination as adjectives, but as nouns, which need a plural form in both English and French languages.
As I explained earlier, not all plurals in English require an ‘s’ marker.
Sheep
The English language plural for Euro is Euro, and for Euro Cent is Euro Cent – may I ask what are these plurals in French?
When you have a number like 9 followed by a noun like apple then the number is an adjective. So wouldn't zloty and grosz be nouns? Not every noun in English is plural spelled with s or es…
Library Media Specialist, columnist, collector, and gardener...
As an English teacher, and a librarian, I would question the reliability of a document sourced in one language to justify the use of a word in another language.
This boggles the mind.
Library Media Specialist, columnist, collector, and gardener...
Here they use them as adjectives, not nouns. We want nouns in titles, and nouns take plural form
They are not being used as ajdectives in the example.
Taking 50 grosz from the example cited,
‘grosz’ here is filling the same function as ‘pence’ or ‘pennies’ does in the sentence “50 pence” [The UK coin], which is a plural of penny.
I think that ‘Grosz’ should be used as both the singular and the plural for the Polish currency because the Polish state uses it as such.
Polish state seems less allergic to Zlotys than you folks ^^
Polish state give theirs opinion - check above. If you you are ok with Zlotys and you are sure it should be Zlotys, put Zlotys. Its a good decision then. Smart one:) Numista will have quality data :)
