Talk:-säure

RFD discussion: December 2020–February 2021

The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process (permalink).

It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.

---

-säure

just Säure in compounds. --20:01, 29 December 2020 (UTC) — This unsigned comment was added by 2003:DE:373F:4037:3C6C:85B5:850A:BEA0 (talk).

• Delete. The derived terms of Säure show it is not limited to "-oic" acids. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 20:22, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
• Keep as creator. A compound "Xsaüre" just means "an acid that contains or somehow relates to X", but when used as a prefix "Xsäure", it specifically refers to "carboxylated X".__Gamren (talk) 01:39, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

  Note that the creator argues for the entries merely by a petitio principii. “when used as a prefix”, it specifically blah, therefore it is a suffix. A real logic monster. Fay Freak (talk) 17:20, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

• Keep. The correctness of the definition is not in question. We must never delete entries because the definition is off. To fix that, we can simply edit the entry. The important question here is: "Is -säure a suffix?" Yes, it is. There's probably a better example somewhere but I did a quick search and found it listed as a suffix in this paper dictionary. — Dentonius 05:48, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
  • "The correctness of the definition is not in question"? Look two comments up I already questioned the correctness of the definition. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 07:29, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

    Vox, I'll rephrase what I said: we should not delete entries just because their definitions aren't correct. It doesn't matter how incorrect the definition is, we can always edit it. Deleting an entry because it has a flaw is not in conformity with the spirit of this project. Our aim should be to improve things gradually. In time, the entries will be beautiful. But that will never happen if people have an itchy delete finger. — Dentonius 07:34, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

    I don't think the entry can be made correct. But if you want to try, redefine it and show how to distinguish it from use of Säure in an unspaced Germanic compound. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 07:44, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

    But, to the best of my knowledge, German compounds are usually written as one word. Why would we need to distinguish? Here we are showing the meaning of this suffix when we encounter such words. That the word Säure exists shouldn't have an impact on the correctness of this entry. In English we have -ful, yet the word full exists. There's a minor spelling difference, but I hope you see my point. We have -load and load (disputed, perhaps, but its existence isn't in question). If others come to me, I'll let you know. But I'm certain there are more. — Dentonius 07:52, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

"and found it listed as a suffix in this paper dictionary"

-- Look into the dictionary again. It's "Sugar, .. a) der Zucker; ... acid of –, die Z-säure ...". That is: "sugar = Zucker" and "acid of sugar = Zuckersäure", and there ain't a suffix -säure in it.

Maybe some should learn the difference between: 1. composition / compound, compound word vs. 2. derivation / derivative, derivate / affix: prefix, suffix ...

--— This unsigned comment was added by 2003:DE:373F:4037:3C6C:85B5:850A:BEA0 (talk). 11:02, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Delete, not a suffix. PUC – 12:52, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Delete. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 13:09, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Delete. Even if -ol is a suffix it does not mean the säure part in analogous names is too; so Propanol is prop- +‎ -an +‎ -ol but Propansäure is prop- +‎ -an +‎ Säure; especially since Säure has a more general meaning, but this word still can have a gloss or usage note telling people it is used for carboxylic acids – technically there is a lot to say about chemistry on such pages. Very poor performance of @Dentonius, as IP said: it appearing with hyphen after an abbreviated dictionary lemma does not mean it has been considered a suffix, the hyphen serves a different purpose. The comparisons to -load and -ful are also of little persuasiveness, as these morphemes are used differently again. Fay Freak (talk) 14:19, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

I think the comparison to -load/load is relevant, actually. An "X load" can be a load of X, e.g. cargo load or fuel load. As a prefix, it has a specific sense.
But yes, if this is deleted, there should be a comment somewhere on Säure.__Gamren (talk) 14:38, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

• @Gamren: This is twice now where you describe the use of a term as a prefix, when it's clearly at the end of the word in your examples. Is German Säure ever used as a prefix, on the front of a word? And is English load ever used as a prefix, on the front of a word? I'm less familiar with German, but for the English term, I can't think of any uses that are prefixing -- only suffixing, on the end of a word.

Did you perhaps mean suffix, and wrote prefix by accident? I feel very confused. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 19:20, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

@Eirikr Yes, I meant suffix.__Gamren (talk) 19:30, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

All three RFD deleted, although unwillingly.__Gamren (talk) 23:04, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Dutch -zuur

Exactly the same story here, should we consider one decision for both? Thadh (talk) 14:39, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Yes, this can hardly be different, I was just too lazy to list it. Fay Freak (talk) 15:52, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Yes, delete. ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 15:53, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

@Rua, any opinion?__Gamren (talk) 23:45, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

I'm leaning towards keep because the given meaning is limited to the position as a suffix. methaanzuur can be analysed as methaan +‎ zuur, but that would translate to "methane acid" which is nonsense. zuur does not mean "carboxylic acid" on its own. It is only when suffixed to an organic base stem that it has the meaning as given in the entry. —Rua (mew) 18:46, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Why can't this be explained at zuur? "(in compounds in which the first stem refers to an organic base) carboxylic acid", or something along those lines. PUC – 21:18, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Can't we do that with every "suffix" then? —Rua (mew) 20:42, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Many suffixes do not have a corresponding standalone word. For example, English -ed. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 20:53, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Okay, and many of them do. Should we do this with every such suffix?__Gamren (talk) 01:59, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Although I'd be very suspicious of all such suffixes in principle, probably not - it has to be discussed on a case-by-case basis. PUC – 12:08, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Danish -syre

Same thing here. That should be all of them. Thadh (talk) 16:49, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Delete all, not suffixes. Ultimateria (talk) 18:34, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Delete all, per Ultimateria. --Robbie SWE (talk) 21:14, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

• Keep all — Dentonius 08:47, 19 February 2021 (UTC)