Talk:about

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to: navigation, search

I suggest put more easy to understand quotations ( better examples than literature, specially if they are poems - more diffucult to understand, generally- ).

I've no objection; feel free to add them to those that are already there. I've been adapting the 1913 Webster entries, and giving more specific identification to the Shakespeare quotes, but the meanings have not stood still in the 90 years since.

About derivated terms, better a link to the verb ( and in any case, include examples of use ).Mac 16:42 Mar 10, 2003 (UTC)

I should probably have wikied the derived terms so that there is a place to give fuller explanation when needed. In general they seem well placed at the end of the article than immediately after the verb. (But then "about" is not to my knowledge used as a verb.) As to examples, I agree; go ahead and add them in.
On a completely different point (which should probably be discussed elsewhere) I wonder how useful it is to link to "noun" from every word that is one. I would tend to prefer a glossary that could be accessed from an entry on the quick bar and which would list explanations of certain common terms. ☮ Eclecticology 18:27 Mar 10, 2003 (UTC)
I like the idea of the quick bar. I didn´t know about it. So go ahead ;) I think a "wikification" of all the worlds in an article would be interesting. Similar to the What is plug-in for webpages. Everybody no has the same cultural level and such this wikification would be interesting to see the meanings of more than one word and go back easily to the main article :-?Mac 20:58 Mar 10, 2003 (UTC)

Here's a good example of what I was talking about before. I'm not going to rfc this, because it's certainly clean enough to be usable. But at the very least, the quotations could use an overhaul, and as always we should check BNC, google and whatever else for interesting usages. -dmh 19:07, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Canadian audio[edit]

I hate to break the news to everyone but that Canadian audio file is inaccurate and clearly joke vandalism. 65.93.137.190 22:07, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Some Canadians typically pronounce about as 'a-boat', though. Someone should add that.70.56.73.235 01:16, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

I've never heard "a-boot" or "a-boat". I've added the correct pronunciation. (At least in my area.) --Bran

another about[edit]

he came about and did something

'about' a subject[edit]

As in the sense of 'we talked about cats'. I noticed that this sense seems to be missing. At least, I don't think any of the existing senses covers it. Am I missing something here or is it really not there? —CodeCat 11:37, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

It is sense 7. The sequence of the senses is more or less from older, more spatial sense to figurative to grammatical. Unfortunately, such a sequence, useful for maintaining some coherence to the PoS section, places what might be the most common sense at the bottom. That definition also included the word touching, now mostly UK, I think, which is misleading for many users as its literal meaning is relatively more common. Finally, the wording of some of the definitions seems dated to me, showing a Webster 1913 heritage. DCDuring TALK 12:12, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Ah, thank you for clearing that up. The usage example helps a lot. But there is one other sense I can't find either. The sense of 'I am crazy about (something)'. Is that idiomatic or is it a real sense? The trouble is that the translations differ depending on whether it's just 'about' or '(adjective) about'. 'Talk about cats' in Dutch is 'praten over katten', but to be crazy about cats is 'gek op katten' (where gek does literally mean crazy). —CodeCat 12:38, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
I was just reading CGEL, which is quite complete about such matters. Many English adjectives are optionally followed by prepositions, quite a few by "about". Following is their list of adjectives which they say is mandatorily followed by "about" (or "at"): "annoyed", "concerned", "aggrieved", "angry", "annoyed", "concerned", "cross", "delighted", "glad", "happy", "knowledgeable", "mad" ("crazy"), "pleased", "reasonable". For many of these "over" is a common alternate in English, but not, I think, for "cross", "knowledgeable", "glad", "mad", "crazy", "happy", "reasonable". DCDuring TALK 13:19, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Does that mean we should have an entry crazy about? —CodeCat 13:43, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Canadian pronunciations[edit]

If the Canadian pronunciations are wrong, shouldn't the SAMPA and not just the IPA be removed? See [1]. - -sche (discuss) 05:35, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

I haven't spent the time on Sampa yet, I just know that what they had for the Canadian IPA was incorrect. I thought about deleting the entire lines, but decided against it. Speednat (talk) 06:11, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
SAMPA transcriptions should match IPA transcriptions, and in this case the Ontario one did and the Canadia one corresponded to /əˈbʌut/, so I've removed them. this page appears to attract a lot of fake or incorrect Canadian pronunciations, hopefully a Canadian can add a valid one. - -sche (discuss) 07:27, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
again thanks, I will just delete the faulty sampa, if I change the IPA in the future, or maybe I will spend the time to learn Sampa. Speednat (talk) 18:00, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
What was wrong with the IPA? w:Canadian raising says it's [ʌu] or [ɛʉ], but the entry had [ʌʊ] and [ɛʊ]; is that the issue or is it something else? —Internoob 20:43, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
I believe the problem is that based on wiktionary, we don't utilize the finer points of IPA. Between the /'s on pronunciation we give a broad transcription, and we don't go into that deep of detail. The reason I had a "problem" with it, is if I go to theabove named Wiktionary guide page for IPA, or others on Wiktionary, or even Wikipedia, they don't show the symbols you were using. Is there a way, you can show the Canadian way of speaking, utilizing the standards of Wiktionary? I have seen mention that the word about /ə.baʊt/ can be shown as /ə.boʊt/.

As a Canadian, I was asked to take a look at the Canadian pronunciations featured in this entry, so here's my two cents. Neither one of the audio clips raises any obvious red flags to my ear. I think the difference between them might be explained by regional variation. The uploader of File:En-ca-about.ogg, User:Tawker, states on his userpage that he's from Vancouver. That explains why, of the two clips, that one sounded more "correct" to my ear — I'm from the Vancouver area myself. The uploader of File:En-ca-about-real.ogg, User:Bran, states he's from Windsor, Ontario on his Twitter account. Vancouver is roughly 3000 miles from Windsor, so comparing a Vancouver speaker to one from Windsor is rather like comparing a Seattle speaker to one from Detroit. In any case, it would probably be helpful to point out the regionality of the Canadian clips in the entry. Sorry I'm not able to offer any help regarding IPA transcriptions. Astral (talk) 22:50, 7 July 2012 (UTC)