Talk:break in the case

From Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Deletion debate[edit]

The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process.

It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.


Just one of the meanings of the noun break AFAICT. Not an English "idiom". Mglovesfun (talk) 10:38, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

By the logic sometimes used, because this could be a "crack" in the "box", but usually isn't, we should keep it. DCDuring TALK 12:12, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We are definitely missing senses at break#Noun. I can think of two already. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:14, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's the most productive aspect of multi-word RfDs: additional figurative senses of component words. DCDuring TALK 12:39, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But what's the appropriate definition of break in this phrase? We already have "(by ellipsis) A lucky break" and "(British, weather) a change; the end of a spell of persistent good or bad weather". Is it one of those, perhaps? (The second would then need to be written more generally, of course.) We also of course have the sense "A physical space that opens up in something or between two things". Is it something like that, but worth splitting off because of its metaphoric use? Not sure what break in this case (sorry) means.​—msh210 16:51, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is something like the sense I just added at break#Noun before the lucky break sense: An abrupt change in the normal flow of a process. We are, of course, still missing at least a have dozen senses. DCDuring TALK 17:28, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If the preceding addition doesn't cover it, how about: "A significant change in circumstance, attitude, perception, or focus of attention."
We now have 14 definitions for the noun; MWOnline is just ahed of us at 31. DCDuring TALK 17:22, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Deleted, as http://web.archive.org/web/20060820155006/http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/08/16/ramsey.arrest/index.html as an archived copy of the now broken external link does not attest the usage.--Jusjih 00:20, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]