Talk:bydraag

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

Wiktionary:Requests for verification discussion[edit]

From bydraag at Wiktionary:Requests for verification:

Green check.svg

This entry has survived Wiktionary's verification process.

Please do not re-nominate for verification without comprehensive reasons for doing so.


bydraag

(moved from RFD)

Not a real Afrikaans word, proper singular is bydrae with plural bydraes. CeNobiteElf (talk) 12:39, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Sounds like a case for RFV. Maybe it's attested in nonstandard usage or older texts. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 14:37, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
What about as a verb, descended from Dutch bijdragen (to contribute)? —CodeCat 16:02, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
Of course it's a real word. CeNobiteElf, the requirement is just that people use it, not that it be considered 'correct'. I'll go cite the entry. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 17:22, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
CodeCat the verb is is bydra, bydraende, bygedra. Metaknowledge, I checked your quotations, you noticed all of them are quite old, right? I've personally never heard bydraag, I have only rarely heard bydrag (note the short a) in speech before, so it could be a potential case of colloquial vowel shortening which is common in common words such as ook, gaan, aan, etc. though how often does one use brydraag daily?
I just checked the WAT (Woordeboek van die Afrikaanse Taal) though, bydraag is in there, but it's omitted in both the Pharos Afrikaans dictionary and the AWS (Afrikaanse Woordelys en Spelreëls) 2009 edition. Assuming you don't have acces to the WAT, here is the full entry of bydraag "bydraag s.nw., bydrae. Sien BYDRAE: Ons het nog nie jou bydraag ontvang nie. 'n Groter bydraag vir die vloot gee. 'n Bydragie vir 'n blad skrywe."
--CeNobiteElf (talk) 18:17, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
I wouldn't call the 1980s "quite old", but yes, I could find nothing from this century. We can mark it as "dated". And no, I don't have access to die WAT (wish I did!) so thanks; that does confirm the validity of the entry, although per WT:ATTEST we rely on quotations, not other dictionaries. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 20:15, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
Languages are big things, it's not a good idea to nominate entries for verification on the grounds 'you haven't heard of it'. Just in English I could nominate thousands of entries a day if I did that. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:19, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
RFV-passed. - -sche (discuss) 18:56, 16 January 2014 (UTC)