Talk:ding up

Deletion debate

The following information passed a request for deletion.

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.

---

ding up

= (deprecated template usage) ding + (deprecated template usage) up. This is not a phrasal verb. It is a verb intensified by adverbial use of up. DCDuring TALK 15:39, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

But by definition << A phrase, consisting of a verb and either or both of a preposition or adverb, that has idiomatic meaning.>> isn't this what a phrasal verb is? To ding = "strike, beat, thrash" but ding up is more than just to "beat up", it's to "fill full of dings, injure, damage". I could be wrong, but sense 3 appears to be a back-formation from ding up, as I do not see it in older dictionaries with this particular meaning of "injure". Leasnam (talk) 16:17, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

I think common, easily found examples, such as a tornado dinged them up pretty good. (c.f. a tornado dinged them pretty good.) seals the pro phrasal verb argument IFAIC. -- ALGRIF talk 16:43, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

@Leasnam: The sense of (deprecated template usage) ding is the one of "To inflict minor damage upon, especially by hitting or striking." A common usage concerns small dents on cars. "Up" adds the idea that there are many, well within the scope of intensification. DCDuring TALK 17:31, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

@DCDuring: Correct. And it is this sense ("To inflict minor damage upon, especially by hitting or striking.") which may be the back-formation of ding up, rather than its parent + up. Leasnam (talk) 17:37, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

@Leasnam: And how would you tell whether that was so? Has the verb been in continuous use? I had always thought of ding#Verb as denominal, as it was in my idiolectic experience. Frankly, this seems extremely implausible. DCDuring TALK 18:37, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

@Algrif: Does "look it up" seal it for look up? Phrasal verbs can be separable. --Dan Polansky (talk) 17:48, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

@Algrif: I had originally thought that it was part of the long-awaited definition of a phrasal verb that it be idiomatic. Apparently, this is not true. I have amended my indictment accordingly. I wonder how many other non-idiomatic phrasal verbs we have. DCDuring TALK 17:55, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi DC. Have you forgotten the example of cut up amongst others that we talked about in the past? There is a world of difference between He chopped the log. and He chopped up the log. or again He cut the paper. and He cut up the paper.. A phrasal verb does not have to be idiomatic. It simply has to have a specific definition that differentiates it from the plain verb. Granted that most are noticeably idiomatic in some way, but not all. Hence, I give the (real) example of the tornado that dinged it pretty good, or dinged it up pretty good. You would be obliged to use the phrasal verb ding up if the statement is to make any sense at all. -- ALGRIF talk 12:09, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

• Keep. --Dan Polansky (talk) 20:22, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Striking as no consensus to delete. bd2412 T 13:27, 26 June 2013 (UTC)