Talk:que si
Request for verification[edit]
The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process.
Failure to be verified means that insufficient eligible citations of this usage have been found, and the entry therefore does not meet Wiktionary inclusion criteria at the present time. We have archived here the disputed information, the verification discussion, and any documentation gathered so far, pending further evidence.
Do not re-add this information to the article without also submitting proof that it meets Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion.
No French entry for this one yet. I know people who say bien sûr que si, or oh/ô que si, but I'm not sure if this is really an interjection or just two interjections next to each other. I'll leave you lot to think about it. Mglovesfun 20:41, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
- Seems good to me. —Stephen 13:11, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
- Potentially sum of parts ("but of course!"), but with my limited French I'm not sure. In any case I will try to cite it to pass the "is it real?" part of RFV if nothing else. Equinox ◑ 20:42, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
- It's definitely SOP; "que" can be used this way with any number of expressions, and obviously this is one of the main meanings of "si". —RuakhTALK 22:39, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
RFV failed, entry deleted. I'm somewhat hesitant to RFV-fail something that I'm pretty sure exists, but I tried to find cites, and it's just too hard: "que si" is a very common word-sequence, and this specific use is too rare, even when I tried searches like "que si, dit-il" that seemed like they should pull up mainly the sense in question. If this were a bona fide idiom, that would be one thing, but it's just SOP, and it makes no sense to keep an entry for one very rare SOP use of a very common word-sequence. That would be misleading at best. (If anyone objects, feel free to find three cites and/or to list this at RFD.) —RuakhTALK 16:11, 3 December 2009 (UTC)