Talk:ruse

From Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Latest comment: 5 years ago by Sgconlaw in topic RFV discussion: September 2018
Jump to navigation Jump to search

RFV discussion: September 2018[edit]

This entry has survived Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).

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


Rfv-sense: "Of an animal: to turn or double back to elude hunters or their hunting dogs". DTLHS (talk) 16:39, 25 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Even if it's verifiable, it appears to be intransitive, if the Chaucer quote is anything to go by. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 16:46, 25 September 2018 (UTC)Reply
Sorry, that was a typo on my part. It is intransitive. — SGconlaw (talk) 17:03, 25 September 2018 (UTC)Reply
It looks like it should be converted to Middle English. Kiwima (talk) 21:11, 25 September 2018 (UTC)Reply
That said, I DID find one modern quote with this meaning. However, it is possible that the author was basing this use on a combination of Middle English sources and the more modern meaning "to trick or deceive". Kiwima (talk) 22:00, 25 September 2018 (UTC)Reply
I think it's the correct sense. The author was paraphrasing Chaucer's Book of the Duchess; I believe it should suffice for verification purposes. — SGconlaw (talk) 12:07, 26 September 2018 (UTC)Reply
Uses similarly inspired by Middle English are also found here: [1] [2] [3] [4] But they do seem to be independent and these uses are clearly modern. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 08:22, 26 September 2018 (UTC)Reply
Thanks! Wonder why they didn't turn up when I searched for them? — SGconlaw (talk) 12:09, 26 September 2018 (UTC)Reply
@Sgconlaw I used inflected forms of ruse (rusing in particular) in quotes along with terms for game, deer and hunting. If that is basically what you did, I have no idea what could have caused the difference, other than Google giving different results based on location. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 13:51, 26 September 2018 (UTC)Reply
Yep, that’s what I did. Strange, as I have no problem seeing the links that you’ve posted. — SGconlaw (talk) 14:24, 26 September 2018 (UTC)Reply
Anyway, I think we can call this one passed. — SGconlaw (talk) 15:13, 26 September 2018 (UTC)Reply