Talk:spose
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
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.
Rfv-senses
- supposed
- In the example, it just seems like the /d/ and following /t/ merge into each other
- ending a conversation, taking one's leave.
- Seems redundant to sense 1 of the entry. A common sense solution would be to have one definition: Eye dialect spelling of suppose. unless either of the other two can be cited. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:49, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not sure why you're RFVing the "supposed" sense. There are loads and loads of hits at google books:"spose to" in support of this sense. (But yes, it should use
{{eye dialect}}.)—msh210℠ 18:11, 29 April 2010 (UTC)- Because I usually RFV then check, so that's a clear pass. Thinking about it, the third one is listed as a verb. Is it? Mglovesfun (talk) 18:18, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- Would you mind checking before RFVing rather than after? It saves others' time and effort (and your own, assuming you currently do check after RFVing and not rely on others to do so).—msh210℠ 18:34, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- All the forms seem attestable. I think that one
{{eye dialect}}should cover all except "supposed" as a sense, which I guess is another{{eye dialect}}, and "[many forms of (deprecated template usage) be] supposed", which would be more, probably one for each form. Countless hours of amusement to be had in lieu of working on senses of (deprecated template usage) in. Eye dialect is mostly a time sink. DCDuring TALK 20:02, 29 April 2010 (UTC)- "ending a conversation, taking one's leave." This doesn't tell me how to use the word, and the example sentence doesn't help me either. Is it suppose to be like cya or later or something like that? So I think citations at the very least might clarify how to use the word. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:07, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- It's in the verb section, which I think is a mistake. Or does it mean "to leave, to depart"? Mglovesfun (talk) 14:35, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- If you were in the context of Michigan or Wisconsin, you would know. It is in the air there. DCDuring TALK 16:46, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- It's in the verb section, which I think is a mistake. Or does it mean "to leave, to depart"? Mglovesfun (talk) 14:35, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- "ending a conversation, taking one's leave." This doesn't tell me how to use the word, and the example sentence doesn't help me either. Is it suppose to be like cya or later or something like that? So I think citations at the very least might clarify how to use the word. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:07, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- Because I usually RFV then check, so that's a clear pass. Thinking about it, the third one is listed as a verb. Is it? Mglovesfun (talk) 18:18, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
- That's my point, we need a definition any reader can understand. Mglovesfun (talk) 16:51, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
- I am for removing meaning [3] and either removing meaning [2] or formatting it like meaning [1]. - -sche 01:06, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
{{look}} - -sche (discuss) 04:39, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
- RFV-failed. Note that the second sense could be attested by quotations like "what was it he spose?" where "spose" must mean "supposed" without it possibly just conflating its end dental with a following dental. - -sche (discuss) 22:46, 26 April 2011 (UTC)