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

dihydrogen oxide[edit]

Hydrogen dioxide??? That would be HO2, wouldn't it? —This comment was unsigned.

Indeed - it should be "dihydrogen oxide". Paul G 11:27, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Is "water" in the sense of "to urinate" a transitive or intransitive verb? Is it correct? Source?

Pregnant women's "water"[edit]

Before the child is born, the pregnant woman's waters breaks - I'm not familiar with this in the plural, only in the singular, which contradicts this page. 00:00, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Here are a few results found with a quick Google:
    • One thing that I found iteresting was that she seemed to be cleaning out her bowels all afternoon-little piles very often, right up to just before her waters broke.
    • Her waters broke 15 minutes after my husband drove up with my 14 yr old daughter.
    • PROM = Premature Rupture of Membranes; when waters break before term or before labor
    • SROM = Spontaneous Rupture of Membranes (when the waters break on their own)
    • She found labor tolerable until the doctor broke her waters at about 3 cm, and then contractions became very intense and nearly continuous (very common occurrence).
    • Midwife discovers that my bag of waters had not completely ruptured and may have been delaying the baby's drop into the pelvis.
    • I arrived at the hospital some 16 hours after my waters broke and had managed to induce contractions using nipple stimulation for a half hour in the car on the way in.
It seems to be used in both singular and plural. — Hippietrail 00:41, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)


Keep tidy.svg

The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process..

Failure to be verified may either mean that this information is fabricated, or is merely beyond our resources to confirm. 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. See also Wiktionary:Previously deleted entries.


Rfv-sense: Awkward position or circumstance; trouble. Even if deep water is attestable, the negative meaning seems attributable solely to the accompanying adjectives "hot" or "deep". DCDuring TALK 05:18, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Even though I think deep water will pass, this one should not. The terms deep water and hot water are idiomatic, and water does not have this meaning on its own. --Dmol 07:12, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

clocked out. DCDuring TALK 11:16, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Deleted. Equinox 00:28, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

"w" in Dutch[edit]

Isn't it pronounced close to English 'v' in some regions? (I'm thinking northern parts of the Netherlands) -- 16:35, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Off topic. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:57, 17 March 2011 (UTC)


re pronunciation, this was listed as a "US spelling", but I'm totally unaware of it. I have moved it to NY because I assumed this was intended, but I may have been wrong. If anything, it is not a general US spelling. -- Prince Kassad 09:46, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Bagirmi translation[edit]

Hello, bagirmi translation is written with Latin alphabet. However, WP article says there is a Baguirmi alphabet. So, I guess Latin word is a transcription. Is it true? Pamputt 22:23, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

It does say the Bagirmi alphabet was only invented in the 1990s. So the Latin word actually predates the invention of the script. -- Prince Kassad 22:44, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

semi-lol content[edit]

Can someone tell what does "Albanian ujë, Ancient Greek ὕδωρ (hýdōr), Armenian գետ (get, “river”)" have to do with other etymological words?Dixtosa 09:17, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I know that Greek ὕδωρ comes from Proto-Indo-European *wodr̥, which was the genitive of *wednós (water). Armenian underwent a big change in its phonology, and գետ is from Proto-Indo-European *vedo- from *wednós (where *ved- became "get"). Albanian also underwent extreme sound changes, and ujë is from Proto-Indo-European *wed- from *wednós (where *we- became "ujë"). So all of these words, along with English water, Spanish agua, French eau, and Russian вода, ultimately stem from Proto-Indo-European *wednós (water). —Stephen (Talk) 09:56, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Spanish agua and French eau come from PIE *akʷā-, not from *wódr̥, and *wednós is one possible genitive of *wódr̥, not the other way round. —Angr 14:13, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

"I can feel it in my water(s)"[edit]

Plenty of Google Books hits, mostly with water rather than waters - is this worthy of a definition? Would the root be in one's water, feel something in one's water, or what? 10:50, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Interesting. Did you hear it or read? I wonder where it is used and/or when it was used. It might be worth including in some way. Thanks. DCDuring TALK 13:48, 3 June 2011 (UTC)


Keep tidy.svg

The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process.

It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.


rfd-sense: (UK, in combination, capitalised) Particular lakes in the Lake District.

If this is only used to form proper nouns (i. e. only occurs in uppercase), it should be at capitalized Water. Otherwise, I can't quite figure out what it's supposed to be. -- Prince Kassad 10:37, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

  • Yeah, delete, it's a just a use of the existing ‘body of water’ sense. Ƿidsiþ 10:47, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
  • Delete, but create at Water. Part of the name and should be caps.--Dmol 11:15, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
Also, it's just an opinion but those "classical element" senses somehow strike me as unnecessary. Though that may be just me. (they aren't tagged yet) -- Prince Kassad 15:02, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
Delete. I wouldn't create water unless you also want to create Stadium (in English) for Wembley Stadium, Bridge for Standford Bridge and Tower for things like Tower of London, Leaning Tower of Pizza and Willis Tower. Mglovesfun (talk) 21:06, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
Keep somewhere. This seems an unusual use of water or Water. I don't think, for example, that it is ever used in the US. DCDuring TALK 22:51, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
DCDuring, there is a countable sense for water meaning 'body of water' per Widsith. That's what it refers to in the title of various lakes. In fact their not lakes at all - they are waters. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:59, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
Is the definition inaccurate, in that there are "waters" outside the Lake District that have proper names that include "waters"? Is there anything in real life about the "waters" of the Lake District that is distinctive? Is this use of "waters" something regional, so someone from the Lake District would call "waters" bodies of water of similar characteristics that had a proper name not including "waters"? DCDuring TALK 16:18, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
No, the Lake district "Waters" are usually just called "lakes" by everyone except local pedants. I've never heard Windermere or Bassenthwaite Lake or Tarn Hows called a "water", except in the general sense that they contain that liquid. Dbfirs 13:13, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
(later) Quote from The Westmorland Gazette (the main local newspaper of the Lake District) November 3rd, 2011 Page 43: about Wast Water " ... depth of 258 feet , making it easily the deepest lake in the whole area." Dbfirs 11:11, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
Keep until such time as someone adds a "body of water" sense that would account for this. Preferably with a cite or two. Note that we do currently have a "body of water" sense, but it's tagged as "in plural", and its sole cite is not terribly convincing IMHO. —RuakhTALK 01:05, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
I have copied a sense from MW 1913: "A body of water, standing or flowing; a lake, river, or other collection of water.", with a citation. This might subsume the "plural" sense mentioned above. DCDuring TALK 03:19, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
I definitely don't think we should keep it. Reword it, ok sure, but not an outright keep. Mglovesfun (talk) 08:58, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
There exists a plural-only sense that means something like, "water that is in a body of water"; see google books:"the muddy waters of the * River" for lots of examples of it. Our current "in plural" senses seem like failed attempts to capture that sense. —RuakhTALK 23:31, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
I think you are onto something. Some OneLook dictionaries have something like it, but don't seem to quite duplicate what you suggest. I don't think your sense includes the other plural senses though. DCDuring TALK 01:43, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Delete, as redundant and don't create Water per the recent deletion of Age. --The Evil IP address 12:45, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
Yes, Delete now that DC has added the more general sense (8) that includes this. While we are deleting such interpretations, could we also delete the sense at lake where "lakes" could mean any collection of lakes (including the Great Lakes) and not just the Lake District. We might possibly replace it with an entry at The Lakes, but I'm not sure it's necessary. Dbfirs 12:54, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Deleted.​—msh210 (talk) 23:49, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

RFD 2[edit]

Keep tidy.svg

The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process.

It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.

water 2

Rfd-sense: (uncountable) Tap water, or well/pump water, as opposed to bottled water.

Added by an IP here. I have serious trouble considering this separate from the general sense 1. In the example sentence given (Do not drink the water.), there isn't really anything that semantically distinguishes tap water from bottled water - you could fill a well with bottled water and the writing would still hold true. -- Liliana 18:00, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

What the context of the usage example (not the usage example alone, let alone the word "water") usually implies is a definition such as "that local-source water that possibly might make one sick (whether tap water or other water, such as locally bottled, unpurifed water, or possibly local well water from low-lying wells)." Another definition might be: "water that is likely to be inhabited by bacteria (or other contaminants) to which the auditor is unlikely to have developed a resistance or tolerance." Another definition might be "the locally sourced water". Or it might just mean "any water around here" or "the water the auditor is likely to drink". That seems like context or, from another point of view, encyclopedic content. In fact, that definition presupposes knowledge on the part of the auditor of the current generally accepted theories of infection from such sources, sanitary conditions, and the economics of local water supply and other beverages.
At the very least we need more diverse illustrations of this purported sense, preferably from durably archived sources. DCDuring TALK 23:18, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
The water in Mesquite is hard. DAVilla 05:27, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
Delete or, at the very least, move to a sub-sense of the primary sense. I don't think it's necessary. Equinox 23:36, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Delete, just plain wrong isn't it? I've never heard anyone say that bottle water isn't water, which is what this sense is trying to say. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:34, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
I don't think it's plain wrong; I think the idea is that statements such as "You shouldn't drink the water here", "The water's bad here", etc. often implicitly mean tap water and exclude bottled water. However, whether this usage requires or justifies a separate sense is doubtful in my opinion. 13:31, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
Makes sense to me. It would be a subsense except I've rarely seen that here. Keep. DAVilla 05:27, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
Would you say that "Do not touch the vase" reflects a separate sense for "vase"? Delete. The example should be moved under #1. --Hekaheka (talk) 09:34, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted 3 to 1. --Hekaheka (talk) 18:53, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

RFD 3 (Afrikaans)[edit]

Green check.svg

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, though feel free to discuss its conclusions.

water 3

The Afrikaans noun water currently has six senses, which were just copy-pasted from Afrikaans Wiktionary. Many are redundant, some look outright wrong ("A disease where water is accumulated"? Really?). I suspect they can be merged into one or two senses at most. -- Liliana 17:57, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

  • Keep all: It's quite possible "water" means something different in Afrikaans than it does in English Purplebackpack89 (Notes Taken) (Locker) 20:36, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Keep all unless you can show that those meanings don't exist in Afrikaans, and don't just look funny. --Tyrannus Mundi (talk) 20:49, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
  • This isn't a good nomination, redundant senses should be named specifically (X is redundant to Y) and the disease one is an RFV matter. Mglovesfun (talk) 20:51, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
    • If you say so: all definitions are redundant to 1: water. It's especially obvious if you compare it to Dutch (immediate sister language) which manages to need only one definition, as well. Well okay, here's some comments:
      • 2: This is I think misguided. You could call hydrochloric acid water just by its similar appearance, but that doesn't justify a definition of water to mean "hydrochloric acid".
      • 3: Same as 1, water.
      • 4: Same as 1, water.
      • 5: Unless someone manages to prove me the opposite, I stand by my motion that this is a completely wrong definition. Nobody would say that a person suffers from "water".
      • 6: Same as 1, water.
    • -- Liliana 20:59, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
"Nobody would say that a person suffers from 'water'." Not in English they wouldn't, but it certainly seems plausible to me that someone might say it in Afrikaans. The corresponding definition in the Afrikaans Wiktionary gives watersug as a synonym, which I assume corresponds to German Wassersucht meaning edema. I don't know Afrikaans, so I can't say for sure that you can say Hy hê water to mean "He has edema", but it wouldn't greatly surprise me. —Angr 22:33, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
Plus even English has conditions like "water on the brain", "water on the knee", "water in the ear" - "water" as a condition doesn't seem odd at all (though I don't know any Afrikaans, so I don't know if it's a good def). The fact the Dutch entry is shorter than the Afrikaans one is not necessarily a sign that it's better. The Dutch Wiktionary page on water has quite a few senses we don't have - including fluids in the body. If nothing else, noting that Afrikaans has the same water-waters distinction that English has seems like useful information, and I don't see any problem with noting that colloquialisms are cognate across languages (merde and Scheiße mean shit in both the literal and figurative senses, but just having one definition that read "shit" wouldn't help our users much). Smurrayinchester (talk) 08:28, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
(I'm not voting because I don't know Afrikaans, but until someone who does know Afrikaans appears, my vote is a default Keep all) Smurrayinchester (talk) 08:29, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
I would have supported a "fluids in the body" sense immediately, but this one specifically says "a disease". This is different. -- Liliana 08:37, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
Keep. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:23, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
Delete sense 2; any term can be used to describe something which is similar. Keep sense 3, 4 and 5 (might need a rewrite, current definition is very weird). Move sense 6 to waters (the Afrikaans wiktionary doesn’t have entries for plurals, and their definition for this sense starts with Waters:). Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 16:14, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
I'd agree with all of that, apart from sense #2 which might be considered idiomatic to an Afrikaans speaker. Mglovesfun (talk) 10:10, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
Keep the disease sense. (RFV it if desired.)​—msh210 (talk) 16:14, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Kept. — Ungoliant (Falai) 02:23, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

liquid water[edit]

I agree with Smurray's edit, and that ice is still water in one sense. But I think that "water" is sometimes used specifically to refer to the liquid, as distinct from "ice" (solid). Should there be a subsense of the first sense which accounts for this? - -sche (discuss) 22:45, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

I agree. — Ungoliant (Falai) 03:33, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
NB, a lot of the Native American- and some other- translations probably only refer to liquid H2O (i.e. the definition which was in the entry when the translations were added). Because the translation-table gloss was never changed from "clear liquid H2O", the translations continue to be in the right place... but we now have the option of adding a new translations table above that one, with the definition of the new first sense (H2O in any state) as its gloss, in which to duplicate a lot of the translations and further increase the size of the page. :) - -sche (discuss) 18:52, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Template:l for English[edit]


  1. the English Derived/Related terms are numerous for [[water]],
  2. experience with WT:REE and Wiktionary:Requested entries (Scientific names) has shown dramatic load-time improvements resulting from converting links from {{l}}-mediated links to plainliks,
  3. {{l}} offers no benefit to users when applied to English unless there is a Translingual section, and
  4. [[water]] can use all the load-time reduction help it can get,
please consider removing {{l}} where {{{1}}}=en. DCDuring TALK 16:43, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
WT:REE had {{l|en}}, [[water]] has {{l/en}} which is much faster. {{l}} automatically skips the table of contents and the entry/discussion/citations/edit/etc. tabs, and the translingual section if any. The only way to make [[water]] load fast enough is to move the translations elsewhere (perhaps a subpage, and perhaps leave those of major languages). — Ungoliant (Falai) 15:23, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
{{l}} does offer a benefit to users when linking to English. If I visit the page broeden, and then click on the link to brood, it links me to brood#Dutch. But if I change the link to {{l|en|brood}}, it links to brood#English. —CodeCat 15:38, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Finding references for the translations[edit]

I have managed to find references and create entries for most of the translations in this entry from languages with names that start with A. However, I could not find references for the following languages' translations: A-Pucikwar, Aasáx, Abau, Abua, Ahwai, Aiwoo, Ajië, Aka-Bo, Ake, Akha, Akkala Sami, Akpes, Alaba-K'abeena, Alumu-Tesu, Alviri-Vidari, Ama, Amahuaca, Amanab, Amara, Amdang, Ami, Amurdag, Ana Tinga Dogon, Angor, Annobonese, Araona, Arin, Arosi, Ashe, Ashkun, Aukan, Awa-Cuaiquer, Awadhi (although the book the Evolution of Awadhi (a branch of Hindi) mentioned, in a strange script, several Awadhi words for water, some similar to the one we list), Awngi, Ayere, Aynu and Ayu. - -sche (discuss) 23:09, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Oof, that's a huge list. Not to mention that I did this so long ago I can hardly remember where I got what from.
You know the standard sources? (I'm not at home right now so no links, ping me later if you need them) the Comparative Austronesian Dictionary website, Roger Blench, SIL PNG & SIL Latin America. Everything else could be from spurious search results on Google Books and those will be harder to find. -- Liliana 13:59, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
To be clear, I don't have a reason to think the translations are incorrect, I just couldn't find any references for them, and listed them here in the hopes that someone else could. It is a long list, but the list of referenced translations is even longer, a testament to the volume of translations you (and to a lesser, more recent extent, I) have been able to add to the page. I mainly checked books, but I did poke around the unprinted internet with Google some, too. I didn't check the CAD; I'll check it later. - -sche (discuss) 18:39, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
DTLHS has found references for some, which I have struck out of the above list. :) - -sche (discuss) 01:25, 4 March 2014 (UTC)