Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/November: difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 10:00, 15 November 2017

跑車

The 5th meaning of 跑車 'race car' reads "car race"; is it o.k.? --Backinstadiums (talk) 11:43, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why is it not ok? Wyang (talk) 02:19, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Wyang:The 1st meaning is race car, a type of car, and the fifth a car race, a type of race. --Backinstadiums (talk) 08:41, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

victim

Should we create an entry for victim mentality, and add a pejorative sense to victim ("someone who is prone to feelings of helplessness")? --Barytonesis (talk) 15:06, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think so, though adding the new sense to victim might just make victim mentality a sum of its parts. —Globins (talk) 06:52, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Contributions of User:Jawitkien

Could somebody (who has any idea about Lojban) give this user some help with formatting etc.? See e.g. bacrynandu. Equinox ◑ 19:30, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

what did I do that you don't like? Jawitkien (talk) 19:41, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jawitkien: hello, and welcome. Please look at this edit, and pay attention to what I've changed. --Barytonesis (talk) 19:45, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind attention. I am mostly regularizing entries. I rarely get to add a new one. Jawitkien (talk) 19:55, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

晶晶: "Lua error: not enough memory"

Just bumped into 晶晶 and noticed the "Derived terms" section only reads "Lua error: not enough memory". What should we do about it? What is the problem? MGorrone (talk) 20:43, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There was nothing actually there so I've removed it. DTLHS (talk) 20:45, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently some of them are here 晶

XBoxes

The page XBoxes should exist. Here is 3 books that have the word "XBoxes": [1][2][3]. --75.71.229.53 22:09, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, and I think most others will too. —Globins (talk) 07:00, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

interversion

Is there no such word in English? If yes, would permutation be a synonym? --Barytonesis (talk) 22:22, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that there are supportable senses in music and law. DTLHS (talk) 22:24, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

day and night AND night and day

In what way are these adjectives?? Equinox ◑ 02:49, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No way that justifies an adjective PoS, IMO. DCDuring (talk) 12:38, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

to the face

I am a bit sceptical: "he ate a whole pizza to the face"? (no Google hits except for our entry). I've put "slang" on it because it has to be, but where is this used, and is it real? Equinox ◑ 05:13, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why not just RfV it? DCDuring (talk) 12:38, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm familiar with take something to the face and the related take something to the head, but these mean something slightly different (i.e. consume the something). These would definitely be considered as slang Leasnam (talk) 01:59, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This has a definite second-language/calque feel to it- @Wikitiki89 might have picked it up from local usage among first- or second-generation immigrant communities. As for rfv: that combination of words gets millions of Google Books hits- I'm not really sure how you would filter out all the false positives. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:15, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See WT:RFVE#to the face. DCDuring (talk) 10:51, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

conver

Hello, I let a message here about the word conver but since it is recommended to let a message here as well, so here it is. Pamputt (talk) 12:54, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't it a typo for cover? --Barytonesis (talk) 13:00, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

~~Who knows? I have no idea.~~ Yeah, you're right. DonnanZ (talk) 17:41, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

drainpipe

"A pipe connecting the drain to the gutter." I assume this means a roof gutter downpipe or downspout, but what about other forms of drainpipe, e.g. from a bath or kitchen sink, or are they always known as waste pipes? DonnanZ (talk) 17:31, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Here in the UK, a "drainpipe" is a pipe from a roof gutter down the side of a building. I have never the word used to mean a waste pipe from a bath, sink or similar. I couldn't say about other English-speaking parts of the world. Mihia (talk) 23:01, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, as far as I understand the word, it's specific to draining water away from a building, not from an appliance etc. Ƿidsiþ 13:55, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

pop socket

The term "pop socket" (variations: "popsocket", "PopSocket", "Pop Socket", etc.) appears in Google searches of years 2013 through 2017. Etymologically, the term may have originated from the name of a company that produces cell phone accessory objects call "pop sockets" (typically circular solid objects that have adhesive to stick to a cell phone to make the cell phone stand up at an angle). According to Wiktionay policy entries need to have existed for a year or more: else, their page is deleted. This term has existed for around 5 years. However, It may not be notable enough for a page. --Spunionztastic (talk) 17:54, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We're a descriptive dictionary, so usage is the only source of notability here. In this case, pretty much all the English usage in durably-archived sources found by Google Books and Google Groups seems to be the combination of various things known by the acronym POP and the programming or electronic-hardware senses of socket, with some odds and ends of random occurrence of "pop"/"POP" and "socket(s)" next to each other. There are a couple of German references to the cellphone product and a spam-type commercial message posted to a couple of non-Usenet Google Groups, but those don't count. Some people have had luck finding things in newspapers that are durably archived, but this doesn't look that promising. Chuck Entz (talk) 20:12, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

father tongue

could an administrator create father tongue please. --2A02:2788:A4:F44:A48E:853C:8987:9F21 22:09, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Place for the request: WT:Requested entries (English)#F. -80.133.107.254 06:35, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

love the sinner, hate the sin

I created the page "love the sinner, hate the sin" but need help on improvements. I felt that citations are unnecessary unless I'm told otherwise; the phrase has been often used. --George Ho (talk) 22:39, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It seems SoP (ie, sum-of-parts, not an idiom, therefore not includable) as a verb. But it is often found as a kind of proverb, which would allow for inclusion IMO. DCDuring (talk) 02:35, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you don't mind, but I completely reworded it. I don't think your definition was completely neutral-POV (e.g. "what they consider a sin"), and it didn't capture the sense of the word as a Christian would use it. My definition may be slightly wordy, so you are welcome to improve upon it, but be wary of implying anything that isn't actually part of the meaning of the phrase as it's used. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 05:38, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology : CARTAGENA - Province of Spain - name used in Spain and most former colonies of Spain.

As Cartagena is being traduced, most people go for the name "New Carthago", as eg. New York, New Jersey, etc., meaning a copy of a city in the colonisator's country. The history of Cartagena - Spain might be quite similar as being the "New" edition of an existing name in the country of origin. The name "Cartagena" does refer to Carthago as the main base of Cartagenian identity. The term "gena" though does not refer to what we call "new"." "Gena" refers to "gender" with all its origines and derivatives as "genus", "generous", "gens" (French),"gentes" Spanish),"general","Genesis" (Meaning Birth). "Gender" was used to indicate "sex" in <15th century England. "Gender" means "blood related", can be a man, a woman, a son, a daughter, a nephew, etc. ... and sometimes a whole Nation was identified by the same "Gender". As "Gender" can be translated into "Family", the name "Cartagena does not mean "New Carthago" but "from Carthagian gender - Carthagian family", as Romans called "Cartagena". All peoples around the Mediterranean some 2200 years ago identified themselve as member of the gender Julii as Julius Ceasar, or the gender Gracchi as Tiberius Grachus, or the gender Skipii as Skipio Africanus, etc. ... Your position in Roman Society was all dependant of the fame or infame your family collected during the past history. Member of the Julii family, the Grachi family, the Skipii famili, and ergo, the Cartagenian familie which gave its name to "CARTAGENA" instead of "NEW CARTHAGO"

The author = Patrick Vermeulen - Belgium, thanks you for your interest.

beverage

AFAIK, not "chiefly US". What do you think? ---> Tooironic (talk) 02:17, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely not, IMO. Wyang (talk) 02:18, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rare in UK in my experience. Restaurants etc. just call them drinks. Equinox ◑ 17:41, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's common in Canada as well, so so far, it'd be chiefly Canada, US, Australia. — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 23:22, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everyone, I've made some changes. ---> Tooironic (talk) 02:57, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It certainly is used in the UK, but it's more formal term than "drink". Collins ([[4]]) makes no distinction in its the British and American definitions. For that reason, I don't believe it needs any regional label at all for this sense, and so I have removed it. — Paul G (talk) 06:51, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's definitely used differently in the US. I mean, the word obviously exists in the UK, but it's not something your waitress is likely to say to you. How we codify that in usage labels, I don't know. Ƿidsiþ 13:54, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

dressed up/done up like a dog's dinner

We already have dog's dinner, but I don't think it covers adequately the meaning of the above expression. --Barytonesis (talk) 12:01, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pon Yup

I doubt it refers to the modern district. The name 番禺 was used for different jurisdictions in its history. The modern designation as a district is a relatively new one (since 2000). — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 07:54, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

strenuous

The first sense is just a list of synonyms. A better definition please? DTLHS (talk) 04:29, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a go at it. Feel free to improve. SemperBlotto (talk) 06:22, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Re mortar

I came to mortar because I wanted to find out why the "mixture of lime" and "indirect fire weapon" are both called "mortar". This page completely fails to do so, only providing the etymology for the context-less word itself.

While I can guess why the weapon got to be called "mortar", what has this to do with building bricks and grinding ingredients?

In short, what is the etymology for the concept of "mixture of lime"? CapnZapp (talk) 13:34, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

All senses come from the same French word (deprecated template usage) mortier. SemperBlotto (talk) 13:47, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Does clockwise need 2 definitions?

'Left' and 'right' are notoriously difficult to define, as first you have to define the observer and what they observe. The wiktionary definitions both invoke the compass to get it across. (I think this is why some people have difficulty remembering which is which... for some people it's intrinsic to the observer, for others it's just an arbitrary abstract concept).

Anyway, I think definition 1 of clockwise is ok, you're allowed to use the concepts of 'right', 'left' and 'clock', and rest on the metaphor like the whole word does, without using words like 'axis' or 'perpendicular'. I'll still rewrite it tho cos it seems a bit clunky.

However, I've read definition 2 five times:

2. (of movement) Positioned as such when facing the side of a circular structure or configuration, objects moving within the structure approach from the right-hand side, and depart toward the left-hand side.

I feel like there is at the very least a missing "that" which should be inserted for the hard of thinking (i.e. me). But... what does meaning 2 mean and how is it different from the first definition? I imagined the notional structure as being outside the observer, not vice versa (which as far as I can tell reverses the definition). And how can something positioned in reference to a circular structure be itself 'clockwise' or 'counter-/anticlockwise'? Because the definition is talking about motion after all.

I feel like I'm missing something really basic :( Moogsi (talk) 01:02, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, weird. "(of movement) Positioned..." sounds like a bad start. Equinox ◑ 01:04, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah "positioned of movement" should be the first clue. I wondered if there was some special meaning... Moogsi (talk) 18:59, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited clockwise adv. Please criticize Moogsi (talk) 18:59, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I removed references to movement because I don't think this is essentially motional but rather spatial e.g. "The hours of a sundial are arranged anticlockwise" Moogsi (talk) 19:02, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Latin: respondeor

The author of entry for verb "respondeo" claims that The passive voice is limited to third-person singular forms. However there exists in wiktionary an entry "respondeor". This contradicts what is said of "respondeo". Pierrecmichaud (talk) 04:54, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the Latin entry whole, it was created by a bot. Anti-Gamz Dust (There's Hillcrest!) 04:05, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There are other spurious forms: respondebar, respondebor, etc. These might be attested, but it's definitely non-classical/proscribed. --Barytonesis (talk) 15:49, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

RFV: marks on Italian obliquum pronouns

Is this dissymmetry true (at least could be in PT/GL/ES)?:

meco: Prep. archaic, literary DEF (1)
teco: Prep. archaic, literary DEF (1)
seco: Prep. archaic. literary DEF (2)
nosco: Pron. HEAD poetic, archaic (4 by extension)
vosco: Adv. HEAD poetic, archaic (1)

Notice the different placement of the marks (before DEF inition; or TCX after HEAD) with no relation to the number of senses (1-4) whatsoever. And the diff POS. Sobreira ►〓 (parlez) 09:21, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reichism

Definition makes no sense at all. How can all races be superior? Superior to what, if not other races? What does "anti-racist with anti-Semitism" mean? Equinox ◑ 15:41, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps "superior" should be changed to "equal". I think the end part refers to this belief as being non-racist, and especially having no anti-semitic affiliations Leasnam (talk) 16:45, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

More importantly, there doesn't seem to be any usage for it. All I can find is references to w:William Reich and one or two references to German imperialism. There's one quote from the Clinton administration in the US, apparently referring to w:Robert Reich. A quick look through the hits for "Reichist" show pretty much only German, not English. It looks to me like the folks at Wikipedia couldn't figure this out, so they transwikied it here instead of just deleting it. Chuck Entz (talk) 19:03, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, right, I assumed the reich was the third reich or something, not a surname. Thanks. Equinox ◑ 23:21, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It is, in the case of the references to German imperialism- but that wouldn't be capitalized in English, and I don't think they're the same as the challenged sense. Chuck Entz (talk) 23:50, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

make the hunting dog chase the rabbit

Hey all. Do we have a word in English meaning to make the dog chase the rabbit, in hunting? Spanish's got one - engalgar - WF

The nearest that we have is let the dog see the rabbit. SemperBlotto (talk) 07:26, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

prepared

How does "prepared" mean "willing"? I don't understand this definition. DTLHS (talk) 01:34, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The definition is correct. In most cases 'prepared' means 'willing'. ---> Tooironic (talk) 02:32, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe we could add a literal sense: "factually/pragmatically prepared" (good to go, ready), as opposed to "mentally/emotionally prepared" (willing). I've added two synonyms, does that help? Also, compare readiness, which means both "preparedness" and "willingness". --Barytonesis (talk) 15:45, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I also think we need a definition for prepared as in "I am more prepared for this test than the last one." and "I am better prepared to take this test.". DCDuring (talk) 22:17, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

fair's fair

No entry for this that I can see. Oxford online has "used to request just treatment or assert that a situation is just". DonnanZ (talk) 15:32, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What does 주일 mean?

I have a Korean Mass timetable distinguishing 주일미사, 토요미사, 평일미사. Wiktionary lets me translate them as Weekday Mass, Saturday Mass, Weekday Mass. Err, what? Surely one of those Weekday Masses is actually a Sunday Mass? Google suggests 주일 means weekend/week/weekday/holiday/Sunday, and translates 주일미사 to Sunday mass. Moreover, the etymology is 週日, which means Sunday basically everywhere, and can mean Weekday in Hong Kong, Malaysia and Singapore. So what does 주일 mean? Sunday or Weekday? Or maybe both are possible but it's Sunday in 주일미사? MGorrone (talk) 16:43, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have no answer to your question, but I do wonder why Mass is 밋사 (mitsa) in the first term and 미사 (misa) in the other two. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 19:40, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Angr: because on a Romaja keyboard that is Missa and Misa and, well, typo :). Accidental double s. Fixed now. MGorrone (talk) 21:47, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@MGorrone: FWIW, 週日 (shūjitsu) in Japanese means wither “week days → number of days in a week: seven days”, or “weekday”, generally meaning every day except Saturday and Sunday. Also, Google Translate (and, so far as I've seen, any MT platform at all) is often unreliably inaccurate. I do note that our Korean 주일 (ju'il) entry displays a notable lack of Sunday-ness.

That said, the 주일 entry on Naver shows two derivations -- one from 週日, meaning “weekday; week”, and one from 主日, meaning “Lord's day → Sunday”. So apparently in Korean, 주일 (ju'il) can confusingly mean either “Sunday” or “weekday (excluding Sunday)”. In the context of your text, I suspect 주일 is meant with the 主日 derivation. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 04:16, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@MGorrone Eirikr pretty much got it correct, though I'm not aware of it meaning “weekday”. I've expanded the entry. Please take a look. Wyang (talk) 07:21, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Wyang: I recall reading that hangul spellings don't indicate long vowels, even though they apparently exist as a phonemic element in Korean terms. By way of comparison, JA does have a length distinction between these two terms, as 週日 (shūjitsu) with a long /uː/, and 主日 (shujitsu) with a short /u/. On the 주일 (ju'il) page, should there be any difference in pronunciation for the 週日 and 主日 derivations? Or is there no vowel-length distinction between these two in Korean?

Curious, ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 18:43, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Eirikr This is a funny one, because Korean merges 週日 and 主日 and makes them completely homophonous (length included), while Japanese keeps the pronunciations apart, even though Japanese on average merges more Sino-xenic readings than Korean. I remember this table from a few years back that illustrated this general tendency quite vividly.

With these two words:

Character	Middle Chinese	Mandarin	Cantonese	Sino-Japanese (Kan’on)	Sino-Korean	Sino-Vietnamese
週	/꜀t͡ɕɨu/ invalid IPA characters (꜀)	/ʈ͡ʂou˥˥/	/t͡sau˥˥/	/siu/ > /sjuː/	/t͡ɕu/	/cu˧˧/
主	/꜂t͡ɕɨo/ invalid IPA characters (꜂)	/ʈ͡ʂu˨˩˦/	/t͡ɕy˧˥/	/sju/	/t͡ɕu/	/cu˧˩/

The Japanese long/short vowel difference reflects the different rhymes in MC, whereas a difference in vowel length in Korean (although there is none here) is usually the consequence of different tones in MC. Wyang (talk) 10:38, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dutch: weggeweest

The inflected forms "weggeweeste" en "weggeweests" simply do not exist, anymore than "geweeste" exists. The latter is always the strong "gewezen" and means "former", ex-"

Jcwf (talk) 00:30, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. It sounds as though all you had to do was to remove the table, which I've now done. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 04:34, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"The dick" instead of the fuck: how common?

I heard this in a few Youtube videos by The Grand Poobear (a streamer) and perhaps one by ryukahr (another streamer), and I was wondering if it's just him (or them two) or it's more widespread, and if we could possibly find attestation for this. I only remember one Poobear quotation: «What the dick enemy was that?!». Urban Dictionary seems to support that it's not just two people (I assume only two people wouldn't create an entry with that many sections?). Other sources? MGorrone (talk) 14:08, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Even if more people use this, my guess is that it's too new of a phrase for there to be any attestations. —Globins (talk) 06:49, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Want, Ignorance

Defined as "a personification of want" and "a personification of ignorance". Can you not do this with any abstract concept by giving it a capital? I'm reminded of an old ad for breakfast cereal, "Hunger strikes!", where Hunger was a little dancing monster that had to be locked up till lunchtime. Equinox ◑ 19:35, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why these have their own entries. As far as I know, there's no widely agreed-upon personification of either of these concepts like the personifications of death or time. —Globins (talk) 06:47, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I'm not sure about these. You can do this with any abstract concept, and it was a common literary device, in classical antiquity and the renaissance particularly, to do so. So I'm sure you could find some citations for both, but there is no extra information in the definition other than 'personification of X'. The only other concept I have a strong image for is Envy, and that's only because of Shakespeare's 'green-eyed monster'. All others I can think of are borrowed from antiquity and have definite forms (Justice, Victory, etc.) I think these definitions can be removed. Moogsi (talk) 17:50, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

clit

The etymology reads "Clipping of clitoris". I feel it's a rather unfortunate choice of words... --Barytonesis (talk) 20:32, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

clipping is the technical term; see our third definition. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 21:13, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Metaknowledge: I'm aware of that; I was just underlining the fact that "clipping of clitoris" is dangerously close to "clipping of clitoris". I've replaced "clipping" with "apocope". --Barytonesis (talk) 23:57, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Barytonesis: But it isn't apocope. Apocope is the deletion of the final vowel (plus any consonants that may follow it). The apocope of clitoris would be *clitor. It may sound unfortunate in this circumstance, but it is a clipping, like it or not. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:15, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Angr: Oh, I see. I thought apocopes and aphaereses were subtypes of clippings. --Barytonesis (talk) 13:24, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well they are, but those terms are more specific than clipping, and since clit~~oris~~ removes more than the word-final V(C) sequence, it's not apocope. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:40, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The wording is a little unfortunate, maybe "short form of" would be better. DonnanZ (talk) 23:42, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I assumed it was a simple abbreviation. SemperBlotto (talk) 06:11, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It is, kind of, but "abbreviation" implies a form like clit. or clit’ whereas "clipping", although a bit jargony, doesn't. Ƿidsiþ 13:51, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

on the phone

This was deleted as it is unidiomatic in the sense of "talking via a telephone", but there is an older sense of being connected to the telephone system by having a telephone in one's house. This dates back to the time when many people did not have phones at home, and so people wanting to keep in touch would ask each other "Are you on the phone?"

This sense seems idiomatic to me. Thoughts? — Paul G (talk) 06:45, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

All the citations I found on Google Books for on the phone before 1929 were of the unidiomatic sense. I didn't try News. DCDuring (talk) 14:43, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Same is true of e.g. "on the Internet" ("they live out in the woods and aren't on the Internet yet" vs. "he's been on the Internet all night"). Equinox ◑ 16:23, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And you can also say that a building etc. is "on" mains power. I think it's a normal sense of "on" and if we don't have it covered by "on" then we should. Equinox ◑ 16:24, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

-tion

Discussion moved from Wiktionary:Requests for verification/English.

There's no way this suffix is unproductive. —Globins (talk) 06:55, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – widespread use. Just search Google Books for "termination", "deletion", or "justification". Concerns about the label should be raised elsewhere, maybe at the tea room. —Granger (talk · contribs) 11:08, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
What will looking for "termination", "deletion" or "justification" in Google Books prove? --Barytonesis (talk) 11:24, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That the suffix exists. —Granger (talk · contribs) 11:54, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I know it exists, I just think the label "unproductive" is a mislabeling. —Globins (talk) 14:23, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Accordingly, I've moved this discussion to the tea room. —Granger (talk · contribs) 16:08, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't this just an "alternative form of" (deprecated template usage) -ation? SemperBlotto (talk) 11:37, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Etymologically, it's the other way around: Latin -atio is a metanalysis of -tio when appended to first conjugation verbs. I don't know how it's felt in English, though. --Barytonesis (talk) 12:01, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'd consider it an alternative form in English. -tion vs -ation just depends on whichever one works with the word ending. —Globins (talk) 14:23, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Globins: to go back to your original question: is it truly productive? It might feel that way synchronically, but diachronically the only true suffixation I see is gumption; all the rest are borrowings from Latin or French or whatever. --Trousse à queues (talk) 17:53, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
How about discombobulation? I think it might be best to remove the unproductive label and add a Usage Notes section that says that it's a variant of -ation that's only used when the word being suffixed already ends in -ate. —Globins (talk) 19:54, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
To answer the question of whether this suffix per se is productive, I would say no. I can think of some ways it is counterproductive (e.g. the back-formed noun sense of invite replacing invitation - although this is also an instance of initial-stress-derived nouns being very much productive in English). I do think -ify and so -ification are productive, so that may cause some confustion. Moogsi (talk) 18:14, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

realtalk

Reading this article about written laughter, I'm not sure about the meaning of “realtalk” in this part:

Take hahaha, which we’ll call basic laughter. It’s actually anything but basic, with the ability to shorten (haha), [...], or replace with an “e” (hehe) — though, realtalk, The New Yorker may have called hehehe a “younger person’s e-laugh,” but ask any actual young person today and his or her response is likely to be “ew.”

Does it simply mean “seriously”, as proposed in the 4th definition on Urban Dictionary? (realtalk - To be serious about something, Being serious about a conversation and/or topic.) Or are there more nuances in it?

Thanks - Cos (talk) 10:00, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Plural of tinda

What's the plural of tinda (the squash)? Tindas is ok? Fructibus (talk) 12:35, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

tindas is attested. DTLHS (talk) 17:40, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Seems right to me (I know my way around Indian English). It's also uncountable. —Aryaman ^{(मुझसे बात करो)} 22:02, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Someone knowing Telugu and wikisaurus

Thesaurus:పండు in Category:Thesaurus:Food and drink ? Sobreira ►〓 (parlez) 10:48, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Sobreira: I don't know any Telugu, but what's wrong with it? It's just a list of fruits in the hyponyms section. —Aryaman ^{(मुझसे बात करो)} 22:00, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We should really categorise by language if we're going to create foreign thesaurus entries (which we shouldn't, imo). It's bound to get messy otherwise. --Barytonesis (talk) 22:03, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I hackily made CAT:Hindi Wikisaurus a while back. I don't see any reason not to make foreign language thesauri, we already use {{syn}} and {{ant}} etc. for FL entries. —Aryaman ^{(मुझसे बात करो)} 22:06, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I noticed that, that's a first step. I'm hesitant about the naming scheme: should it be

"TH:language/term" (Thesaurus:Hindi/water)
"TH:term/language" (Thesaurus:coglione/Italian)
"TH:langcode:term" (Thesaurus:pt:autêntico)
"TH:language:term" (Thesaurus:Polish:złoczyńca)?

The second one doesn't make much sense so we can probably scrape that one. And I know there are opposants to language code. See also Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2017/August § Disambiguate Wikisaurus .28thesaurus.29 entries by language. --Barytonesis (talk) 22:19, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That was actually my point, Telugu in English.

About existence of FL Wikisaurus I later read this. Consider also the existence of v.gr. Category:Portuguese_snowclones.
About name for category, consider also this. I saw other wikts: es:Wikcionario:child/Tesauro/en; fr:Thésaurus:avion/italien. I didn't find anything else. I would follow one of this models for template exchange compatibility and in case in the future we can implement them in wikidata. Sobreira ►〓 (parlez) 09:31, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(I have moved three pages back where they were before, including Thesaurus:coglione. Their being moved is not necessary to illustrate alternative locations; let's avoid any moves that create more mess in the actual thesaurus. --Dan Polansky (talk) 10:00, 15 November 2017 (UTC))[reply]

Quick question re: pronunciation of reactionary

Entry in question: reactionary. Currently our pronunciation reads /ɹɪˈækʃən(ə)ɹi/, but I'm pretty sure I've heard the pronunciation /ɹɪˈækʃəˌnɛɹi/ (or something along those lines) before, or at least I've personally been reading it that way all this time. Now while I tend to have a reasonably good feel for the language I'm no native speaker, so I'm wondering if any native English speakers can help clear this up? Are there multiple pronunciations? — Kleio (t · c) 17:07, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there are. As with many words ending in -ary, there is a British pronunciation in /(ə)ɹi/ and an American pronunciation in /ˌɛɹi/. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 17:37, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I see, thank you. Thought I was just imagining things. — Kleio (t · c) 17:45, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

子, "master" sense

What is the origin of the "(great) master" sense for 子 ? Out of curiosity. --POKéTalker (talk) 19:40, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

-genesis

Why should we analyze this as a suffix and not just genesis? DTLHS (talk) 00:40, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

gnagan

The past is gnōh by B&T, but it is gnōg at Old Engli.sh. Don't know which it is... Anglish4699 (talk) 03:08, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Probably both. Word-final g and h are more or less in free variation in Old English. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:19, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

faffy

What does it mean? Collins says "awkward and time-consuming", fitting with "faff about", but the two examples I found at Citations:faffy seem maybe more like "silly". The English Dialect Dictionary has "gusty, apt to blow about" which is probably a separate, older sense, possibly citable (EDD has one cite of "varry faffy"). - -sche (discuss) 03:19, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 307: / Line 307: @@
 :::::* About existence of FL Wikisaurus I later read [[Wiktionary:Thesaurus#Multilingualism|this]]. Consider also the existence of v.gr. [[:Category:Portuguese_snowclones]].
 :::::* About name for category, consider also [[:Category:te:Fruits|this]]. I saw other wikts: [[:es:Wikcionario:child/Tesauro/en]]; [[:fr:Thésaurus:avion/italien]]. I didn't find anything else. I would follow one of this models for template exchange compatibility and in case in the future we can implement them in wikidata. [[User:Sobreira|Sobreira]] ►〓 [[User_talk:Sobreira|(''parlez'')]] 09:31, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
+:::: (I have moved three pages back where they were before, including [[Thesaurus:coglione]]. Their being moved is not necessary to illustrate alternative locations; let's avoid any moves that create more mess in the actual thesaurus. --[[User:Dan Polansky|Dan Polansky]] ([[User talk:Dan Polansky|talk]]) 10:00, 15 November 2017 (UTC))
 == Quick question re: pronunciation of ''reactionary'' ==