Talk:การสีซอให้ควายฟัง
The following information passed a request for deletion (permalink).
This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.
This idiom does not add การ-. --Octahedron80 (talk) 00:31, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
- @RichardW57 Can you assist with this and the below request? This, that and the other (talk) 08:59, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- 3 quotations could be a bit hard - I only get 430 raw Google hits and Quiet Quentin is barely usable on Firefox. (I don't know whether that's a subtle attempt to drive us to Chrome/Chromium.) --RichardW57 (talk) 10:32, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what @Octahedron80's point is. Is he arguing that formulaic abstract nouns like this are simply SoP? Does he accept การสี as valid if the 3 quotations can be provided? A precedent for including the challenged term is English swinging the lead. RichardW57 (talk) 10:32, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- I've added a quotation for the verbal noun of the idiom. RichardW57 (talk) 12:18, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
I might be a little too stereotypical. Most idioms do not add "การ/ความ" because they have been around since ancient times. The addition of "การ/ความ" on verbs/adjectives/adverbs has only been for later ~100 years (but not all words can apply). If you see that idioms with "การ/ความ" already in use, so I can allow it. If possible, may I have 2 examples. --Octahedron80 (talk) 07:08, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
- I've added two more quotes. Cleaning up the first new citation is possibly beyond me - the passage seems badly trimmed by Google books. The 2021 citation can be rescued, but I first want to know that it's accepted as a durable quotation. The paragraph reads to me as a chain of run-on sentences - I'm not sure that I can trim it. --RichardW57 (talk) 20:31, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
- I don't understand your logic. The idiom doesn't seem restricted to being part of particular larger idioms. Is there a competing idiom that would suppress use of the abstract noun? --RichardW57 (talk) 20:31, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
This appears to be RFD-kept. Vininn126 (talk) 15:03, 5 April 2023 (UTC)