Talk:animal

U.S./American usage of 'animal' meaning 4 legged fauna. i.e. phrases like "birds, fish, and animals"?? — This unsigned comment was added by 83.70.67.199 (talk) at 17:36, 24 September 2006 (UTC).

Humans

"Evolutionary biologists say humans are also animals."
Just evolutionary biologists? I was under the impression that under this scientific definition, every living thing was either a plant or an animal. We are not plants. We eat things, we have cells, and there is no biological difference between us and "other" animals. Under this BIOLOGICAL definition, I don't think there's any question of whether we are animals. (We're not plants, or silicon based, etc)

num. 2 already covers non-scientific usage, IE all living things which aren't plants, except humans.

EDIT: I just changed the sentence to something more accurate:

"Humans are also animals, under the scientific definition, as we are not plants."

This fits with the previous sentence as well. I'll keep this as an explaination. 74.14.122.167 23:05, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Political animal

I think this is a specific expression, from Aristotle I think, not a general use of the word "animal." Redddogg 03:55, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Definition

The current scientific definition is in no way rigorous enough to satisfy a scientist.This definition would allow slime molds (motile fungi) and Venus flytraps (a plant that 'moves' and 'eats other organisms') to be 'animals.' I would simply write: 'animal: a monophyletic kingdom of multicellular heterotrophic eukaryote with internal digestion. That is, animals are all descended from a common ancestor. They are organisms composed of many individual cells with distinct nuclei and membrane-bound organelles. They obtain nutrition solely by ingesting organic matter and then breaking it down.'

Movement is no kind of animal criterion. When was the last time a coral or barnacle moved? If you want to say that movement only has to apply to parts of the organism, then the Venus flytrap certainly moves, and even a tree moves when the wind blows. Dhicks3 17:30, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Mistake in French

There's a mistake in the French section. The plural of animal is animaux and not animaaux. I don't know how to change it. 24.48.117.59 02:28, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Fixed. Thanks. — Ungoliant ^(falai) 02:46, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Citation for Portuguese

@Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV Would you mind adding a citation to at least one of the Portuguese senses, preferably one of the slangy or colloquial senses? ←₰-→ Lingo ^Bingo _Dingo (talk) 11:58, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

@Lingo Bingo Dingo  Done — Ungoliant ^(falai) 01:36, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

RFD discussion: February–July 2024

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.

---

animal

Rfd-sense adjective: Of or relating to animals.

This seems like a very straightforward attributive use. Theknightwho (talk) 23:49, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Keep per the etymology, which also accords with older usage I've seen. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 19:59, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Keep per the OED, quotations (e.g., “both animal and vegetal remains”; “a form either wholly or partially animal. […] (who never has human form)”), and derived terms (e.g., semianimal (“half or partly animal”); cf. semihuman). J3133 (talk) 11:54, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

@Theknightwho: I am not sure if you looked in the OED adjective entry; if not, do you still propose this deletion? J3133 (talk) 12:29, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

@J3133 That still seems attributive to me (despite the use of vegetal), but I don't mind if we keep it. The etymology argument is probably more convincing, under WT:JIFFY. Theknightwho (talk) 12:36, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

@Theknightwho: I do not see how “wholly or partially animal” or “half or partly animal” is attributive, because it does not “modif[y] another noun attributively”. J3133 (talk) 12:41, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

@J3133 That just seems like a noun use: "a form either wholly or partially man" sounds odd but not ungrammatical. Theknightwho (talk) 12:46, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

@Theknightwho: I have added two more quotations: “I’m no longer human or animal or vegetal” and “though undoubtedly human, it was very animal in its instincts and ways”. The former uses three adjectives; the latter, with a modifier, clearly shows that this is an adjective. J3133 (talk) 13:03, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

@J3133 I find the second quotation more convincing, but sure - this does seem to be an adjective in some uses. Theknightwho (talk) 13:08, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

• RFD-kept. Inqilābī 19:55, 14 July 2024 (UTC)