Talk:galacto-

RFC discussion: December 2013

The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for cleanup.

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.

---

galacto- and papillo-

Non-standard header instead of a ==language== section. Format is all wrong - probably need rewriting from scratch. SemperBlotto (talk) 22:24, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

• p.s. galacto- can also be astronomical (about galaxies)

This raises questions I've been trying to ignore about what Merriam Webster has been calling International Scientific Vocabulary since the 1960s. In taxonomy it is easy to find support for Translingual as an appropriate home for words and morphemes. MW includes much more. papillo- would probably be part of both biology and medicine, adding meaning in the same way in multiple languages. I'm not sure how much support there is for a major expansion of the items we include in Translingual. We certainly try to treat Translingual entries as second class, not allowing translation tables or pronunciation. DCDuring TALK 22:43, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

We treat the chemopharmaceutical morphemes as English. Are they not used and understood in other languages? DCDuring TALK 22:46, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

I would support allowing more types of international terminology in Translingual sections. --WikiTiki89 22:52, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

The question is whether all languages would use the exact same spelling. In Catalan, you'd find papil·lo- for example, and most Slavic languages would write galakto- because "c" has an entirely different pronunciation in those languages. —CodeCat 23:03, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Definitely delete and start again. Mglovesfun (talk) 23:21, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

It would be easy enough to change the L2 from International Scientific Vocabulary to Translingual and add an inflection line, which would clean these two entries up. There is even support in taxonomic names for these as prefixes, such as Papillogobius (possibly a syn of Favonigobius) = papillo- + Gobius (" a goby") and Galactomyces.

The issue is more the scope of such terms outside of taxonomy. I'm not sure that affixes is where I would most want to start, but the issue presents itself here. I think we are not in a position to resolve the larger issue, so kicking the can down the road is probably the best we can do. At least we here know there might be a can waiting for us down the road. DCDuring TALK 23:44, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

•  Done Cleaned up as if only used for taxonomic names. DCDuring TALK 00:04, 13 December 2013 (UTC)