Talk:jump a claim

RFD discussion: June–September 2023

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.

---

jump a claim

jump claims

SOP, I think a sense at jump should suffice (maybe "to overtake literally of figuratively"?), if sense 8 isn't enough already: "To move to a position that is further forward" ("I hate it when people jump the queue"). The variation in form ("jump a few claims" is also attested: "He gambled at cards, bought and sold horses, refereed boxing matches, got into mining again, tried to sell gold-painted rocks to rubes, defused a property-line dispute and jumped a few claims."; "the same long story about the time somebody jumped his claim", etc., etc.) indicates this is a collocation, not a lexicalised idiom. PUC – 15:31, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

• Speedy keep as a paradigmatic set phrase. Nominator falsely states that this is not lexicalized; clearly it is (see Webster-dictionary.net, WordSense Collins). I would suggest that the nominator get a clue, but I expect this will only lead to that set phrase being nominated for deletion next. bd2412 T 12:22, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
  • Leaving aside the personal attack, your argument amounts to "it is not true that it is not lexicalized because it is obviously lexicalized". Lol, okay. By the way, you realize wordsense is a mirror site for Wiktionary, right? PUC – 16:42, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
    • The tenor of my response was justified by the utter waste of the community's time in making such poorly thought and poorly researched nominations as this one and the one above for cut a deal. There is a point where the hand-holding for an incapacity to comprehend the concept of a "set phrase" has to end. bd2412 T 01:19, 27 June 2023 (UTC)
      • The real waste of time here is having to deal with your condescending tone, your non-arguments and your attempts to shut down rational debate. Nobody is forcing you or anyone else to participate in these RFDs, you know.

In the meanwhile, I'm trying to offer possible comparanda, to suggest glosses and synonyms for a potential new sense at jump, and to find instances of jump used in that sense with other nouns. Maybe it'll result in the project having a little edge over other dictionaries? PUC – 19:33, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

I don't have to respond to thoughtless nominations, but the community ultimately does. Irrespective of whether we add a sense to jump for the way that it is uniquely used in the phrase, "jump a claim", the collocation is still very clearly a set phrase, and is includable nonetheless. If this were not the case, we would have no multi-word entries at all, and would define things like fire engine and dog days strictly by adding senses to fire, engine, dog, and days. bd2412 T 20:41, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

No, the community doesn't have to do anything; if a nomination appears to be unfounded, it can safely be ignored. I cannot - and do not - delete entries unilaterally, so if no one responds, I won't do anything, and the RFD will eventually be closed, by me or by someone else.

Obviously, things would be different if there was an abuse of the RFD process on my part. But there isn't: I'm not nominating every multiword entry there is for RFD; and clearly, if their outcome is anything to go by, some of my RFDs are founded (lose an hour of sleep being a recent example). If someone points out to me, with arguments, that this or that nomination is completely mistaken, I'll retract it. But unless there's some sort of quota, or unless the community as a whole starts complaining that too many of my requests are ridiculous, I'll continue doing what I do, thank you very much.

Finally, you seem to be inventing rules. There's no provision for mere collocations/set phrases at WT:CFI; CTRL+F "set phrase" doesn't return any result. We create entries for things that are irreducible to the sum of their parts. If an expression can be explained at a lower level, that of its components, that's what we usually do. PUC – 10:21, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

There are dozens of discussions such as these where the fact of a collocation being a set phrase is precisely the rationale for it being kept. As for the cost to the community, yes, there is absolutely a cost. Look up the page. We have discussions lingering open from over a year ago. These do not magically resolve themselves merely because you stop thinking about them. bd2412 T 14:04, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

This is a maintenance page. Some clutter on a maintenance page is only to be expected in a work in progress. We have no schedule to observe, and the project isn't going to crash because this page gets a bit long. What matters is making sure that the mainspace doesn't contain things it should not contain. (And please don't tell me "yeah, but you're not the one who has to close all these RFDs afterwards" - I do close some of them.) PUC – 11:08, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

I can't see any such sense at jump, and am not sure that you can jump anything else. What other nouns are possible? (This phrase was famously used in one of the Sherlock Holmes stories, BTW.) Equinox ◑ 16:54, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

You can also jump someone else's land or property: see GB for jumped his land, jumped my land, jumped their property. jump a claim is a collocation, yes, but having a separate entry for it is not the right solution.

I didn't say there is an appropriate sense at jump, I suggested adding one. I thought jump means something similar here to what it means in jump a queue, but I think I was wrong, so I've struck out that part. It seems closer to sense 9 "To attack suddenly and violently" (The hoodlum jumped a woman in the alley.) Maybe to appropriate, to arrogate?

And what does jump mean in "I staked that claim first, but they jumped my rights"? PUC – 17:26, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

If "jumping a claim" originated as an idiomatic expression, and was then back-formed into a general meaning of jump (in the same way that "kicked the bucket" has lead to "kicked" meaning "died"), then the original idiomacity does not cease as an historical fact. bd2412 T 19:06, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

If that's indeed what happened historically, then yes, WT:JIFFY applies. PUC – 19:37, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure how to vote, but I would like to note that the phrase did not exist (on Google N-grams) until 1848/1849- none in 1845 or before. That indicates to me a close connection or origination with the 1849 Gold Rush. The fact that the terminology did not exist before then may go to show that this was not a normal use of "jump" and "claim" until that moment in time- no Scottish lords wrote in their diaries about jumping a claim for instance. This is an American creation. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 14:45, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

• Keep. I'd say that our struggles with determining what the meaning is show that this cannot be sum-of-parts. —Soap— 11:42, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
• Keep Jberkel 13:29, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Kept. PUC – 13:39, 17 September 2023 (UTC)