Talk:pobody's nerfect
Latest comment: 4 years ago by Dan Polansky in topic RFD discussion: November 2019–February 2020
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.
Conveys no information. Any phrase could be so modified. DTLHS (talk) 17:09, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
- Try that on French fries. In any case, the issue is not whether any phrase could be so modified, but whether they actually are. GBS gives many hits, and you can get this on a T-shirt or a mug. The point of the modification is of course that it is an example of its own claim, thus being the antithesis of the claim “I never make misteaks.”. Likewise, for the same reason, you’ll find hits for “hit shappens”. But you’ll have little luck with other spoonerized phrases that carry no such message, such as “geeling food” or “wot to norry”. --Lambiam 19:44, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
- Right, it is felf-mulfilling sessage. Perhaps she would oint this pout in a nusage ote? Mihia (talk) 21:01, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
- I think the technical term is autology – although, to really fit the concept, the phrase should have been “pothing’s nerfect”, so it is an imperfect autology, thus making it an autology on steroids. The etymology section is probably a better place for mentioning its autological nature. --Lambiam 21:52, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
- Fine, as long as she oints the pout, I don't mind where she does it. Mihia (talk) 23:58, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
- I think the technical term is autology – although, to really fit the concept, the phrase should have been “pothing’s nerfect”, so it is an imperfect autology, thus making it an autology on steroids. The etymology section is probably a better place for mentioning its autological nature. --Lambiam 21:52, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
- Right, it is felf-mulfilling sessage. Perhaps she would oint this pout in a nusage ote? Mihia (talk) 21:01, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
- Keep per Lambiam. —Granger (talk · contribs) 00:05, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
- Keep I suppose. The other day I created Kate and Sidney pie after seeing it in H. E. Bates. As Lamb says, only some of the potential forms exist: there is no "Flack Borest trifle". BTW I don't really like using "alternative form" in such entries, since it makes them sound equally valid. Better to define it as the normal term alone, and put the humorous gloss on it. Equinox ◑ 03:29, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
- If it's good enough for DUrban ictionary, if should be good enough for us. DCDuring (talk) 17:01, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
- Kate and Sidney pie should be RFD'd. --Vealhurl (talk) 21:41, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
- RFD kept: no consensus for deletion. --Dan Polansky (talk) 12:03, 15 February 2020 (UTC)