Talk:touché
The English audio file is the same as the French one; a separate English one needs to be uploaded. Tooironic 13:29, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Sarcasm Reference
[edit]The reference to possible sarcastic use is redundant and should be removed. Almost any word can be used sarcastically and there is no need to explicitly mention it. It makes it seem like touché is used often sarcastically when there is no referenced literature that uses it that way, nor have I ever read or heard it used sarcastically. It is not commonly understood enough to be used successfully in a sarcastic way. Firefight (talk) 17:55, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
Multiple senses
[edit]Senses 2 and 3 appear similar, except for the use of sarcasm. Since many things can be used sarcastically without that being their default use or meaning, perhaps senses 2 and 3 should be combined/merged. --anon I think touché is the same for Catalan and Spanish. Not sure though, I've asked some Catalan friends and they say it is, so I filled the gap. --anon2
The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for deletion.
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.
Rfd-redundant: An acknowledgement of the success, appropriateness or superiority of an argument, sometimes used sarcastically to mock one's opponent's absurd logic = Used in a conversation or debate to concede a point as true, often in response to a successful counter of one's own logic. An anonymous user on the talk page suggests that these senses be merged. The difference seems to be that one is used against oneself and the other is not. Also, one mentions sarcasm while the other does not. These two senses don't seem to be very distinct. —Internoob (Disc•Cont) 03:09, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
They are, in my opinion, very distinct. One touche is sarcastic/mocking, and is also said during an argument to acknowledge superiority of an argument. Another is completely different; it's the acknowledgment that your opponent has won the discussion that is at hand. I find it completely unnecessary to merge these two definitions. Keep Zamoonda 21:34, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
The following discussion has been moved from the page [[{{{source}}}]].
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.
Rfd-redundant — This comment was unsigned.
- I agree. Delete. Sense 2 covers it. Equinox ◑ 19:38, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
Taken from below, this was a duplicate section. I'd have removed it outright if people hadn't voted already. -- Liliana • 19:55, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
No way - keep it you Philistines!!! I've used it in this sense many times
- But is it the same as the previous sense? If it is and we delete it, we'll still cover your usage with definition #2. --Mglovesfun (talk) 16:41, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Delete per nom.—msh210℠ (talk) 23:56, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
deleted by SemperBlotto -- Liliana • 10:00, 4 January 2012 (UTC)