User talk:Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV/self examples
Not so sure about "pixels". That depends on whether the user is viewing this page in a typical Web browser or using other media such as a screenreader for the blind. The same argument might apply to text, because a screenreader only renders the contents as speech. Equinox ◑ 23:08, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
- You’re right about pixels, but text is stored as text in Wikimedia’s database anyway. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 23:15, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
- It's text in WM's database, but not to the blind person who hears it spoken by computer. It's sometimes text, but not always. If you accept text, you should accept red, because the word red is sometimes written in red colour (but not always)! Equinox ◑ 23:19, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
- What about the fourth definition of text? We could use that as a gloss. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 23:25, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
- I don't think that the audio signals reaching a blind person's ear are computer data. Equinox ◑ 23:27, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
- Fair enough. Removed. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 23:34, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
- I don't think that the audio signals reaching a blind person's ear are computer data. Equinox ◑ 23:27, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
- What about the fourth definition of text? We could use that as a gloss. Ungoliant MMDCCLXIV 23:25, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
- It's text in WM's database, but not to the blind person who hears it spoken by computer. It's sometimes text, but not always. If you accept text, you should accept red, because the word red is sometimes written in red colour (but not always)! Equinox ◑ 23:19, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
I thought of a few more: haplogy, pentasyllabic, and verbified. Wonderful list, though. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 16:52, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
- Added. BTW friends are free to edit this page. — Ungoliant (Falai) 17:37, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks. I just don't like to mess with other people's pet projects without permission. --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 17:41, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
Um, did you know about Appendix:English autological terms? Should this be merged there? Is it cheating to look at an appendix? --Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 22:36, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
- I know, but I only found out about it a few days after creating this page. Still, having it in User: allows humorous things like “tpyo” and “psæudoarchaïſm” which wouldn’t be appropriate for a serious appendix. — Ungoliant (Falai) 23:03, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
- Just noticed Spanish grave and esdrújulo. Not sure if you take foreign words, though. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 03:23, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
The actual pixels may not be visible to the naked eye. You didn't include "atoms," "molecules" and the many more similar things, and well, I don't agree with any for the same reason: we don't see them in particular due to how small they are. We see the bigger things formed. No one sees atoms and pixels. Moreover, you included "pixels," but since there are also atoms and protons in the same word, why not "consonants," which also has vowels in it, and so on. In fact, "rectangle" in some fonts has a clear lowercase L in it. 2001:8A0:433B:F001:39D2:B853:4070:BB23 23:25, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
/self examples[edit]
Words that describe themselves can be split into two classes - those that retain the property when translated into a different language (e.g. polysyllabic and those that don't (e.g. English. Similarly/related :- many sentences are true in one language, but false when translated (e.g. "This is written in English."). Cheers SemperBlotto (talk) 15:08, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
"Words which are examples of themselves (see also autological):" - aren't those called 'autonyms'? — This unsigned comment was added by 70.116.98.136 (talk).
- I can’t say I remember ever seeing autonym used in this sense. — Ungoliant (falai) 02:08, 29 October 2015 (UTC)