text: obnubilavate

title: obnubilavate


text: obnubilavano

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: obnubilavano


text: obnubilai

title: obnubilai


text: obnubilasti

title: obnubilasti


text: obnubilò

title: obnubilò


text: obnubilammo

title: obnubilammo


text: obnubilarono

title: obnubilarono


text: obnubilerò

title: obnubilerò


text: obnubilerai

title: obnubilerai


text: obnubilerà

title: obnubilerà


text: obnubileremo

title: obnubileremo


text: obnubilerete

title: obnubilerete


text: obnubileranno

title: obnubileranno


text: obnubilerei

title: obnubilerei


text:
obnubilarsi

Verb

 * 1) to dim
 * 2) to cloud over
 * 1) to cloud over

title: obnubilarsi


text: obnubileresti

title: obnubileresti


text: obnubilerebbe

title: obnubilerebbe


text: obnubileremmo

title: obnubileremmo


text: obnubilereste

title: obnubilereste


text: obnubilerebbero

title: obnubilerebbero


text: obnubiliate

title: obnubiliate


text: obnubilino

title: obnubilino


text: obnubilassi

title: obnubilassi


text: obnubilasse

title: obnubilasse


text: obnubilassimo

title: obnubilassimo


text: obnubilassero

title: obnubilassero


text: obnubilarmi

title: obnubilarmi


text: obnubilarti

title: obnubilarti


text: obnubilarci

title: obnubilarci


text: obnubilarvi

title: obnubilarvi


text: obnubilandosi

title: obnubilandosi


text: obnubilandomi

title: obnubilandomi


text: obnubilandoti

title: obnubilandoti


text: obnubilandoci

title: obnubilandoci


text: obnubilandovi

title: obnubilandovi


text: obnubiliamoci

title: obnubiliamoci


text: obnubilatevi

title: obnubilatevi


text:
pesatore

Noun

 * 1) a weights and measures inspector (or similar)

title: pesatore


text: urinen

title: urinen


text: urinerne

title: urinerne


text: salvatico

title: salvatico


text:
Talk:up a creek without a paddle

Tea room discussion
definition includes "superlative of up a creek". Do we have room for humor in Wiktionary? I hope so, but this seems like weak "humor" at the expense of consistency and correctness. Should this be notes as an intensified version of up a creek? DCDuring TALK 15:34, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I would say this is a variation of up the creek without a paddle:, which sounds much more familiar to me. —Michael Z. 2008-07-01 22:00 z
 * The Brigham Young University American Corpus has a 5/5 split on this, for the record. Circeus 22:44, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:up a creek without a paddle


text:
Talk:divitis

Tea room discussion
divitises is a properly-formed but apparantly completely unattested plural. Should divitis: have this plural form shown, or should it be labelled as singular only? —Michael Z. 2008-07-02 00:38 z

 * divitis just got updated with the edit summary “-itis words are generally uncountable.”

 * That's wrong.  There's the divitis where every table cell from 1997-era code is turned into a div, the divitis where every semantic element is replaced with a div and a class attribute (synonym for classitis:), and probably other divitises.

 * There also appear to be bronchitises, laryngitises, and tendinitises. See also itis:,  pl. itises:.

 * From whence comes this reflex to categorize every mass noun as uncountable? That seems to be incorrect more often than not. (I see that a mass noun: is defined as uncountable, which looks demonstrably false to me, as are some of the cited examples).  —Michael Z. 2008-07-02 03:17 z

 * The medical words that end in -itis form their plurals -itides. Sometimes, usually in popular publications, the plural is "-itises". For this neologism, I'd expect the plural to be "divitises" when it finally shows up. If you use, you do not have to address it now. I think that has led less-expert contributors to put in a "-" when the plural has came out wrong after saving. Most of the easy errors get corrected by more expert editors. Some editors, when confronted with a word uncommon in the plural or with a less common type of plural don't change the "uncountable" indication. This extends far beyond mass nouns to various nouns that don't get used in plural forms except by those who do business in the field. Philosophers form plurals of most abstractions. Tuna fisherman and merchants will perhaps discuss "tunas". Most normal folks will not discuss either in the plural. DCDuring TALK 10:19, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

 * Please notice that the lead google books hit for bronchitises is from the humor magazine Punch. There are also only 60 hits total.  These are cases where the plural is practically nonexistent, and the noun is in fact uncountable.  If you disagree, please find a citation for "three bronchitises".  The grammatical term "uncountable" does not mean that a plural is impossible; it means that the plural is exceedingly rare to nonexistent, and that the noun may not be used with a numeral. Hence: uncountable. --EncycloPetey 16:34, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

 * Humbug. The Punch is a fine attestation, as are about 40 others, including “all the bronchitises,” “a few more malarias and bronchitises,” “some of our obstinate chronic bronchitises”, “the sixth ward, in which the hernias, rheumatisms, bronchitises . . . were placed,” “a series of bronchitises,” “the bronchitises will start up,” “Nana had had one of her bronchitises,” “any more of these colds and bronchitises,” “many bronchitises,” “certain of the chronic bronchitises,” “many of the so-called ‘bronchitises’," “an asthma and two bronchitises.”

 * Bronchitis is not the same kind of noun as information—it has an uncountable mode, ‘the disease,’ and also a common sort of countable one, ‘an occurrence of, a case [patient] of, or a type of bronchitis,’ which pluralizes as bronchitises.  It also has an indeterminate mode, as in “his bronchitis,” which cannot be called either (it is not “countable and uncountable,” which would be like calling a number “positive and negative”).  For this reason, I would lump them all into a single definition line rather than splitting them into two.

 * Clearly, itises can take plurals, numbers, and the definite article. Divitis is new technical jargon, and we haven't been able to attest a plural, but it clearly follows the same form as bronchitis.  You may be able to argue that we shouldn't show an unattested plural spelling, but how can you argue that it is uncountable?

 * I think our glossary and dictionary definitions of countable, uncountable, and mass noun need to be tightened up a bit to prevent nouns like these from being painted “uncountable” by default. The examples of money and soap are contradictory.  The expressions “used freely,” “practically nonexistant,” and “exceedingly rare” make the definition unclear, and the statement that uncountable nouns have no plural form is just wrong.

 * And by the way please use the language specific template is unfair.  cannot be used in all cases, for example, in plural entries, or when there needs to be no note on the inflection line at all. —Michael Z. 2008-07-02 19:47 z

 * You have said "clearly, itises can take plurals, numbers, and the definite article", but have not provided a single example of one that has been used with a cardinal number. The sole, odd exception you have noted is "two bronchitises", where the word is used in its countable sense of "a case of bronchitis in a particular person".  That definition does not appear in the entry for that word; the sole definition given is the uncountable one.  The  template is capable of handling both countable and uncountable when used correctly in cunjunction with  and  on the definition line.

 * But back to the thread of this topic, you still have failed to demonstrate that divitis is countable. In fact, other authors of the page have noted that they have found no use of a plural form attested at all.  Since the word is uncountable, the template  works just fine. --EncycloPetey 20:09, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I have just updated bronchitis. As I said, the senses are not distinct, because a usage like “his bronchitis” cannot be placed into one or the other.  Am I mistaken, or have you just switched from arguing that the noun bronchitis is uncountable, to arguing that the uncountable sense of bronchitis is uncountable?  You asked me to cite “three bronchitises”, but I failed by only finding “two bronchitises?”

 * Divitis follows the same form and usage as other itises. The closest I can attest is “you can end up with a case of divitis,” and “another classic example of divitis kicks in when...” These are indeterminate (i.e. not demonstrably uncountable). —Michael Z. 2008-07-02 20:42 z

 * I do not fully understand how our agreed-upon rules apply in the case of uncountability. It would seem that, if the plural form exists, then not every sense of the word can by uncountable, which would suggest that the inflection line should show the plural. I see no reason to assume that uncountability is the default. To the contrary, to learn from the practice of professional lexicographers, it seems most dictionaries simply present the plural or let the user assume that the plural forms by the usual rules, which are, after all, remarkably simple in English, especially since adding -s or -es works when one is in doubt, even if only as a less-preferred form. Following non-English plural rules is much more than one would expect of normal English speakers.
 * Just as has been suggested by someone in the case of Proper nouns, where any Proper noun can automatically be used as a common noun without our acknowledging it, so, in the case of many nouns with uncountable senses, I would suggest that it can be assumed that any noun with an uncountable sense always has the sense "type of" which is automatically countable. The cases to the contrary should be readily attestable or agreed to.
 * Whatever the specifics, we need to take this kind of thing out of the realm of controversy. How should plurals be presented in the lemma? Under what circumstances do they need to be separately attested? Do they need to be attested for each sense? By the same standard as applies for lemmas? Is what is appropriate or customary for "dead" languages appropriate for "living" languages. It's just a matter of trying to figure what would be best for the different classes of our current users, especially those who are most like the users whom he hope to benefit with a more successful Wiktionary. DCDuring TALK 20:45, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:divitis


text:
Talk:game show

Tea room discussion
Should these two definitions really be separate - surely they should be merged?
 * A radio or television programme ...
 * An episode of such programme ... — Saltmarsh απάντηση 15:19, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I would mark the second definition with and post in RFV.  I've never heard of a single episode of such a program referred to as a "game show"; I've only ever heard the term applied to the program(me)/series itself. Consider: "There were two Price is Right game shows each morning." doesn't sound right.  There might be two episodes or two airings, but there is only one game show.  --EncycloPetey 16:30, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

 * But if one watches a "game show" today, isn't that only one episode. I would expect both definitions to be true and readily attestable. In a frequentative use of "watch" it would have to the the first sense" "I watch may favorite "game show" every day." DCDuring TALK 21:27, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, yes, you're only watching one episode, of course. But you're watching the program, no? And I think that the latter is meant by "watch a game show today". Kinda like "I watched M*A*S*H today": the referent is the television series, even though I only watched one episode.—msh210 ℠ 17:43, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

game show
Rfv-sense surely included in the more general Sense#1. — Saltmarsh απάντηση 10:31, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

 * copied for Tearoom:
 * I would mark the second definition with and post in RFV.  I've never heard of a single episode of such a program referred to as a "game show"; I've only ever heard the term applied to the program(me)/series itself. Consider: "There were two Price is Right game shows each morning." doesn't sound right.  There might be two episodes or two airings, but there is only one game show.  --EncycloPetey 16:30, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

 * But if one watches a "game show" today, isn't that only one episode. I would expect both definitions to be true and readily attestable. In a frequentative use of "watch" it would have to the the first sense" "I watch may favorite "game show" every day." DCDuring TALK 21:27, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

 * Surely this applies to practically every entry. — Saltmarsh απάντηση 10:31, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I agree with EP. I think "game show" still refers to the show as a whole, even if you only watch one episode. Would you ever say "I watched two game shows today" meaning that you'd watched two episodes of a single game show? —Ruakh TALK 21:18, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

 * The facts of the matter are that it does not arise because a game show rarely (never?) airs twice in the same day.

 * I view this as something like . The term refers to a physical issue of the magazine ("The magazine was torn"), the business of running the magazine ("The magazine laid off three editors"), and the content of the magazine ("The magazine said ...."). If we want to save ink or screen space, we can certainly do so. Some words are almost identical to this in their functioning (show, newspaper). (Notice that both durable and ephemeral entities can be involved.) But not every series of things works the same way. A play is different, with the word applicable to the script, the production, a particular performance. "Senate" applies to an abstract entity, a specific body of office holders (optionally including the staff), and a two-year term of the body.
 * I suppose we don't say that we will include all senses of all words in all languages, but I'm not sure that I know how to draw the line among senses to include and those to exclude. The meaning of "game show" looks different to someone who is likely to only see one episode or a fragment, a habitual watcher, or someone involved in putting on the show. DCDuring TALK 00:59, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

 * The facts of the matter are that some game shows do regularly air twice in the same day because different networks set different air times for their programs. I can watch Jeopardy! three time a day (if I wanted to).  I view this as more like cop show; if someone says they watched three cop shows today, I automatically assume they mean three episodes from three different titles.  This, like game show is a case of reverse metonymy, where the name of the whole is used to stand in for referring to one of its instances.  And just as we wouldn't define every possible metonymous sense, we shouldn't try to do so here either. --EncycloPetey 02:52, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Which ones do we define? All the non-redundant senses that are verifiable, I guess. So how would one write definitions to eliminate the need for multiple senses such as of magazine ? DCDuring TALK 03:30, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
 * No, we stick with the one sense, and leave it to the reader to understand metonymy. Otherwise we'll be diluting useful information with a mountain of trivialities.  If you want to start a vote to include all metnymic senses of words, please do.  All previous discussions we've had rejected the idea. --EncycloPetey 03:40, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I just took a look at book to see how a common word might reveal the principle of "understood metonomy". In that case I found a def. of book as a bound collection of pages (and many other defs.), but not a sense that I believe corresponds to "He wrote a book", "He has a book in him", "He wrote the book on that". (Examples may include more than one sense.) I may well not understand metonymy. If there is a weakness of that entry I would like to understand how that entry can be improved to include what seems to me to be the missing sense. DCDuring TALK 18:30, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
 * A discussion of book probably ought to be separate. I will open a TR discussion TR DCDuring TALK 18:32, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

RFV failed, sense removed. —Ruakh TALK 01:00, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

title: Talk:game show


text: Category:da:Physiology

title: Category:da:Physiology


text:
Talk:overachiever

Tea room discussion
Our sense is "one who overachieves", that is, achieves beyond expectations. An anon has added a sense "one who has overachieved, and expects to do so again". I think the most common sense is "one who tries to overachieve". Thoughts?—msh210 ℠ 19:28, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

How about simply "someone who achieves at a level exceeding expectations." Our previous definition forced a user to click to another entry for no good reason. It also invited the user contribution, which seems to reflect some psychological theory and represent a fairly arbitrary subset of the universe of overachievers. DCDuring TALK 20:08, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't think any of these ideas capture the concept. An overacheiver is not simply someone who achieves a high level of success, like a university professor, or more than would be expected, as in a rags to riches story. Neither of those cases are best labeled that way. An overacheiver is more like a workaholic, someone who works their pants off to do the most that they possibly can, someone who burdens themselves with success. Anyways, regardless of how you phrase the definition, it shouldn't be two lines. DAVilla 00:21, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

 * But that just seems like another species of narrowing the concept to fit a theory. I don't think it's yet clearly supportable even if the meaning is evolving in that direction. We could go that way if we had some cites, of course. DCDuring TALK 00:34, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:overachiever


text:
Talk:सूर्य

Tea room discussion
The definition for this word might benefit from being trimmed. I don't know whether what we have is encyclopaedic (if so is it in Wikipedia?) or just needless waffle. Thryduulf 22:57, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Here's a link for those who, like me, cannot see the word.—msh210 ℠ 23:06, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

 * Linked to English --Ivan Štambuk 09:27, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:सूर्य


text: sgonfiando

title: sgonfiando


text: sgonfiante

title: sgonfiante


text:
sgonfiare

Etymology 1
From.

Verb

 * 1)  to deflate, to let down to let the air out of
 * 2)  to reduce the swelling of
 * 3)  to bring down a peg or two, to reduce (someone or something) to the right level
 * 4)  to deemphasize (a news item or fact), to reduce in importance
 * 5)  to bore, to annoy
 * 6)  to deflate
 * 7)  to subside
 * 8)  to lose self-importance, to deflate
 * 9)  to lose importance

Verb

 * 1)  to puff out

title: sgonfiare


text: sgonfiato

title: sgonfiato


text: sgonfiati

title: sgonfiati


text: sgonfiata

title: sgonfiata


text:
sgonfio

Etymology 1
Unsuffixed past participle of.

Adjective

 * 1) flat
 * 2) deflated

Etymology 2
.

Noun

 * 1) puff (of clothing)

title: sgonfio


text: sgonfi

title: sgonfi


text: sgonfia

title: sgonfia


text: sgonfiamo

title: sgonfiamo


text: sgonfiate

title: sgonfiate


text: sgonfiano

title: sgonfiano


text: sgonfiavo

title: sgonfiavo


text: sgonfiavi

title: sgonfiavi


text: sgonfiava

title: sgonfiava


text: sgonfiavamo

title: sgonfiavamo


text: sgonfiavate

title: sgonfiavate


text: sgonfiavano

title: sgonfiavano


text: sgonfiai

title: sgonfiai


text: sgonfiasti

title: sgonfiasti


text: sgonfiò

title: sgonfiò


text: sgonfiammo

title: sgonfiammo


text: sgonfiaste

title: sgonfiaste


text:
sgonfiarsi

Verb

 * 1) to deflate
 * 2) to go flat
 * 3)  to go down
 * 1)  to go down

title: sgonfiarsi


text: sgonfiarono

title: sgonfiarono


text: sgonfierò

title: sgonfierò


text: sgonfierai

title: sgonfierai


text: sgonfierà

title: sgonfierà


text: sgonfieremo

title: sgonfieremo


text: sgonfierete

title: sgonfierete


text: sgonfieranno

title: sgonfieranno


text: sgonfierei

title: sgonfierei


text: sgonfieresti

title: sgonfieresti


text: sgonfierebbe

title: sgonfierebbe


text: sgonfieremmo

title: sgonfieremmo


text: sgonfiereste

title: sgonfiereste


text: sgonfierebbero

title: sgonfierebbero


text: sgonfino

title: sgonfino


text: sgonfiassi

title: sgonfiassi


text: sgonfiasse

title: sgonfiasse


text: sgonfiassimo

title: sgonfiassimo


text: sgonfiassero

title: sgonfiassero


text: sgonfiarmi

title: sgonfiarmi


text: sgonfiarti

title: sgonfiarti


text: sgonfiarci

title: sgonfiarci


text: sgonfiarvi

title: sgonfiarvi


text: sgonfiandosi

title: sgonfiandosi


text: sgonfiandomi

title: sgonfiandomi


text: sgonfiandoti

title: sgonfiandoti


text: sgonfiandoci

title: sgonfiandoci


text: sgonfiandovi

title: sgonfiandovi


text: sgonfiamoci

title: sgonfiamoci


text: sgonfiatevi

title: sgonfiatevi


text:
Talk:grind

Tea room discussion
The use of Etymology 1 and 2 in grind looks strange to me. I don't see two etymologies. - dougher 04:32, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I think it is intended to say that the Old English word gave rise to the first group, from which the second group then came later. I have my doubts about making these kind of splits too.  --EncycloPetey 04:34, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I think ideally you would simply list the verb first, and then the noun afterwards. But because many editors arrange POSs alphabetically, it becomes difficult to show this kind of relationship without splitting the sections.  Widsith 10:48, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

 * Also, is it true that undefined: is the plural of undefined:? I think they're simply synonyms, one of which happens to be uncountable and one of which happens to be plural. I find it really hard to imagine "one coffee grind", "two coffee grounds". —Ruakh TALK 01:53, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

 * Based purely on my own usage: A coffee grind is a (countable) type of ground coffee in the sense of "fineness": drip grind, percolator grind, filter grind, etc. A coffee ground is a single particle of what is left after brewing, known collectively as "coffee grounds". It is based on the experience of my youth when some supermarkets had grinding machines which offered those selections. Consider this a hypothesis for the state of current usage in the US, because I haven't had too many conversations on the subject in the past decade or two. DCDuring TALK 02:36, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I think coffee grounds is one of those things which some dictionaries call “usually plural.” Not sure if a single particle is “a ground.” —Michael Z. 2008-07-17 04:11 z

 * Perhaps I can add that this (DCDuring's) is precisely my (UK) usage. — Saltmarsh απάντηση 05:45, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

 * Ah, that makes sense. (I don't drink coffee, and was having difficulty making sense of what I was seeing on b.g.c.) Thanks! —Ruakh TALK 03:13, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Musical sub-meaning
I had an interesting discussion today with a mormon who was violently offended by my use of the word "grinding" referring to a driving musical passage. I certainly could have used the word "driving" more appropriately to describe this musical phrase, but by choosing the word "grinding" I absolutely offended this person. Am I totally out in left field thinking of a grinding rhythm describing a building fast phrase?

--Connel MacKenzie (talk) 00:22, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

 * That person probably confused it with the verb sense ("dance in a sexually suggestive way"). Equinox ◑ 23:47, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Video games
Can also be transitive, perhaps collapsed from constructions like "grind for XP", "grind for lives", etc. to "grind XP", "grind lives", and so forth. Lots of cites for both on the web and I could find at least a few on YouTube although it is more difficult to search there. — Soap — 02:58, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

to grind one's vowels
In Patrick Gale's The Aerodynamics of Pork is the following passage:
 * "She embraced her godson warmly. 'My God,' she ground her vowels, ‘you are getting tall! You’ll match Great-grandfather yet."

What does it mean? None of our definitions seems to make sense here. --Droigheann (talk) 16:13, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Faroese etymology source
I don't know how to edit the article itself just yet, but after a fairly long search, I've been pointed to this page as a source for the etymology of the Faroese term for a pod of whales, reflecting that it is indeed an extension of the Old Norse term for a fence or grille: https://timarit.is/page/930661#page/n71/mode/2up I just thought it helpful to post a link for intellectual honesty's sake. Bobanthar (talk) 16:25, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:grind


text:
User:Ferike333

For this page in Hungarian click here. For this page in German click here.

Welcome to my userpage! My nick is pronounced, but you can simply call me Feri. I live next to the capital of Hungary, Budapest. Thus I'm a native Hungarian. I also speak English and German. My English knowledge is somewhat advanced. My German is between intermediate and advanced, so I plan to take the Oberstufe this fall. Furthermore I started learning French in 2008 and I speak some Russian, too. But I don't really know these two languages, yet. I like English and German the most, but I'm also interested in any other languages. You can also find me under the same username on the Hungarian, German Wiktionaries and the Hungarian and English Wikipedias, but I spend here the most of my time. If you have any questions, feel free to write me. If you discover any mistake I made, please correct it, if you're unsure, let's work it out together. All the best, User:Ferike333

My works

 * vakbél - appendix (organ; common Hungarian name)
 * féregnyúlvány - appendix (organ; official Hungarian name)
 * függelék - appendix in books
 * vakbélgyulladás - appendicitis
 * rezsim - régime
 * medvecukor - liquorice (UK), licorice (US)
 * tanterv - curriculum
 * honvágy - homesickness
 * kofa - a woman who sells fishes, vegetables, etc. in a market
 * tiszafa - yew
 * pisztácia - pistachio
 * tengerimalac - guinea pig
 * kockázatos - risky
 * krisztustövis - holly
 * magyal - holly - completed
 * fasz - dick - completed
 * faszfej - dickhead
 * seggfej - arsehole (UK), asshole (US)
 * keringő - waltz (noun)
 * valcer - waltz (noun)
 * keringőzik - to waltz (verb)
 * felszabadít - to liberate (verb), to free (verb)
 * lucerna - lucerne (UK), alfalfa (US, UK)
 * garnéla, garnélarák - prawn, shrimp, scampi
 * életrajz - biography
 * önéletrajz - autobiography, curriculum vitae (UK), résumé (US)
 * rezümé - résumé
 * biográfia (It feels very official or specific. Normally: életrajz) - biography

My dictionary

 * abrogate [ˈæbrə(ʊ)geɪt] vt eltöröl; ~tion [ˈæbrəgeɪʃn̩] n eltörlés (törvényé)
 * cerumen [sɪˈruːmən] n fülzsír
 * eligible [ɛlɪdʒəbl̩] adj jogosult; in~ [ɪn-] adj jogosulatlan
 * elute [ˈiluːt] vt
 * hearsay [ˈhɪəseɪ US ˈhiːrseɪ] n mendemonda, hallomás
 * hosier [ˈhəʊʒər US -oʊ-] n harisnyakészítő, kötöttáru készítő és -eladó; -y [-i] n harisnya, kötöttáru
 * impeach [ɪmˈpiːtʃ] vt akadályoz, egy közösségen belül vki ellen eljárást indít, annak elbocsátása érdekében
 * insignia [ɪnˈsɪɡniə] n jelvény, kitüntetés
 * jarrah [ˈdʒæɹə] Aus n eukaliptusz
 * jigger [ˈdʒɪgə US ˈdʒɪgɚ] I n dzsigtáncos; rosta; slang bigyó; tatvitorla; tatvitorlás halászbárka; II n homoki bolha; adagolópohár (italkeveréshez; 1,5 uncia)
 * Liverpudlian [lɪvəˈpʌdlɪən US -vɚ-] adj, n liverpooli
 * locale [ləʊˈkɑːl US loʊˈkæl] n helyszín, színhely
 * mail [meɪl] I n páncél, láncing; II n adó, bér, Scottish pénzadomány
 * meringue [?] n habcsók
 * misanthropic [ˌmɪzənˈθɹɒpɪk, -s- US -ˈθrɑ-] adj embergyűlölő
 * nefarious [nɪˈfɛərɪəs] adj becstelen,
 * nudge [nʌdʒ] n lökés, megbökés (finoman); vt meglök (finoman, figyelmeztetés céljából); közelít
 * oversight [ˈəʊvəsaɪt] n elnézés, figyelmetlenség; felügyelet
 * pit [pɪt] v (against sy) áskálódik (vki ellen)
 * privet [ˈprɪvɪt] n fagyal(bokor)
 * puddle [pʌdl̩] n tócsa, pocsolya; vízálló agyag-homokkeverék; coll zűrzavar, összevisszaság; vt keveréket készít; buzgat, kever (acélt); felkavar (vizet); vi tócsában gázol
 * puncheon [ˈpʌntʃn̩] n gyámfa
 * quash [kwɒʃ US -ɑ-, -ɔ-] vt hatálytalanít, ; elnyom, elfojt (lázadást)
 * reproach [rɪˈpɹəʊtʃ US -oʊ-] n szemrehányás; vt szemrehányást tesz (vkinek)
 * roundel [ˈraʊndl̩] n kör, körtánc, felségjel
 * Scouse [skaʊs] n liverpooli; s~ n (liverpooli) pörkölt; Scouser [ˈskaʊzə US -zɚ] n liverpooli
 * seigneur [sɛˈnjɜ US sɛˈnjɝ], seignior [ˈseɪnjə US ˈsiːnjɚ] földesúr, hűbérúr
 * sleiveen (also sleeveen) [ˈsliːviːn] n Irish , csaló
 * snobbery [ˈsnɒbərɪ US ˈsnɑbɛrɪ] n sznobság
 * tomfoolery [ˌtɒmˈfuːləɹi] n idióta viselkedés
 * warp [wɔːp US wɔrp] vt megront, befolyásol
 * yoke [jəʊk US -oʊ-] n járom, iga; vt egyesít, összeköt, összekapcsol

 * Geheimhaltung titoktartás

hu:Szerkesztő:Ferike333 de:Benutzer:Ferike333

Spelling
UK -ce, US -se UK -se, US -ce
 * pretence - pretense
 * vice - vise - satu
 * pactise (verb) - prectice (verb)

UK -re, US -er
 * accouter - felszerel (katonát), accoutrements/accouterments - katonai felszerelés
 * caliber
 * center
 * euchre (eucher is rare)
 * fiber
 * goiter
 * liter
 * louver
 * luster
 * maneuver (manoeuvre in British, other spellings may appear)
 * meager (meagre also has an invariable meaning?)
 * meter
 * miter
 * niter
 * ocher
 * reconnoiter
 * saber
 * saltpeter - salétromsav
 * sepulcher
 * specter - kísértet, szellem
 * theater
 * titer

UK - ise, -yse, US - ize, -yze
 * advertise
 * analyse
 * apologise
 * appetise as in appetiser
 * canonise
 * centralise
 * cicatrise - ?
 * circumcise
 * collectivise
 * colonise
 * criticise
 * digitalise
 * digitise = digitalise
 * dramatise
 * emphasise
 * equalise
 * evangelise
 * finalise
 * galvanise
 * harmonise
 * kulakise
 * localise
 * memorise
 * merchandise (verb)
 * minimise
 * notarise - (közjegyzőileg) hitelesít
 * organise
 * patronise
 * penalise
 * popularise
 * privatise
 * proselytise - megtérít
 * realise
 * revolutionise
 * sanitise
 * seize (seise being a rare alternative)
 * socialise
 * summarise
 * sympathise
 * synchronise
 * tantalise
 * tranquilise, tranquillise (tranquil(l)izer = nyugtató)
 * utilise
 * valorise (even the British omit the "u" from the original word. The "ou" spelling counts as misspelling)
 * vaporise
 * verbalise
 * victimise

UK -ogue, US: -og
 * catalog
 * Decalog
 * dialog
 * epilog
 * monolog
 * synagog

UK -our(-), US: -or(-)
 * arbor
 * ardor
 * behavior
 * candor
 * color
 * demanor - viselkedés
 * endavor (US also uses endavour)
 * favor
 * fervor
 * flavor
 * glamor (US also uses glamour)
 * harbor
 * honor
 * humor
 * labor
 * neighbor
 * odor
 * rumor
 * savor
 * savior
 * splendor - pompa, nagyszerűség, fény
 * tumor
 * vigor

Pronunciation
UK /-aɪ/, US: /-ɪ/
 * everything endig in -isation (UK)/-ization (US)
 * elephantine
 * turbine (US also /aɪ/)
 * direction
 * digestion

UK /-ɪ/, US: /-aɪ/
 * dissect (US /-ɪ/ too)

UK /-aɪl/, US: /-ɪl/
 * docile
 * fertile
 * fragile
 * hostile
 * infantile
 * juvenile
 * missile
 * mobile
 * projectile
 * reptile
 * virile

UK /ɑː/, US: /æ/
 * advance
 * aft
 * blast
 * blaster
 * casket
 * cast
 * caster, castor
 * castle
 * class
 * dance (British also uses /dæns/ or rather /a/)
 * disaster
 * fast
 * France
 * glance
 * glass
 * grasp
 * lance
 * last
 * mass (/mæs/ or /mas/ is also common in British)
 * mast
 * master
 * pass
 * past
 * pastor
 * pistachio
 * plaster (plaister)
 * raft
 * staff
 * vance
 * vast

UK /ɑː/, US: /eɪ/
 * cicada (kabóca)
 * promenade
 * tomato
 * vase

title: User:Ferike333


text:
Talk:brouhaha

Tea room discussion
Can brouhaha be uncountable? I changed the entry from plural brouhaha to brouhahas. RJFJR 16:11, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

 * Yes. There are 639 Google Books results for brouhahas.  NOAD says “usu. in sing.” —Michael Z. 2008-07-16 16:17 z

French quotation
The translation into English is welcome :) Un brouhaha, une tempête d’exclamations accueillit ces paroles = A brouhaha, a gale of exclamations welcomed those words. -- Andrew Krizhanovsky 11:11, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

 * Thanks, I have added the translation to the entry. -- Andrew Krizhanovsky 07:46, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

title: Talk:brouhaha


text:
Talk:axises

Tea room discussion
Is axises an alternative spelling or a common misspelling of the plural of axis? RJFJR 19:38, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

 * It seems prevalent mostly in technical writings by authors for whom English may not be their first language. Not so rare in Groups and newspaper comments (but rare in articles). Hard to separate out from plural of ax/axe. I would favor misspelling. DCDuring TALK 20:19, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I think it's actually . Alternatively, we may wish to create a new or something, seeing as there are tons of these. —Ruakh TALK 00:22, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

 * Not to be pedantic about it, but it seems not a "misconstruction" as much as a simplification, an application of a standard plural rule to what is seen as a standard English word. Increasingly I see the unreasonableness of trying to force people to learn which non-English plural rules are mandatory (Latin, Greek, Italian, Hebrew?) for good English and which are not (Lakota, Aramaic, Bantu). DCDuring TALK 01:24, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

 * It's not Wiktionary's place to try to force people to talk a certain way, but it's also not our place to pretend that all ways of talking are equally standard. All the major online dictionaries — AHD, MW, Dict.com, OED — give the plural as axes: without comment, and they're borne out by practice in edited works. (Note: I'm speaking only of the senses that we actually define at axis:. Apparently it also refers to a kind of deer, and in that sense has plural axises:.) Your comment implicitly recognizes that certain things "are mandatory for good English"; why would you wish to deny our readers that same recognition? —Ruakh TALK 01:40, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

 * Many languages have irregular forms, and it is usually considered erroneous to apply regular rules to these words. It's not unreasonable to “force” people to spell correctly.  In English, axises for axes is just a misspelling—or misconstruction, if we really feel so confident in explaining its mis-etymology. —Michael Z. 2008-07-18 02:09 z

This is one of the most rediculous things I have read. It is axis a pivot point of which something hovers or rotates. It's correct use in a plural statement would be: to simple apply the number of axix to the begining and hyphenate (e.g. 3-axis). And it is many deer. "I was walking down a trail and I saw many deer." Its not many deers! and it not I saw a heard of Axis deers and its not I saw many Axises. It's simply I saw many Axis Deer.

title: Talk:axises


text:
Talk:mis-sold

Tea room discussion
I have just added that this a past participle but is it definitely also an adjective as stated? Pistachio 19:31, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

 * First thing is that "missold" and "mis-sold" are almost equally common on books.google.com. Can something be "very mis-sold" (or "very missold") (gradability), "more mis-sold than" something else (comparability)? Is there any meaning to a word as an adjective that is not within the meaning of the participle? There may be other tests, but those are the ones I use. Do the gradable and comparable uses actually occur in written works (fictional dialogue for colloquial usage). If none of these are true, then we wouldn't take it to be an adjective. See Adjective.
 * In this case "very missold", "too missold", "very mis-sold", "too mis-sold" are not found on google Books, Scholar, News, or Groups. (NOT gradable). Nor was "more missold" or more "mis-sold". (NOT comparable) I would need to see usage of any meaning in the participle or past.
 * Despite all this, we may have an entry for a word as an adjective that is really just a participle. Feel free to correct it or put it into the Request for Verification ("RfV") process by inserting an ((template|rfv}} tag and clicking on the "+" to add it to our RfV page or ask about it in the Tea Room at WT:TR. DCDuring TALK 16:31, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

 * One questionable assumption in the above: that mis-sell or missell is actually a word. No dictionary I have checked has it. DCDuring TALK 19:33, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

 * mis-sell, but not missell (hits are for proper noun Missel or scannos). DCDuring TALK 19:42, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

mis-sold
Rfv-sense UK Sold on the basis of misleading financial advice. I doubt that all of that is conveyed solely by the word "mis-sold". I don't find any indication that "mis-sold" in comparable or gradable on any of our Google sources. DCDuring TALK 16:29, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

 * That seems to be the common understanding of the term in the UK. Google books has several entries (aside from obvious verb usage) for each of "mis-sold pension", "mis-sold endowment", "mis-sold policy" etc.--Dmol 18:32, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

 * Yes. And there is no dictionary I have access to that shows either "missell" or "mis-sell" as a verb. So this follows the other model of a participle-like form that has no non-participial verb forms (I haven't checked "mis-selling" or "misselling".) and therefore can only be listed as an adjective. Arrghh. DCDuring TALK 19:29, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I'm not sure that necessarily follows. If I recall correctly, babysit: is a backformation from babysitting:, which is baby: + sitting: (and used to be hyphenated); but babysitting: is not an adjective. Rather, certain kinds of compounds tend to form only with participles (though backformation frequently generates the other verb forms afterward). (However, I don't know whether this applies to mis-sell:, and if it does, I'm not sure how we want to handle such cases. You can see one approach at [[shareholding]], but I can't say I'm particularly happy with it.) —Ruakh TALK 20:01, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

 * Ah yes, back-formation, certainly. I was following canons of plausible reasoning, not logically inevitability, in line with my general fallibilism on almost all matters, including most people's (including my own !) application of what is purported to be "pure logic". A wiki is a particularly good fit with fallibilism, IMHO.
 * In any event, in this case, mis-sell seems to exist, whether by back-formation or not I don't know. Assuming my reading of the b.g.c. hits is correct, we will have stolen a march on the other on-line dictionaries. I think we should verify the lemma. DCDuring TALK 20:52, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

It seems like the verb is accepted then. Originally I asked whether this is an adjective as well as a past participle. If it is also an adjective, does it mean selling 'on the basis of misleading financial advice' or in a more general sense to sell 'misleadingly, fraudulently or in violation of laws or regulations' (as in mis-sell)? Pistachio 16:10, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

 * Because it hasn't been cited, I wouldn't draw too many conclusions. From my researches it appeared to be used mostly in the UK and mostly arise in some kind of regulatory/legal context with which I am not familiar. DCDuring TALK 16:18, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

 * clocked out as adjective. Verb sense OK. DCDuring <i >TALK</i > 16:01, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:mis-sold


text:
Talk:sticked

Tea room discussion
Normally, the past of stick is stuck - but you can "stick" someone - i.e. use a stick to hit someone, and that past is sticked. How to convey this information? --Felonia 15:26, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

 * Look at how hung and hanged are referenced at hang. Should have usage note(s) explaining as with hang. For stick, the adhere/jam/place/etc senses (i.e. most) are stuck, and the others are sticked. The printing sense is missing. Robert Ullmann 15:36, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

 * And the aviation sense for the verb. E.g. "over sticked" (rare, and probably just SoP) and dead sticked. (we have dead sticking) Robert Ullmann 15:44, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:sticked


text:
tubino

Noun

 * 1) bowler (hat)
 * 2) tube dress

title: tubino


text:
User:RyanCross

Hey there, I'm.

title: User:RyanCross


text:
vignetta

Etymology
From, from , diminutive of , from , from.

Noun

 * 1) vignette (printing)
 * 2) sticker

Etymology
.

Noun

 * 1) illustration
 * 2)  cartoon (in a newspaper)
 * 3)  panel
 * 4)  strip

title: vignetta


text:
Talk:scruffle

Tea room discussion
While i was reading an English book, i couldn't understand the word 'scruffling' in the following sentence.

'I burrowed upwards again, reaching the surface after twenty minutes of snuffling, scruffling and turning my beady nose up at the juicy worms i uncovered every couple of scrapes.'

I can't find the word 'scruffling' in any dictionary. Can anyone help me? Thanks. Vin 08:18, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I believe this is a nonce word that the author made up to fit the situation. From context it means to push dirt away and aside when tunnelling.  From curiousity, what book were you reading?  RJFJR 14:17, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

 * The book is The Amulet of Samarkand. But it isn't a nonce word, it is used at least in Yorkshire, meaning to push soil away whilst weeding. And in several other senses. Should have an entry scruffle, scruffling. Robert Ullmann 14:24, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

 * How come i couldn't find the word in any other dictionary? Thanks for the information! Vin 15:03, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

 * Would this be tagged as dialect or slang? RJFJR 16:00, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:scruffle


text: User:RyanCross/header

title: User:RyanCross/header


text: peritonei

title: peritonei


text: peritoniti

title: peritoniti


text: asciti

title: asciti


text: sierologie

title: sierologie


text: sierologi

title: sierologi


text: sierologhe

title: sierologhe


text: ferritine

title: ferritine


text: patofisiologie

title: patofisiologie


text: renine

title: renine


text:
prostaglandine

Noun

 * 1)  prostaglandin

title: prostaglandine


text: peritoneali

title: peritoneali


text: ormoni follicolo-stimolanti

title: ormoni follicolo-stimolanti


text:
Talk:suggest

Tea room discussion
Are we missing a "recommend" sense ("I suggest that you invite him; otherwise he'll be very hurt." "I suggest you eat the salmon. The beef is rotten."), or is that included in one of the sense we have?—msh210 ℠ 16:33, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I think our current sense #3 ("to ask for without demanding") is a special case of the sense you describe. (The overall sense seems to be something like "to recommend, propose, or bring up (an idea or course of action)" — though maybe they're actually three separate senses?) —Ruakh TALK 19:17, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I teach this as different senses. I suggest we do something, is different from I suggest you do something. The first is "to ask for without demanding", while the second is "recommend". IMHO. -- Algrif 17:40, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree that those are two senses, but don't draw the line at you vs. we. The examples I gave when starting this dicussion ("I suggest you eat the salmon" and the other) are recommendations, not requests.—msh210 ℠ 17:48, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

 * Isn't this another case of the context and "politeness" altering the interpretation? Do such cases really require a separate sense? If every case of irony, politeness, understatement, etc. required a sense line, there's hardly a word that would escape being multi-screen. I suppose that the RfV process would keep the entries from becoming overlong, but at the expense of clogging the RfV process for a while. DCDuring TALK 18:03, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Just to clarify, do you mean, "The sense we should have is 'recommend', and the 'request' sense is just a special use of the 'recommend' sense, where one says 'suggest'/'recommend' as a polite euphemism for 'request'."? I, for one, am okay with that.—msh210 ℠ 18:08, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

 * Well, to me suggest might mean "propose" or "offer as a possibility". If a waiter "suggests" something, we wonder exactly what's motivating the suggestion, but he is displaying "politeness" by advancing it as a modest suggestion. I think we have to stop usually at the surface meaning ("propose") instead of going to the interpretation as "recommendation". After all, if one's boss "suggests" that one put in a little extra effort on a specific project, that is virtually an order, but we would not add "order" as a sense, would we? Admittedly the case at hand is much less clear-cut than the "order" instance, but it certainly ventures into being very situational. DCDuring TALK 18:32, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

when you mean that you advise them to do it
Don't ‘suggest someone to do something’ when you mean that you advise them to do it. You suggest that someone does something. If you say to someone ‘I advise you to...’, you are telling them that you think they should do it https://www.wordreference.com/EnglishUsage/suggest https://www.wordreference.com/EnglishUsage/advises Then, is the structure suggest somebody to do something O.K. with a meaning different from when you mean that you advise them to do it? --Backinstadiums (talk) 16:48, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:suggest


text: ormoni follicolo stimolanti

title: ormoni follicolo stimolanti


text: ascitica

title: ascitica


text: ascitici

title: ascitici


text: trentasettenni

title: trentasettenni


text: ascitiche

title: ascitiche


text: passatoie

title: passatoie


text: sierologica

title: sierologica


text: pesatori

title: pesatori


text: sierologici

title: sierologici


text: sierologiche

title: sierologiche


text: tubini

title: tubini


text: patofisiologica

title: patofisiologica


text: patofisiologici

title: patofisiologici


text: patofisiologiche

title: patofisiologiche


text: classificabili

title: classificabili


text: monografica

title: monografica


text: monografici

title: monografici


text: monografiche

title: monografiche


text: neomelodica

title: neomelodica


text: neomelodici

title: neomelodici


text: neomelodiche

title: neomelodiche


text: salvatica

title: salvatica


text: salvatici

title: salvatici


text: salvatiche

title: salvatiche


text: sgonfie

title: sgonfie


text:
üdvözlet

Etymology
From the üdvözl- stem of.

Noun

 * 1) greeting

title: üdvözlet


text: üdvözletek

title: üdvözletek


text:
User:Robert Ullmann/Italiano

Possible project, reading some Italian newspapers for new and missing words.

Some random notes:

The s/w (as of today, 5.1.9) will not re-list words listed in the last 10 days. Many are from features that are updated weekly, or stories that simply stay on the section page for a few days. To make this work, it is important not to delete from the lists, just use strikethrough: ; word : ... that way the word will still be seen as listed. The stops list can be used for things that just keep showing up over a longer period.

English words from la Repubblica are suppressed for now, there were a lot of them; and there are plenty of Italian words to find.

Latin from L'Osservatore is suppressed when possible. The check is to see if the shortest non-Italian (i.e. not in wikt) word in each sentence is Latin, if so skip the sentence. (This sounds complicated, but is one line of code.) This doesn't work when the Latin word is missing, e.g. suam.

6.1.9: I've dropped L'Osservatore because it has French, German, and Polish in today's (5/6) issue. This is not possible to filter out (unless we had general coverage of Polish etc). So removed.

6.1.9: Added Corriere della Sera

title: User:Robert Ullmann/Italiano


text:
köszöntés

Noun

 * 1) greeting, salutation, welcome
 * 2) felicitation, congratulation, toast on festive occasions
 * 1) felicitation, congratulation, toast on festive occasions
 * 1) felicitation, congratulation, toast on festive occasions

title: köszöntés


text: köszöntések

title: köszöntések


text:
User talk:RyanCross

Conrad.Irwin 12:15, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

title: User talk:RyanCross


text:
köszönt

Verb

 * 1)  to greet, salute, hail, welcome (on arrival)
 * 2)  to congratulate, toast (on festive occasions)

title: köszönt


text:
Citations:newbie

Noun (a newcomer to something)

Noun (Internet - A new user or participant; someone who is extremely new and inexperienced (to a game or activity))

title: Citations:newbie


text:
User:Robert Ullmann/Italiano/stops

Stop list.

These are words that should not be listed in daily pages, although they appear in the paper. They may be errors (in the paper or in parsing), or words borrowed once from English, or other things. A good example is chat, presumably the English word, doesn't have an Italian section. If it has been borrowed into Italian, then perhaps it should? The fact that la Repubblica uses it as the title of an every-day section might say that it has?

Add anything that recurs, and is not wanted. One per line  followed (if desired) by the reason for adding it; anything else on the line is ignored. Alphabetical order is good for us humans, the software doesn't care.

not dictionary material (yet), derived from Italian politicians names: days of the week without the accent mark:
 * chat referenced section name - it added
 * dell dell' typo or parsing separately
 * document HTML format stray
 * expe - html noise
 * gall - html noise
 * internet English, is there an Italian equivalent? - same - it added
 * navigator - html noise
 * nell nell' typo or parsing separately
 * privacy from document structure somewhere - also it loanword - added
 * homme - French
 * italians - English
 * italia - typo
 * sull sull' typo or parsing separately
 * ndrangheta - it's 'ndrangheta; added
 * berlusconi - typo
 * qual - qual' typo or parsing separately
 * condicio - part of par condicio
 * spagna - part of pan di spagna
 * litteram - part of ante litteram
 * caffe - typo
 * extremis - part of in extremis
 * sancta - part of (sancta sanctorum)
 * sanctorum - part of (sancta sanctorum)
 * retiro - part of buen retiro
 * buen - part of buen retiro
 * honorem - part of ad honorem
 * generis - part of sui generis
 * partes - part of super partes
 * antan - part of d'antan
 * perche - typo of perché
 * tapis - part of tapis roulant
 * roulant - part of tapis roulant
 * veltroniano
 * veltroniana
 * veltroniani
 * veltroniane
 * bassoliniano
 * bassoliniana
 * bassoliniani
 * dipietrista
 * dipietristi
 * dipietriste
 * dalemiano
 * dalemiana
 * dalemiani
 * dalemiane
 * grillino
 * grillina
 * grillini
 * grilline
 * grillismo
 * finiano
 * finiana
 * finiani
 * finiane
 * cofferatiano
 * cofferatiana
 * cofferatiani
 * cofferatiane
 * bossiano
 * bossiana
 * bossiani
 * bossiane
 * tremontiano
 * tremontiani
 * tremontiane
 * tremontiana
 * tombeur - part of tombeur de femmes
 * femmes - part of tombeur de femmes
 * hommes - French
 * primis - part of in primis
 * anch anch' typo or parsing separately
 * conditio - part of conditio sine qua non
 * nonche - nonché typo
 * lunedi
 * martedi
 * mercoledi
 * giovedi
 * venerdi
 * berlusconismo - neologism
 * mortem - part of post mortem
 * prodige - part of enfant prodige
 * casus - part of casus belli
 * trompe - part of trompe l'oeil
 * oeil - part of trompe l'oeil
 * rutelliano - neologism (from a politician name)
 * rutelliana
 * rutelliani
 * rutelliane
 * modus - part of modus operandi
 * operandi - part of modus operandi
 * vendoliano - neologism
 * vendoliana
 * vendoliani
 * vendoliane
 * dulcis - part of dulcis in fundo
 * fundo - part of dulcis in fundo
 * antiberlusconismo - neologism
 * antiberlusconiano - neologism
 * antiberlusconiana
 * antiberlusconiani
 * antiberlusconiane
 * fassiniano - neologism+
 * fassiniana
 * fassiniani
 * fassiniane
 * judice - part of sub judice
 * novo - part of ex novo
 * pectore - part of in pectore

title: User:Robert Ullmann/Italiano/stops


text:
Talk:coudre

Tea room discussion
Coudre doesn't have the conjugation there. Is there anywhere I could request it or anyone I could request it from? I don't actually know it well enough myself. - Oreo Priest  talk 14:30, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

 * On the bar on the left side, below the search box, you will find the link French Wiktionary which might have what you need. DCDuring TALK 15:10, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Or not. You would have to page through the "what links here" equivalent in French wiktionary to find the forms that are entered there. DCDuring TALK 20:46, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I don't have time to add the conjugation table right now — I'll try to remember to later, if no one beats me to it — but the rule is pretty simple: it's conjugated just like vendre:, perdre:, etc. (sometimes called the regular <-re> verbs), except that its stem alternates between <coud-> (/kud/, /ku/, /ku(t)/) and <cous-> (/kuz/). <cous-> is written before endings that start with written vowels ("nous cousons", "qu'il couse", "on l'a cousu", etc.), while <coud-> is written before endings that start with written consonants ("je couds", "nous coudrons", "coudre", etc.), as well as in the (endingless/<-Ø>-ending) third-person singular present indicative ("il coud"). Given this, the forms are pronounced as you'd expect. —Ruakh TALK 16:41, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I don't think we have a template for this one. Come to think of it, I can't actually think of any other verbs which conjugate exactly like coudre.  Except for recoudre.  There must be some...  Widsith 20:06, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

 * Does découdre: count? :-)  —Ruakh TALK 21:30, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

 * So if this comes up again, who should I go to? - Oreo Priest  talk 06:39, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Bring it here. We'll sort it out eventually, and quicker if someone like you mentions it!  Widsith 07:06, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:coudre


text:
Talk:gannet

Tea room discussion
The sea-bird, "gannet", is used as a symbol of gluttony or ravenous eating. It appears with that meaning in at least two current slang and dialect dictionaries. The citations I am finding are mostly for eating "like a gannet". I assume this does not illustrate use. DCDuring TALK 21:13, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:gannet


text:
Talk:cash money

Tea room discussion
Have I got this right? —Ruakh TALK 10:23, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

 * Certainly seems right to me. What is the name for this kind of redundancy-for-emphasis construction? DCDuring TALK 11:43, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I don't know. Pleonasm doesn't give one, and pulls up many statements of the fact that pleonasm can be used rhetorically for emphasis, but not SFAICS any parenthetical notes or anything giving a term for it.  does get a bit of use, but not much. —Ruakh TALK 17:55, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

 * It might be synonymia: The use of several synonyms together to amplify or explain a given subject or term. A kind of repetition that adds force. But, note "several"; to some that means more than two. From Silva rhetorica DCDuring TALK 18:40, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

 * "Synomymia simplex", the simplest form of synonymia, involves mere doublets of synonyms. I guess that's an answer. DCDuring TALK 18:48, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

 * It may also be a retronym, if the term was coined as a result of the word money: coming to mean credit and savings in addition to cash. --EncycloPetey 20:44, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:cash money


text: Category:English reciprocal verbs

title: Category:English reciprocal verbs


text: overruffed

title: overruffed


text:
overruff

Verb

 * 1)  To ruff with a higher trump following a prior ruff on the same trick

Translations

 * Bulgarian: надцаквам
 * Catalan:
 * French:
 * German:

Noun

 * 1)  An act of overruffing

title: overruff


text: overruffs

title: overruffs


text:
Talk:foutre

Tea room discussion
foutre needs conjugation. - Oreo Priest  talk 15:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I believe it's conjugated just like vendre:, perdre:, etc., but with the spelling <fous> instead of *<fouts> in the first and second persons present indicative and imperative; but, I doubt all of its forms will actually meet CFI. The TLFi entry, http://www.cnrtl.fr/definition/foutre, says that it's not used in the passé antérieur, passé simple, conditionnel présent, conditionnel passé, imparfait du subjonctif, and subjonctif passé — except that I must be reading it wrong, because a bunch of its quotes are in the conditionnel présent. —Ruakh TALK 15:55, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:foutre


text:
Talk:there you go

Tea room discussion
The entries at there you go seem odd to me. The sense of voila! seems to me to be missing. I'm not sure how something like [after a discussion on US presidents] "There you go! It says here that Richard Nixon was the 37th president after all." would fit in. The second entry also seems a bit suspect to me, and perhaps is subordinate to this sense. Maybe it's British or something. I think an entry at there we go could be created out of a subset of these definitions once it's all straightened out. - Oreo Priest  talk 17:08, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The "you" in the first definition should be removed (You have done it, or are doing it, correctly.), and maybe be replaced with "one". As far as I know it doesn't need to be a "you" that did it correct. As you can see from Oreo's example over, it can be oneself: "there you go, I was correct". When it comes to the second entry/definition, that one seems ok to me. That's a normal use of the interjection to me, and may, as you said, be British, since I've mostly hanged out with Britons through the years ... I've at least heard it used like that numerous of times. --Eivind (t) 17:20, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I thought the strange part was that it's "expressing exasperation", when it seems to me not to be limited to that. Obviously the example shows exasperation, but I think it might not be necessary. - Oreo Priest  talk 18:13, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:there you go


text:
Talk:fictive

Tea room discussion
Is the adjective fictive comparable the way the entry says? RJFJR 15:53, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

 * 145 raw hits for "more fictive than" at b.g.c. DCDuring TALK 16:39, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

 * The raw hit count is misleading for that one; about half the hits are in, and aren't using "more fictive" as a comparative of "fictive". Still, there are a bunch of hits that are using it that way, and plenty of comparative uses at that don't use "than", so I agree that it's comparable. —Ruakh TALK 17:07, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Having the capacity of imaginative creation
Fictive talent. Apart from this narrow sense, needless variant of both fictional and fictitious --Backinstadiums (talk) 17:31, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

new noun sense
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=fictive —Fish bowl (talk) 01:29, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:fictive


text:
vulvic

Adjective

 * 1) Pertaining to the vulva.

title: vulvic


text:
Talk:Pirandellian

Tea room discussion
Some summer-movie buzz writer thought he was cool and used this word to describe the new Batman. Obviously a word in the everyday vocabulary and knowledge base of his target demographic at MSN/Blockbuster video's 2008 Summer Movie Guide o_O
 * "The sudden death of Heath Ledger in January 2008 inescapably charges the enterprise with additional intensity and Pirandellian power; this Joker will be cackling at us from beyond the grave."

I guess I am looking for a tidy definition of whatever narrow interpretation of Pirandello's work is employed in such comparisons. It doesn't seem to be as readily defined as Machiavellian or Orwellian, and in researching the author (Pirandello), I get images of, "outrageous dystopian absurdity", "contempt for actors and their inablility to do justice to a work", "one soul and his insignificance in service to the whole psyche of mankind". Which of these themes (or something else entirely) is the narrow theme through which this adjective is usually understood? i.e. what is Luigi Pirandello's narrow lasting legacy? What did this movie buzz writer mean? What do 99% of a million people do when coming across this word on an idiot-friendly page like MSN/Blockbuster video? Probably not spend an hour on it like me. :-P -- Thisis0 20:42, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

 * It could mean all of these; the usual sense is of a breakdown between "author" and "character" – in this case, the loose idea is of reality (Ledger's death) interacting with fiction (Ledger's new movie). It's not an excellent use of the word.  The OED defines it only as concerning Piranadello, with especial "reference to the relationship between illusion and reality".  Ƿidsiþ 20:53, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Another context "Pirandellian" has been used it by the Psychologist Phillip Zimbardo, who referred to his 1971 Stanford Prison experiment as "A | Pirandellian prison" in the New York Times Magazine, April 8th 1973. Here the reference refers to how acting out roles of prisoners and guards "blurred the line between role-playing and reality" (See | Stanford Prison Experiment website). Here Pirandellian is used in the context of "actors becoming inseperable and indistinct from their characters" or fiction becoming reality. (Jojomo 15:02, 7 January 2012 (UTC))

Reference: [http://www.prisonexp.org/pdf/pirandellian.pdf|Zimbardo, P. G., Haney, C., Banks, W. C., & Jaffe, D. (1973, April 8). The mind is a formidable jailer: A Pirandellian prison. The New York Times Magazine, Section 6, 36]

Reference
"Miss Butterfield also uses Pirandellian devices — showing the same scene as it might have happened and as it did, having the novelist-heroine conduct" John Cross 21:10, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

title: Talk:Pirandellian


text:
Talk:it's never too late to mend

Tea room discussion
I'm not nominating this on RfD or RfV, since I know this phrase is considerd a proverb (the American Heritage Dictionary labels it as such), but is it really? Honestly, sounds more like a SoP to me. Or does it have some distinct connotation that I'm not aware of?--TBC  21:27, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I think that Wiktionary includes proverbs, so as a proverb, it is included. Conrad.Irwin 21:29, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I know. I'm not questioning its inclusion or anything (hence why I didn't go to RfD or RfV). I'm just wondering if there's some sort of connotation associated with it.--TBC  21:33, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:it's never too late to mend


text:
Talk:threnody

Tea room discussion
Having initially removed a citation (Wendell Holmes) and having this reverted by a fellow editor, I'd like to see others having their say on this. Although the the work by Emerson obviously is a threnody, the fact that the only mention of this word is as the title of the poem blurs the value of this quote as a citation for the term. Am I being pedantic beyond reason here? __meco 15:27, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * If it were the only quote, then yes it would be of dubious value, since it would not be clear whether the meaning is bound up in the word itself. Howeveer, since there is another quote, I don't see that it does any harm, and does show that the word was used for the title of a poem on an appropriate theme for the word. --EncycloPetey 15:33, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, Emerson called it "Threnody" because it is a threnody, and in the context of Holmes' quotation, in which Holmes explicitly says that Emerson's "Threnody" is a "lament" and the "tenderest and most pathetic of Emerson's poems", the meaning of the term threnody is illuminated. This quotation thus ably serves the main purpose of quotations—to illuminate meaning. I honestly believe that the entry is enriched by the presence of this quotation.  -- WikiPedant 16:02, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The problem is that titles are proper nouns, so while the quote may help to show something of the meaning of the word, it shows incorrect usage for the word itself. --EncycloPetey 16:12, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmm, interesting point, Petey. But is it fair?  Any word or phrase can be capitalized and used as a title of a work.  And I'd be inclined to argue that the meaning of a term is not abrogated or compromised by the fact that, by your nicely explicated criteria, that term graduates to proper noun-hood as soon as you make it a title of a work.  After all, the term was selected by the author as an appropriate title because of the meaning it had back when it was a lowly common noun, and surely that meaning still carries through.  -- WikiPedant 16:37, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * But it is still being used in an unusual way. If someone says "I enjoyed Stephen King's Misery," they mean something very different from "I enjoyed Stephen King's misery."  It is easier to see in this example that the meaning has changed considerably.  In the first example, Misery means "a particular book",  but in the second example, it means "suffering".  Changing a word into a title applies it to a specific entity as a name, and while it retains connotations and associations of the original word, it will no longer carry the same meaning. --EncycloPetey 16:55, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

 * In general I think that it's a bad idea to use proper nouns senses of words for examples of their common noun senses. The reason is that there is no guarantee that they coincide, in meaning or in grammar.  I'm a bit torn in this case, as Threnody appears to be a threnody, both in meaning and in syntax.  However, I can understand meco's point of view in removing a proper noun sense on principle.  -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 17:11, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

 * Though I agree with WikiPedant that this particular quote enriches the entry, on one hand, on the other hand there is an obfuscatory element because the word appears as a proper noun. I may write a short story called "Soliloquy" for its analogous bearing on the text, without the short story actually being a soliloquy. Similarly I may write a novel called "Short Story", which, again, obviously isn't a short story. It is this confounding situation which I believe we find ourselves in in relation to the threnody article, even though we here happen to have a work titled "Threnody" that also is a threnody. __meco 17:19, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

 * All the examples are valid, but much the same sorts of situations can occur with common nouns, which are widely subject to figurative and metaphorical usages. I guess my main point is that, common noun, proper noun, or whatever, no term defines itself, and the purpose of quotations is to supply a context which provides a sense of how the term has been and can be used (i.e., a sense of the meaning).  That's the demand made of every expository quotation (i.e., that's the criterion of its appropriateness), and this quotation fulfills the demand. -- WikiPedant 19:29, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I don't suppose we can use footnotes in the articles, however, if we did, this would be an instance where that would be fitting. __meco 19:45, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

 * Agreed. While there is some merit to the example, I would feel much safer if we noted the irregularity of it being a proper noun.  -Atelaes λάλει ἐμοί 20:07, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

 * It'd be ridiculous to add a footnote to a quotation saying something like, "This quotation is sort of OK, but doesn't quite fill the bill." If measures like this are seriously being contemplated, it's better just to yank the quotation, so I have.  I replaced it with a 20th-century quotation from an academic journal, which also illuminates the meaning. -- WikiPedant 22:09, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:threnody


text:
Talk:marble

Tea room discussion
I visited the page of the word 'marble' for i wanted to know the meaning of the verb 'to marble'. But i noticed that the verb from is missing, i could only find a noun. Can anyone complete this entry because i want to know what it means. Thanks Vin 17:27, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

 * Added 2 senses. DCDuring TALK 19:46, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The second of them, "(intransitive, beef) To be interlaced with fat", doesn't seem to be a verb, it's more like an adjective.--Dmol 22:20, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

 * If you can word it better, I'd appreciate it. The idea is that it is the steer that marbles its muscles with fat by eating well, although there is also a rare transitive sense of breeders marbling the meet of one breed of cattle by interbreeding with other varieties. DCDuring TALK 22:53, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
 * for cake batter thats "marbelize" 128.252.12.73 16:29, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you. marbelize and, marbleize are synonyms for marble per Random House. DCDuring TALK 16:51, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Tea room discussion 2
I was wondering whether the etymology of the child's toy - marble - is in fact a corruption of marvel? If so, then the entry needs to be split. -- A LGRIF  talk 14:19, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * No, they're so-called because they used to be made of actual marble. Ƿidsiþ 16:26, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Thx for the info- -- A LGRIF  talk 18:49, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
 * We all thanks for the info but this info is not on the actual page. Is there a way to add it so anyone can see it? (and some other, alike, "missing" etymologies in other articles?) Wikifriendly --Xoristzatziki 18:49, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Request for Verification
Rfv-sense: (intransitive, beef) To be interlaced with fat.

I don't think it is intransitive, if it exists as a completely conjugated verb. I suspect that marbling (noun) and marbled (adjective) may be the only forms, which makes this tedious to search for. DCDuring TALK 15:00, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

 * I only know this sense as transitive - to put thin layers of fat between thicker layers of lean meat. SemperBlotto 21:15, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

 * Quotations of SemperBlotto's transitive sense added. A Google Books search for "beef marbles" finds no intransitive verb, but one very bizarre noun. "Beef marbled" finds more quotations of the transitive sense. - -sche (discuss) 04:19, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Please take a look. DCDuring TALK 19:27, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

 * This really seems impossible. To "marble" should denote a process; at the very least, something like "To become interlaced with fat". —Ruakh TALK 15:41, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

 * I would guess, that "to be interlaced with fat" was an attempt at the sense used in the Business Perspectives quotation you just added. The quotation you just added seems indeed to fit better under a slightly reworded "(of beef) to be come interlaced with fat" sense than under the "cause (beef) to be interlaced with fat" sense. (Put the definitions in place of the word: "Information about how an animal grades, how much it weighs, how it [causes (beef? itself?) to be interlaced with fat] and how it has converted feed helps farmers hone their growing practices" versus "Information about how an animal grades, how much it weighs, how it [is/becomes interlaced with fat] and how it has converted feed helps farmers hone their growing practices".) - -sche (discuss) 16:04, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Of the three quotations now under "(of cattle) to cause its meat to be interlaced with fat", I think only Heather Smith Thomas’ could support that sense. ("The Angus-type beef calf may [cause its own meat to be interlaced with fat] and finish quicker" almost makes sense, although I still think it means "the Angus-type beef calf may [have its meat become interlaced with fat] and finish quicker".) The Theodore Carroll Byerly is not in that sense, though — put the two definitions into it and see: "thinner animals rarely had enough excess energy in their diet to cause the meat to [cause their meat to be interlaced with fat]"? "to cause the meat to cause the meat to interlaced"? Isn't it simply "to cause the meat to [become interlaced with fat]"? - -sche (discuss) 21:03, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

 * I agree that the 1978 quotation is definitely saying that the meat is marbling: it exactly matches the current definition, "(intransitive, of beef) To become interlaced with fat", of the RFV'd sense. The 2000 and 2009 cites are in a sense that might be defined as "(intransitive, of cattle) To have its beef become interlaced with fat." ("Cause" seems wrong, though. The animal isn't really causing it; it's just the topic.) Ordinarily I would say that these two cites could be merged into the RFV'd sense, with the def adjusted accordingly (something like, "(intransitive, of beef) To become interlaced with fat; said also of the cattle"), except that they seem more similar to the 1848 cite, which is transitive, and which clearly distinguishes the cattle from the beef (in that the subject refers to the former, the direct object to the latter). I think the best solution might be to create a single sense for the whole mess, and grammatical subsenses for the various configurations that assign different elements of {cattle, beef, farmer} to different elements of {subject, direct object}. (But then, would each separate configuration need to have three cites?) —Ruakh TALK 21:31, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

 * Yeah, on closer examination, I saw and was about to comment that the 2000 Business Perspectives and 2009 Heather Smith Thomas quotations are about the animals, not the meat, as you pointed out in an edit summary. I will check how (if) any technical dictionaries define the verb. - -sche (discuss) 21:37, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
 * The intransitive usages seem quite rare. If we have require precises definition that are fully substitutable, we are apparently going to lose them. Could we finesse this by combining transitive and intransitive senses (and more significantly their citations) under ergative? Or could we combine the two possible subjects of the intransitive senses ("cattle or certain other livestock" and "the meat of cattle or certain other livestock"). It wouldn't be the end of lexicography as we hope it to be to omit the full verb senses where the attestation is so scanty. DCDuring TALK 23:34, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

 * Having one ergative sense "(of animals or their meat) ..." (and leaving the existing first and second senses "cause to be streaked" respectively "be streaked") is a decent solution. Having one transitive sense "(of animals or their meat) to cause to be interlaced with fat" and one intransitive sense "(of beef) to become interlaced with fat" (with the 1912-1970-1974-1978 quotations) is also a decent solution, and because we have the quotations to support it it is perhaps better, but in that case I'm not sure what to do with the 2000 and 2009 quotations. - -sche (discuss) 23:53, 2 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Let's wait a bit longer before removing any senses, though — we keep finding more quotations. Just now I found one specifically about animals. - -sche (discuss) 00:06, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

 * Every sense now has three or four quotations. Cited? - -sche (discuss) 00:58, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
 * All of the quotations are now on the citations page; the quotations I thought were most illustrating remain also in the entry. Feel free to move more quotations back into the entry — or out of it, although I think each sense should be left at least one quotation (to show how it's used). - -sche (discuss) 02:45, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

 * Passed. - -sche (discuss) 17:51, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

title: Talk:marble