Talk:Aufblaser

RFV discussion: October 2021–January 2022

This entry has survived Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).

Please do not re-nominate for verification without comprehensive reasons for doing so.

---

Aufblaser

German: “agent noun of aufblasen; inflator”. Tagged by Herr de Worde on 18 September, not listed. J3133 (talk) 11:19, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Three uses: (a); (b); (c). Although all are the agent noun of aufblasen (“to inflate”), the senses are rather disparate. In (a) the use is metaphorical; referring to this wordly realm als inflating the soul with metaphorical air. In (b) it is a vocation, that of glassblower. In (c) it refers to someone who puffs up the importance of something.  --Lambiam 17:12, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Each of these examples is ancient. The term is not to be found in the Duden and also not in the German Wikitionary. It is simply not familiar and should therefore at least be marked as obsolete. And then one should also cite the different ancient meanings individually; as a person (profession), as a device, as a swear word ... maybe with an explanation.

Why do we have to deal with crap that nobody understands anyway? Of course, you can also make nouns from verbs and understand the content from the context. But just because someone does that at some point, it doesn't mean someone should store it in a dictionary. Herr de Worde (talk) 19:08, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Duden and German WT don't matter. It's easy to understand (aufblasen +‎ -er), and English WT covers extinct languages and older and rarer terms as well (of course, there can be labels). --Myrelia (talk) 19:17, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Yes. It's true that at this point it's not a very useful entry, but it meets WT:CFI. It's not obsolete. – Jberkel 16:53, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

RFV-passed. I want to note however that the 1983 quote has super weird grammar. Feel free to object on the grounds of that. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 13:26, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

It has perfectly normal grammar. It is a 1706 quote obviously. The “2017” quote is also before 1880. Jakob Böhme also did not write 1841. I don’t think the word was rare either, apparently in the “2017” quote it is a particular military function and in the 1706 quote it was a local name for the Glasbläser occupation, in the Böhme quote some made-up philosophical-religious concept, so three distinct meanings. Fay Freak (talk) 15:01, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

This is a general problem that has annoyed me many times: The date of the publication does not necessarily coincide with the date the text itself was written, which leads to weird things like having these modern dates next to those quotes in Aufblaser (though the 2017 one could probably pass as such if just the spelling were modernized). Template:quote-book doesn't seem to have a parameter to indicate which year the quoted text really is from. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 15:09, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

It’s |year=. The rest goes into |year_published=. Fay Freak (talk) 15:13, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

I see, thanks for pointing this out. I think though the Template:quote-book/documentation could be improved to be clearer in this regard. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 15:34, 10 January 2022 (UTC)