Talk:Tyrannosaurus rex
Add topicLatest comment: 9 years ago by Metaknowledge in topic RFD
RFD
[edit]
The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process.
It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.
This is a Translingual term, we have a Translingual entry, and any use in running English text is still Translingual. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 20:04, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
- What about citations for Tyrannosaurus rexes or Tyrannosauruses rex? That would perhaps support a definition of a common noun referring to an individual specimen, not a proper noun referring to the species. Supposedly taxa are properly used as proper names of the natural class or lineage, not in reference to an individual exemplar, though I find it hard to believe that anyone honors this in all cases. DCDuring TALK 22:35, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
- I think this is a case where one of the vernacular names overlaps with the taxonomical name. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:13, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
- Is there any alternative name apart from the short form T. rex? If not, keep. Donnanz (talk) 09:46, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
- I think this is a case where one of the vernacular names overlaps with the taxonomical name. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 07:13, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
- The existence of the English plural Tyrannosaurus rexes (I've just cited it and tyrannosaurus rex(es), and citations of Tyrannosaurus Rex(es) are easy to find) is suggestive, in my opinion, that Angr is correct and the English vernacular name happens to be homographic with the taxonomic name. - -sche (discuss) 19:12, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
- Ergo, keep. - -sche (discuss) 00:42, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
- The existence of the English plural Tyrannosaurus rexes (I've just cited it and tyrannosaurus rex(es), and citations of Tyrannosaurus Rex(es) are easy to find) is suggestive, in my opinion, that Angr is correct and the English vernacular name happens to be homographic with the taxonomic name. - -sche (discuss) 19:12, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
- Keep. It has an English pronunciation and you can easily find nonacademic usages, just like dog. — TAKASUGI Shinji (talk) 00:26, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
- @TAKASUGI Shinji: Doesn't it have, say, a Japanese pronunciation too? DCDuring TALK 00:44, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
- The Japanese pronunciation is [tiɾ̠a̠no̞sa̠ɯᵝɾ̠ɯᵝsɯ̥ᵝ] (tyrannosaur). --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 01:03, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
- All we need is a little attestation and we could/should have a Japanese L2 section also. Is there any language that the pronunciation principle enunciated above would not apply to? It seems we would only be limited by attestation. This would be quite easy for languages using Roman script, but need not be limited to them. DCDuring TALK 01:50, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
- I meant the above pronunciation applies to the Japanese spelling ティラノサウルス (transliteration of "tyrannosaurus"), of course, not the Roman spelling. Since, it's not RFV, a simple vote would suffice, IMO. Keep the English term. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 02:26, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
- All we need is a little attestation and we could/should have a Japanese L2 section also. Is there any language that the pronunciation principle enunciated above would not apply to? It seems we would only be limited by attestation. This would be quite easy for languages using Roman script, but need not be limited to them. DCDuring TALK 01:50, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
- The Japanese pronunciation is [tiɾ̠a̠no̞sa̠ɯᵝɾ̠ɯᵝsɯ̥ᵝ] (tyrannosaur). --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 01:03, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
- @TAKASUGI Shinji: Doesn't it have, say, a Japanese pronunciation too? DCDuring TALK 00:44, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
- Closing as nominator; I am convinced by the citations. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 07:33, 5 February 2015 (UTC)