Talk:extraforaneous

RFV discussion: April–July 2023

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

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

---

extraforaneous

Obsolete nonce term Wonderfool April 2023 (talk) 08:19, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

OED has three cites, and there are more in GBooks. Surprising, considering the apparent lack of evidence for foraneous. This, that and the other (talk) 11:07, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

The broader question should be that we need to look at Category:English nonce terms better. Perhaps that category shouldn't even exist, as if a term is only used once it isn't valid for WT, and if it is used more than once it isn't a nonce term...Wonderfool April 2023 (talk) 18:42, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

We call terms used only once “hapax legomena”. J3133 (talk) 18:46, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

My interpretation of our use of "nonce term" is that each of the 3+ authors that have used the term has coined it independently as a nonce. However, I'm not sure if that is a very meaningful thing to keep track of. Also I'm sure many of the things in that category need deleting (or removing from the category at least). This, that and the other (talk) 01:12, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

I thought a nonce word was one that was created for an occasion, but not necessarily a hapax legomenon. Lewis Carroll invented many words which might be considered nonces (such as brillig), but if they have been used by other writers they wouldn’t be hapaxes. — Sgconlaw (talk) 19:21, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

• RFV failed MyWeezer (talk) 13:42, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Seriously? I said there are cites. I know I was lazy and didn't put them in the entry - just give me a chance to get around to it. There's no rush. This, that and the other (talk) 23:28, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Cited This, that and the other (talk) 02:04, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Passed. --Overlordnat1 (talk) 10:49, 27 July 2023 (UTC)