Talk:on TV

The following information passed a request for deletion.

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.

---

on TV

Not sure about this one. We have on air, but we don't have on the radio, on stage, etc. Im thinking SOP Leasnam (talk) 02:46, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Funny how we say on the radio but on TV (no definite article). It's been 'restored' by an IP who obviously can't restore things, who's just recreated it with not terribly good content. Renard Migrant (talk) 12:44, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

We typically use the definite article on the radio, on the phone, on the computer, on the internet, on the answer machine, on the intercom, on the news. on TV is an exception. 2602:306:3653:8920:F8DB:ECAE:5A18:B0E 13:15, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

The distinction isn't specific to this phrase, though. It is more often "watch TV" and "listen to the radio," etc. This is a feature of TV not "on TV." - TheDaveRoss 14:37, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Realized I hadn't actually voted, delete. - TheDaveRoss 20:43, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

We also have on camera. Should be kept until consensus is reached for deletion, if such consensus is reached. 2602:306:3653:8920:F8DB:ECAE:5A18:B0E 12:48, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes it should be kept as not a patently ridiculous entry. Who deleted it? How long was it here before it was deleted? In other words, could someone please delete it and then restore all edits please? Renard Migrant (talk) 13:26, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I've restored all past versions dating back to September 2013, so anyone interested can see them in the page history. I can't say the current version is significantly worse than its predecessors, though. I agree it shouldn't be deleted without discussion as it isn't patently ridiculous, though I'm not convinced it should be kept, either. Someone wow me with reasons to keep it. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 13:51, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, it's OK now. SemperBlotto (talk) 14:05, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I tend to think it's obvious what it means and thus should be deleted. If you know what 'on' and 'TV' mean, you know what 'on TV' means. And if you don't we have entries on on and TV, funnily enough. Renard Migrant (talk) 14:54, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Prepositions in English are idiomatic: you are in a meeting but at a party; you do things with help from, but with the aid of. Delete. Equinox ◑ 15:25, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

All preposition? Should we have for TV? of TV? in TV? for TV? If not, what makes on TV distinct? DCDuring TALK 19:18, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

• FWIW, on stage probably passes COALMINE Purplebackpack89 18:12, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
  • onstage is valid in Scrabble so I guess Chambers have it. Renard Migrant (talk) 11:37, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
• It is not true that on radio is not used. At COCA it occurs nearly 1100 times, vs nearly 3800 for on the radio. Similarly one can find on the TV, sometimes with the same sense as our definition of on TV, though there are other uses of on TV and many more of on the TV. BTW, which uses of on TV are idioms and which are not? How do we direct someone from on TV to binge + on + TV when they parse binge in TV as binge + on TV?

It is common in headlines for definite articles to not be used, even where such would sound strange in speech. 2602:306:3653:8920:F8DB:ECAE:5A18:B0E 19:50, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Delete as transparent. DCDuring TALK 19:18, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

On TV and On the TV have different meanings. On the TV usually refers to a specific TV. That show was on the TV. Which TV? The one in the break room. 2602:306:3653:8920:F8DB:ECAE:5A18:B0E 19:31, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

That is because TV has more than one sense, the medium and a particular device. - TheDaveRoss 20:01, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Exactly my thoughts. One sense is countable and the other sense isn't, creating variation in the articles, with ambiguity arising at "the". Not idiomatic. Delete. Nibiko (talk) 12:11, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

I did take the trouble to make sure what I was saying was true. I had to use a lot of hedges and vague quantifiers to do so. It is NOT true that all uses of on the television mean "on the television set" or "on the television screen", though many do. If you'd like to get more quantitative about it, sign up to use COCA or get facts from some other corpus. DCDuring TALK 20:15, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

• I notice it's been altered to a prepositional phrase, which doesn't make much sense; just as a phrase would do. Anyway, we may as well keep it. Donnanz (talk) 10:13, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
• Keep. You're on camera. You're on TV. Shoof (talk) 23:34, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

  I might write a letter on paper, or paint a picture on canvas, or record an album on CD. These, and on TV, are all just on + media. On camera is a different animal, on TV has no similar special meaning. - TheDaveRoss 12:43, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

• On the Fence, but leaning toward the conclusion that this is just a normal use of the preposition on that doesn't require separate definitions, hence the large number of very similar phrases already mentioned in this discussion. P Aculeius (talk) 16:01, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

  This is quite like the situation with phrasal verbs: it is easy to forget that there is difference between a phrasal verb and a verb followed by an adjunct prepositional phrase or adverb.

Some prepositional phrases are clearly idiomatic, some are arguably idiomatic, some are just phrases that are used a lot or idiomatically only as part of true idioms. That we or other dictionaries have an entry for another prepositional phrase using on has little implication if the only proper definitions of the other phrase are true idioms not using on the same way as this entry. DCDuring TALK 18:19, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

• Comment: under on, preposition sense 13, "used to indicate a means or medium" could be clearer, but it's evidently intended to apply to this particular phrase, which is actually given as an example. Another way to put it might be that "on" and "in" can be synonymous in English, just as they are in Latin (which uses "in" for both); television, noun sense 1, gives the medium of television (as opposed to a television set). So another way to say "on television" would be "in the medium of television". That's definitely not idiomatic; so if "on" in this instance means "in" and "television" means "the medium of television", then the meaning of "on television" seems pretty transparent. This seems to be distinguishable from "on camera", since, barring the Latin phrase "in camera" (meaning "privately" or "in secret"), camera almost always refers to a device, rather than "the medium of photography". In other words, that a different meaning of "camera" applies only when used in the phrase "on camera" makes that phrase idiomatic. P Aculeius (talk) 18:48, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
• Add a usex sentence at TV to show an FL reader it's idiomatically used with on and without the article and delete. --Droigheann (talk) 20:39, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

  Added. A ggod idea even if this is not deleted. DCDuring TALK 21:36, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

• Keep. Merriam-Webster has an entry for such http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/on%20(the)%20television. Jooge (talk) 21:31, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
• Keep using the lemming heuristic, albeit indirectly: "on (the) television" is at Merriam-Webster[1] and oxforddictionaries.com[2]. Thanks to Jooge for discovering this. --Dan Polansky (talk) 13:16, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
• RFD kept as no consensus for deletion; 4 keeps and 6 deletes found. The counting would be easier if people posted boldface keeps or deletes as the first items of their posts. --Dan Polansky (talk) 14:55, 9 April 2016 (UTC)