Talk:ploughing

Also a noun (the operation of the verb "to plough") ?

--Lucyin 18:35, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

I see in the "Commons" that there is a page "plowing", with ploughing being a redirection :

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Ploughing

so, it is a noun !!

--Lucyin 12:51, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

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.

---

ploughing

Noun. No semantic change from present participle. DCDuring TALK 22:47, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

IMO, noun entry needed to show the plural. What about the verb plough? We list ploughs, ploughing, ploughed even though they are standard inflections; same with the noun. Equinox ◑ 10:25, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

There's hardly an -ing form that doesn't form a plural. To me it seems a lot like the plural of proper nouns or attributive use of nouns, which we dispense with, unless there is something unusual or semantically distinct. DCDuring TALK 11:53, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Okay, so regardless of whether or not we have a noun at (deprecated template usage) ploughing, do you think we should not have any entry at all at (deprecated template usage) ploughings, even if it is an attestable word? Equinox ◑ 12:47, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't, but others may differ, as they may on the prior point about a separate noun PoS section.

It would be interesting to review our noun entries for words that are also -ing forms to see which ones have semantically distinct senses. It might make it easier to understand the development of distinct senses and thereby to detect emergent distinct senses, which is particularly difficult when the underlying verb is highly polysemic. DCDuring TALK 14:52, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm very surprised! I think deliberately omitting entries for clearly attestable common nouns is a mistake; it suggests they are not words, merely because they happen to be formed in a very simple obvious way (like verbs, as I said above). This isn't some controversial suggestion like "ALL WORDS IN ALL LANGUAGES so we need to have Dolly Parton and Chu-Chu Rocket and Microsoft Office 2003". It's (deprecated template usage) ploughings! What do others think? Equinox ◑ 15:25, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

I strongly agree that, no matter what is done with the "Noun" section at ploughing, the plural entry should be kept.​—msh210℠ (talk) 16:55, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

I too agree; we have dozens of other English words formed in a very simple obvious way, to exclude these would be confusing.--Prosfilaes 18:47, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

If ploughings is a noun, so is ploughing. Otherwise, what is it a plural of? DAVilla 06:44, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Keep, if there are three citations showing countable use. BTW the translation table seems to be a mistake, it refers to plough#Noun. Mglovesfun (talk) 07:43, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

I see in the "Commons" that there is a page "plowing", with ploughing being a redirection (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Ploughing). So, it is a noun !! Otherwise, how to translate the French "labour", walloon "tcherwaedje" being the operation of breaking the ground into furrows (with a plough) for planting ? The Harrap's French English dictionary gives for French "labour": tilling, ploughing. Here, the French labour is only translated "cultivation", which is only one of the 3 meanings of labour. If Wiktionary is a also tool for translations (and not only for English semantics of words), it should give the nominative use of English present participles as distinct entries - at least, that 's what seems to me - (As a present participle, "ploughing" is the French "(en) labourant" and Walloon "(tot) tcherwant" - In Dutch, I think it would be beploegend, omspittend -, not quite the same words ! ).

--Lucyin 13:21, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

• It looks like a noun to me. I've started a proper translation table and converted the old one to "ttbc". SemperBlotto 13:45, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

OK, but it is not the "device" (en : plough, fr : charrue, wa : tcherowe) but the operation. --Lucyin 13:55, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Treatment of -ing forms as nouns has been discussed before. See in particular Beer parlour: CFI for -ing form nouns and adjectives, September 2010. The subject is tracked in Wiktionary:English -ing forms. See also #perusing from August 2010, later to be found at Talk:perusing. --Dan Polansky 16:14, 18 January 2011 (UTC) Kept. Mglovesfun (talk) 13:40, 20 February 2011 (UTC)