Talk:preempt
Add topicShould there be an entry for the adverb preemptorily and would that be the correct spelling Bees77707 14:49, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, but it is quite rare. People tend to use (deprecated template usage) preemptively instead. SemperBlotto 14:54, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
(by extension) To do something before someone else.
[edit]I've added
- (transitive) (by extension) To do something before someone else.
because this is definitely a widespread use. Please amend my syntax if needed.
Many examples online, such as
- "Michael: Safoora, you preempted what I was going to say" [1]
- "ghostgeek: Looks like you've just preempted some of what I was going to say Lori." [2]
- "And you basically preempted what I was about to say." [3]
However I would prefer adding a simple (synthetic) example, and/or a quotation from an esteemed source. Please add if you can find.
—DIV (1.145.84.34 11:32, 16 August 2021 (UTC))
The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for verification (permalink).
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.
Rfv-sense "to do something before (someone else), to beat to the punch." Recently added. Not sure this exists separate from the other senses. - -sche (discuss) 22:17, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- It looks like another case of definition 3 to me. It would be easy to cite, so this is not really an RFV - rather it is an RFD, to make the judgement call about whether it is a separate sense. Kiwima (talk) 04:42, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- Oh, that's an interesting possibility; at the time this sense was added, there was nothing analogous to sense 3, so it could have been intended to cover that. I added sense 3 (and citations to various senses) because I took this to be very different from sense 3. In sense 3, you do something to prevent someone else doing a thing (effectively), whereas I took this sense to be saying you do a thing first, before someone else does it. If the sense is just intended to cover the same thing as the "prevent" sense, I'll just merge them, as I wouldn't have added sense 3 as a separate sense had I realized this was just an IP's effort to get at the same thing. I note, though, that the 1993 Congressional cite is actually sense 2 (federal law displaces or takes precedence over state law, even when state law came first), and the 2009 Plamondon cite also looks like sense 2, and matches the usex Dictionary.com uses for their analogue of that sense (they have "take the place of [...] supplant": "the special newscast preempted the usual television program"). The wording of sense 2 may need to be expanded to be clearer. - -sche (discuss) 11:46, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, I think the best thing would be to combine this with sense 3. Kiwima (talk) 01:29, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
- Oh, that's an interesting possibility; at the time this sense was added, there was nothing analogous to sense 3, so it could have been intended to cover that. I added sense 3 (and citations to various senses) because I took this to be very different from sense 3. In sense 3, you do something to prevent someone else doing a thing (effectively), whereas I took this sense to be saying you do a thing first, before someone else does it. If the sense is just intended to cover the same thing as the "prevent" sense, I'll just merge them, as I wouldn't have added sense 3 as a separate sense had I realized this was just an IP's effort to get at the same thing. I note, though, that the 1993 Congressional cite is actually sense 2 (federal law displaces or takes precedence over state law, even when state law came first), and the 2009 Plamondon cite also looks like sense 2, and matches the usex Dictionary.com uses for their analogue of that sense (they have "take the place of [...] supplant": "the special newscast preempted the usual television program"). The wording of sense 2 may need to be expanded to be clearer. - -sche (discuss) 11:46, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
RFV-resolved Kiwima (talk) 21:59, 28 August 2021 (UTC)