Talk:short for

From Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Latest comment: 1 year ago by Dan Polansky in topic RFD discussion: August 2022–January 2023
Jump to navigation Jump to search

RFD discussion: August 2022–January 2023

[edit]

The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for deletion (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.


Seems SOP, same kind of for as in "English for", "German for" etc. — Fytcha T | L | C 13:34, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

And for short? Clearly different. DonnanZ (talk) 14:17, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply
That has absolutely NOTHING to do with the discussion. Vininn126 (talk) 14:45, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply
Better with a syntax or collocation template. Vininn126 (talk) 14:45, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply
Delete as SoP. — Sgconlaw (talk) 18:45, 13 August 2022 (UTC)Reply
Keep. Being allegedly SoP doesn't seem to be the real reason. Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2022/August#Template:short_for_-_redundant? DonnanZ (talk) 08:36, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply
Delete, SOP. PUC09:30, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Reply
Comment – Worth noting that "short" is a noun here, which has been somewhat obscured by the fact that it's preserved in this set expression. This could (and should) be treated at short (perhaps already is, I didn't look – edit I looked, it's not); whether we need this entry as well I'm ambivalent on. Ƿidsiþ 14:18, 17 August 2022 (UTC)Reply
I'm not convinced - seems like a predicative adjective. You might say "don't and can't are short for do not and cannot", but you wouldn't say they are "shorts" for them. Theknightwho (talk) 13:04, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply
Yeah, I'm about 99% sure it's still an adjective here. Vininn126 (talk) 13:08, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply
Lexico calls it a phrase, which I accept, it's good enough for me. But I take "short" itself to be an adjective, as in "short form", the short form of. DonnanZ (talk) 12:49, 19 August 2022 (UTC)Reply
At least historically, it was a noun here. In fact one used to say "it's a/the short for…". I suppose as the article has disappeared, it's been reinterpreted as an adjective, but it doesn't entirely make sense as an adjective (to me). As you say, it's more like a stand-in for the noun phrase "short form". Ƿidsiþ 06:30, 20 August 2022 (UTC)Reply
There are entries for short form (noun, created in 2004), and shortform (adjective) - Lexico lists the adjective short-form. The noun would probably fail COALMINE on a technicality, but it's still valuable as an entry. DonnanZ (talk) 08:44, 20 August 2022 (UTC)Reply