Talk:short for
Latest comment: 1 year ago by Dan Polansky in topic RFD discussion: August 2022–January 2023
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)
- And for short? Clearly different. DonnanZ (talk) 14:17, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
- That has absolutely NOTHING to do with the discussion. Vininn126 (talk) 14:45, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
- Better with a syntax or collocation template. Vininn126 (talk) 14:45, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as SoP. — Sgconlaw (talk) 18:45, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
- 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)
- Delete, SOP. PUC – 09:30, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- Yeah, I'm about 99% sure it's still an adjective here. Vininn126 (talk) 13:08, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- Keep, this does not seem to be an obvious construction as a sum of parts. bd2412 T 07:10, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
- Keep per above. --Overlordnat1 (talk) 07:58, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
- RFD-kept: no consensus for deletion (WT:VP). --Dan Polansky (talk) 08:49, 4 January 2023 (UTC)