Talk:sic

RFV discussion: July 2015

This entry has survived Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).

Please do not re-nominate for verification without comprehensive reasons for doing so.

---

sic

I would like to challenge this "Adverb" sense in the entry sic:

1. thus; thus written

I recently created {{unsupported|[sic]}} for uses of sic between square brackets. (and (sic) since it appears parenthesized sometimes in Google Books) I also moved the usage notes from sic to {{unsupported|[sic]}} about this use. My rationale is that, since it seems to be, in a way, always "separate" from the text and used between square brackets, syntactically it behaves more as a symbol, like an asterisk or a footnote. For comparison, I also created […] recently, while (...) I created in 2010. IMHO, sic#English shouldn't be defined as a normal adverb unless it can really be found in running text as a normal adverb. Thoughts? --Daniel Carrero (talk) 05:52, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

I don't agree that, just because it's only ever used as a parenthetical aside, it's not a ‘normal adverb’ (whatever that means). The main definition should be at (deprecated template usage) sic without brackets, as in Wikipedia and every other dictionary. Ƿidsiþ 14:53, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

I agree that the sense should be at sic; compare this brief discussion of (aq).
The sense is also used without brackets, as in:

• 1971, H. E. Wilkie Young and Elie Khadouri[e], Mosul in 1909, in Middle Eastern Studies, volume 7, page 229 (quoted in 2014, William Taylor, Narratives of Identity: The Syrian Orthodox Church and the Church of England →ISBN, page 207):

  When it is all over they merge and go in a body to visit [...] the Telegraph Office – with plausible expressions of regret and excuses for the mob 'which' they say 'is deplorably ignorant and will not be restrained when its feelings are strongly moved' – sic, the fact being that the mob's feelings will never be 'moved' unless it is by one of them.

And other parenthetical information may be added to the brackets, as in:

• 1884, James Grant, Cassell's old and new Edinburgh, page 99:

  This I may say of her, to which all that saw her will bear record, that her only countenance moved [sic, meaning that its expression alone was touching], although she had not spoken a word […]

• 2004, Michael Cook, Studies in the Origins of Early Islamic Culture and Tradition, page 43:

  […] then the kingship of the Romans (Rum) moved (sic: kharaja) from the family of Heraclius to Leo (Liyun) and his son after him.

... showing that the brackets are not part of the word. - -sche (discuss) 19:20, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

One quote that does suggest that the brackets are to some extent seen as part of the word:

"The question of wether or not to give anonymity to criminals in cases like this will go on forever," intoned madam – and you may care to know there is a [sic] bag in the rear pocket of the seat in front of you. (source)

But of course there it's being used in a playful punning sense. Some more citations which suggest the brackets are not essential:

• 1939, Benjamin Britten, Letters from a Life Vol 2: 1939-45: Selected Letters and Diaries of Benjamin Britten, Faber & Faber →ISBN

  The only person who wrote to me about 'duty', 'conscience' – 'being a pacifist at heart, but this was a war', etc... – (sic, sic, sic!!!); was he of that noble ancestry.

• 2010, Paul Booth, Digital Fandom: New Media Studies, Peter Lang →ISBN, page 127

  Jim 's Interests: General: Working out, hanging out at the local bars, expanding my mind, eating Tuna Sandwhiches...or so I'm told and poker... Television: ... this show that's on Thuresday nights at 8 :30pm... I can't place the name of it but it has this crazy interview style thing...[all sic]

• 2012, editor of Too Brief a Treat: The Letters of Truman Capote, Vintage →ISBN

  I have ignored occasional errors of grammar, such as “she has not written either Jack or I." Too many "[sics]" I find obnoxious. (Note that they didn't say "too many [sic]s")

I don't like the idea of having the main entry at {{unsupported|[sic]}} for several reasons - bracket shape is not fixed, bracket use is not compulsory, and unsupported titles are incredibly ugly. Smurrayinchester (talk) 13:10, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Actually, even better - unambiguous adverbial use:

• 2012, Milton J. Bates, The Bark River Chronicles: Stories from a Wisconsin Watershed, Wisconsin Historical Society →ISBN, page 271

  whole bussiness: Quoted sic in George F. Willison, Saints and Strangers ( New York: Reynal and Hitchcock, 1945)

• 2006, Christina Scull, Wayne G. Hammond, JRR Tolkien companion & guide, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt →ISBN

  *Joseph Wright, his predecessor in the chair, called him 'a firstrate Scholar and a kind of man who will easily make friends' at Oxford (quoted, sic, in E.M. Wright, The Life of Joseph Wright (1932), p. 483).

• 2003, Monika Fludernik, The Fictions of Language and the Languages of Fiction, Routledge →ISBN, page 468

  Bolinger, Dwight (1977) 'Pronoun and repeated nouns.' Lingua18:1-34 [Quoted sic in Toolan 1990. Neither in Lingua 18, nor in the 1977 volume of that journal.]

Smurrayinchester (talk) 13:25, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

• Why woudn't we have the bracketed form be a redirect to the unbracketed form and show both as usage examples. Keeping punctuation out of headwords of lemmas whenever possible seems like a worthy goal. DCDuring TALK 13:40, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

  I have redirected the bracketed forms — compare (aq) — and removed the RFV template based on the citations above. I have also removed the following bit, because it isn't a very good example of the use of "sic" to ridicule a perceived error — it isn't even a "perceived error", it's (in the second case) a plain and simple error of spelling/grammar. We can find a better example, I imagine. - -sche (discuss) 01:44, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

It may also be used to highlight a perceived error, sometimes for the purpose of ridicule, as in this example from The Times:

Warehouse has been around for 30 years and has 263 stores, suggesting a large fan base. The chain sums up its appeal thus: "styley [sic], confident, sexy, glamorous, edgy, clean and individual, with it's [sic] finger on the fashion pulse."

^ Ashworth, Anne (2006 June 21) “Chain reaction: Warehouse”, in The Times‎^[1], retrieved 2007-01-06

sicc

Shouldn’t this be moved to its own page? H. (talk) 08:56, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

sic!

In German this often gets an exclamation mark. What about English? (Personally not a fan of this spelling because it feels like "Yes! Look! They really spelt this wrong!", but anyway it's common.) 2.202.159.25 00:31, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

RFM discussion: November 2020–April 2022

See Talk:ibid. § RFM discussion: November 2020–April 2022