Talk:twitter

Tea room discussion

Note: the below discussion was moved from the Wiktionary:Tea room.

We have a definition of the microblogging sense of the verb. But what do you call an individual "message"? Is that also a "twitter", or maybe a "twit"? It seems to be (deprecated template usage) twittata in Italian, but I haven't added the noun sense yet. SemperBlotto 10:48, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I believe it's a "tweat". Conrad.Irwin 10:51, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Ah - we have it as (deprecated template usage) tweet. Now I'm wondering about (deprecated template usage) twitterati. SemperBlotto 10:57, 12 March 2009 (UTC

Why does this deserve any kinder treatment than all the entries and senses that are summarily deleted as neologisms? DCDuring TALK 11:17, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Huh? If they have three independent citations in durably-archived media, spanning at least a year, we certainly shouldn't be deleting them, and AFAIK we haven't. (Possible exception: the exceedingly problematic "santorum".)-- Visviva 11:53, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, we welcome neologisms; it's only protologisms that get the chop. SemperBlotto 11:59, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

One who twits

Webster 1913 has a separate noun: "One who twits, or reproaches; an upbraider." I haven't been able to hunt this down among the more common senses. Equinox ◑ 23:18, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Also in Chambers 1908. Equinox ◑ 12:45, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

RFV discussion: July 2023–August 2024

The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).

Failure to be verified means that insufficient eligible citations of this usage have been found, and the entry therefore does not meet Wiktionary inclusion criteria at the present time. We have archived here the disputed information, the verification discussion, and any documentation gathered so far, pending further evidence.
Do not re-add this information to the article without also submitting proof that it meets Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion.

---

twitter

Verb: intransitive: "To move like a songbird. A blue jay twittered by me." (I don't know if that sentence is realistic, but I would understand it as "moved past me while twittering", not as a bird-like style of motion.) Equinox ◑ 22:48, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

The usex is awful: blue jay calls are very loud and harsh, about as far from a twitter as you can get. Either the person who wrote it knows nothing about birds, or they were trying to play a joke on us. As for it being a separate sense: 76 trombones has something like "I took my place as the one and only bass, and I oompahed up and down the square." You can do this with any number of verbs in order to imply manner without using an adverb. Chuck Entz (talk) 23:34, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

I thought I wrote this already but I cant find it now ... apologize if this is a duplicate post from somewhere. Anyway .... in defense of the usex, maybe the author chose to use a bluejay precisely because the bird's natural call doesn't sound very tweet-like, and therefore it shows the verb really does refer to motion. That said, a usex is not attestation, so this by itself can't save the entry. —Soap— 08:45, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

• RFV failed +deletedDenazz (talk) 20:52, 23 August 2024 (UTC)