Talk:List of snowclones/Archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Organization of list

I'd like to see the list re-ordered, preferably— if someone is up to the challenge— by date of earliest appearance. The current list is a random hodgepodge, and not as useful as it could be. If date-sources for the origins could be found, this would be a particularly worthwhile section. —LeFlyman 19:43, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Seeing as no one else was willing to do so, I took the initiative and ordered them according to year dates of original usage. If someone takes issue with the reorganization, please let me know. —LeFlyman 18:52, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Merger

Regarding the proposed merger (integrating List of widespread memetic phrases): I support it completely. Ruakh 21:16, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Merge done, needs sources

Does somebody knows which movie the Gun line from Mae West is from??? Also does anybody knows the origin behind "X called, they want their Y back" and "X for the rest of us"? Circeus 20:25, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Did "X for the rest of us" perhaps originate with Festivus? Or is that just a famous example of it? Ruakh 20:27, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

I actually have never even heard it, but I'm not a native speaker. Circeus

The Festivus saying, which was popularized on Seinfeld, is not a "snowclone"; while "X called" certainly is, as Google attests. On a related note, it's similar to the Seinfeld episode "The Comeback" in which George comes up with the oneupsmanship insult: "The jerk store called. They're running out of you" which led to Elaine and Jerry coming up with their own: "Your cranium called. It's got some space to rent" and "The zoo called. You're due back by six." —LeFlyman 21:05, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

google gets quite a few things (Candidate, Brainjam, media guidebook, newspaper, reference) for "A X for the rest of us", even though it might not be nearly as widespread as the other. But then Imight be mislead. and we're interested in the entire "X called,they want theyr Y back", not just "X called" which alone is certainly not a snowclone.

Certainly, the phrasing "for the rest of us" is pretty common, and it may be an early snowclone or just a well-worn phrase that sounds like a showclone. For example, Apple originally advertised the Mac as "The computer for the rest of us." The Jargon file AKA Hacker's dictionary refers to this origin and says "For the rest of us" is "Used to describe a spiffy product whose affordability shames other comparable products, or (more often) used sarcastically to describe spiffy but very overpriced products."—LeFlyman 06:14, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Please note: the term in question is snowclone, with an L. Ruakh 07:03, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

That's what I get for typing too fast at odd hours of the morning. Correcting my mistypes.—LeFlyman 07:21, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

While we,re at it, can someone get an Original for "if we don't X, the terrorists wins"? Shouldn't be too hard to find. Circeus 21:29, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Here's another potential snowclone: "...and all I got was this [lousy] t-shirt". Don't know the original, so I didn't put it on the list. --Kevin

A snowclone involve replacing a single word. That is more of a cliché jokeCirceus 19:26, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

If the X in a snowclone involves replacing just a single word, then the "or the terrorits win" phrase may not be a snowclone, since it usually involves inserting a phrase rather than a single word. --Kevin

A snowclone does *not* require the replacement of only a single word. The X/Y/Z/etc. spots can be occupied by phrases as well. Here's some general discussion of how snowclones work that supports this. --ErinOConnor

Well, if we're going to get technical, the original coining of snowclone had more to do with a repeated thought — an idée reçue, if you will — than with the repetition of a certain turn of phrase. I think it's pretty clear that "Americans must have as many words for TV show as Eskimos have for snow" would be an example of the original (Eskimo) snowclone, as the Language Log presented it, even though it doesn't use the phrasing given here at all. This "list of snowclones," while a good idea, has really abandoned the original sense of the coining.

(That's really not directed at you at all, I just felt that it needed to be said. As it happens, I agree with you that there's no "single word" requirement. BTW, you're KirinQueen, yes? Good to see you on Wikipedia.) Ruakh 20:24, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that's me. No worries, I've learned not to take such comments personally. And I agree with you. The concept of snowclone is fuzzier judging by the various Language Log discussions than these templates we like would suggest.ErinOConnor 00:55, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Ruakh, you might be interested in the matter I brought up at Talk:Snowclone. —Leflyman^Talk 05:45, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Sourcing snowclones

Someone added, and then someone else removed "X is like Y on steroids." A simple Google search reveals this to be a well-used snowclone-- with a range of usage like:

"VC Bistro is like business school on steroids" (Seattle Post Intelligencer)
"Dubai is like Singapore on steroids" (CNET)
"This is like a tollbooth on steroids" (The Fayetteville (NC) Observer)

However the origin may be difficult to track down. Perhaps some stock phrases such as this one may not be possible to source. Does that mean they should be excluded? —LeFlyman 19:20, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Right, good point. Maybe it would make sense to separate the list into known "originals" and "stock phrase"? Circeus 19:42, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

"X is like Y on Z," where Z can be crack, steroids, or almost any drug, is a pretty common expression. Ruakh 01:28, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

As the person who entered the brief note about meanings of various drugs in the "like Y on Z", I'm a bit confused about the need for a citation--all I can say is, that's how I've seen people use it. There's no cite; it's personal experience. I Have No Username, 11:55, 16 March 2006

All content in Wikipedia articles is required to be citable to a verifiable source. Even in an article such as this, we exclude "Original Research." Personal experience is not something that's sourceable. Thus, unless you can come up with a citation for a source that discusses the alternate usages of the "X is like Y on Z" snowclone, it needs to be removed. It's not about whether something is true or not; but whether it can be referenced from somewhere else. —Leflyman^Talk 03:23, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Well for things like snowclones, shouldn't google hits be admissible? Certainly that's how Languagelog, which originated the term, researched them. --Iustinus 04:07, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Possible Snowclone(s)

Should the famous "1. Collect X 2. ... 3. Profit" from the South Park Underpants Gnomes be considered for inclusion? --Suamme1 00:25, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

I think removing this was a mistake. Google finds almost 10000 examples of "step 3 profit", and I think that it would be more common without the word "step" (though there are too many false positives to bother checking). As an example there are 60 mozilla bugs which were filed using it. ajchapman 07:47, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

I think you make a valid point, as it clearly has usage as an Internet meme -- however, that doesn't necessarily translate into the off-line realm. I think that the other South Park stock phrase "Oh my God! They've killed X!" is significantly better known (with near 30 thousand uses according to Google). I'd even be in favor of removing the lesser-known Simpsons phrase "I for one welcome our new X overlords" as another example of extensive Internet usage that doesn't really have much traction in the real world-- but it is referenced in a 2004 Language Log entry, from which "snowclones" sprang. But we do need to remember (something that I, too, forget) that the Internet does not represent the world entirely accurately— and that our encyclopedic entries should aim to be appropriately balanced and understandable to users off the Net, too.—Leflyman^Talk 21:42, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

I think that other South Park phrase is better known, but doesn't get as much use as a snowclone. If we search for a variant without "kenny" there are 10400 uses (29900 if we don't take out kenny). A search for "1 * 2 * 3 profit" without "underpants" finds 15200 (19000 if we don't take out underpants). Sure, this is just on the internet, but I think it is more important to explain the origin when a variant makes up 80% of the usage than when it makes up just under 35. Hmmm, actually I've just done another search also getting rid of "underwear" and "unterhosen" and that gets the results down to 10200, which gives the result to "oh my god they killed ..." but only just, and I still think the original:snowclone ratio counts for something. ajchapman 10:41, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Structuring a "good" Google search for "1. X; 2. ?; 3. profit!" usage appears to be rather difficult; if you look at the results your search comes up with you can see that at least 13 of the first 50 (that I show) are false positives. Again, I'm suggesting that while the phrase may be popular as a joke on the Internet, it hasn't passed over into real world usage as most of the others have. My feeling is we should avoid having the list too reliant/weighed down with recurring jokes from online forums and blogs.—Leflyman^Talk 20:17, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

I second that removing this was a mistake. This seems archetypical. -- anon

It's not really that well-known or used, plus it's a phrase rather than a single word. Likewise I've removed another one which I can't find much usage:

*X, France surrenders.

Memorable usage in Wired magazine headline "Fark sells out. France surrenders." A reference to the rapid surrender of France to Nazi forces in the Battle of France.

—LeFlyman 18:56, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Fascinating discussion; just discovered this page overall.

What about, "Will X for food"? No idea as to origin, but hey, anything you see on t-shirts... --PKtm 17:22, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Presently, the article states the original X was "food". I'm guessing that this is an error and it was actually "work", but since I have nothing but my gut to go on, I won't change it. But someone else might want to if they know for sure. Reveilled 20:32, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing that. Late night edits tend to make for easy mistakes :) —Leflyman^Talk 21:54, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Two that came to mind as I read the article:

"X for Dummies" - from the (unfortunately) popular line of books.

"The Joy of X" - from the book, "The Joy of Sex"

I don't know how common they are, or whether they should be included, because I have read neither Snowclones for Dummies nor The Joy of Snowclones. 69.181.66.75 09:45, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
I added what I consider to be the mother of all snowclones, one that originated in 1990 and passed so quickly into the vernacular that people consider it utterly native...
—Ashley Y 08:30, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

One that came to mind as I read was "X(e)y McY (Z)", as in "Pukey McDrunk" or "Drunky McPuke Shoes".

I don't know the origin. It is at least as early as the Simpsons circa 1992. A bar competing with Moe's opens, called "Tipsy McStagger's Good-Time Eating and Drinking Emporium". Often used as a derisive nickname. Examples: Sarah Vowell, in her book "Assassination Vacation" referring to Abraham Lincoln's son Robert Todd Lincoln, who was present at three presidential assassinations, as "Jinxy McDeath"; A swerving driver on the road being referred to as "Drifty McLane Change"; White House press secretary Scott McClellan is sometimes referred to on talk radio as "Puffy McMoon Face" for the expression he exhibits when pressed on embarrassing subjects. Some people seem to have a preference for the 3-word version, as it has a more flowing rhythm and allows for greater creativity in word choice.

Another example, how about: "two X short of a Y" eg "two sandwiches short of a picnic" to mean someone who's 'not all there'.

What does everyone think of "Thank you Mario! But our princess is in another castle!" from Super Mario Bros.? Just suggesting it in case it helps, although I have to admit I haven't seen it much...could be: Thank you X! But our Y is in another Z! WikiSlasher 16:37, 12 June 2006 (UTC) "X is a luxury we can no longer afford" - if anyone can find an origin of this? Earliest I have is 1950.

Any votes for "Duke Nukem: Forever"? I would have to find sources, but I'm sure I've at least heard people refer to any video game that has pushed back it's release date indeffinitely as "X Forever"... like "Halflife 2: Forever". Sinbad EV 6:31EST Octorber 12 2006

Et tu, X?

Pengo recently pointed out that "Et tu, X?" could be considered a snowclone. Of course I am wondering about what the date of origin would be:

Caesar was assassinated in 44 BC. No ancient source has him saying "Et tu, Brute?, but one does mention a tradition that his last words were "Καὶ σὺ τέκνον" (Greek for You too, my son?). If one wanted to be especially perverse, one could claim that the Greek phrase was the original.
Shakespeare's Julius Caesar, according to the Wikipedia article, was "probably written in 1599", and possibly first performed that same year. But do we know for sure that Shakespeare invented the phrase? Just because the tradition is not ancient does not mean Shakespeare was the first to use it.

So does anyone have any opinions or (better yet) information on this? Should this be in the list? If so, should we claim to know the date of origin? --Iustinus 18:18, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

It seems more than well-known and used, as demonstrated by an easy Google search. I suggest using the 1599 date as an origin, since that was the first "popular" documented usage. Even if it wasn't original to Shakespeare, that is the usage known by all others. —Leflyman^Talk 20:47, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Question

Would "X, You Ignorant Slut" count? Eyeball kid 19:02, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

In Soviet Russia

This is listed as source unknown, when the source of the true joke (not in the same form as the snowclone) was Yakov Smirnoff's comedy. I don't quite know how to source this with an original example, especially without changing the entire phrase around. Tom 23:41, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Disputing "What happens in X, stays in X"

I'm sure friends of mine were using this in 2002, and I doubt it was even remotely new then. 2003 doesn't sound remotely plausible to me. Stevage 15:00, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

It might have had limited usage as early as 2002, however, the popularization came from a series of Las Vegas promotional ads which were noted in 2003. See the article linked:

Vegas goes for edgier ads

Posted 8/3/2003 8:58 PM

By Theresa Howard, USA TODAY

All bets are off on Las Vegas as a family destination. The Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority (LVCVA) stepped up its steamy, adult message — "What happens here, stays here" — in new ads as individual hotel properties shed family-friendly ads and amenities.

I have come across another widely published article from March 28, 2004, which says "Eighteen months ago, Candido and Hoff penned a tagline for the city of Las Vegas' new, risqu´e tourist campaign, "What Happens Here Stays Here."" The article notes, "A USA Today survey named the campaign the most effective of 2003, and the trade publication Advertising Age termed it a cultural phenomenon."

So I think 2003 is a safe bet as an origination of usage. —Leflyman^Talk 18:51, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

This is WAY older than 2003... --Joveblue 13:38, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

It should be from the novel "The Green Mile" by Stephen King (1996). --ElfQrin 14:03, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Examples please

This is confusing with X and Ys everywhere and minimal explanation of what they are supposed to represent, and where they originated. For example, I didn't understand the eskimos example until I clicked on the link (and I was only looking at this page because the Snowclones page didn't express it clearly either). Most have the originals but most don't. The way they are presented at the moment however is on the confusing side anyway...

My suggestion is "Fight X with Y" should be Fight fire with fire (where the bolded words are replaced in snowclones) -or- "Fight X with Y (from fight fire with fire). --Joveblue 13:34, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Also for a lot of them examples of how they are used as snowclones would be helpful. That is, what X and Y could be replaced with.

How about adding a link to a good Google search (or any other search engine of your choice) showing common usages for the snowclone? For example, I've just added "X is a Harsh Mistress", and I can link to the Google results. -- Yggdrasil

Please see :Wikipedia is not a dictionary or a usage or jargon guide. --Leflyman^Talk 18:53, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

- I'm not sure Yggdrasil's suggestion would make this into a dictionary or a usage or jargon guide. Given that this article is about formulas that can have different words or phrases plugged into them, the poing of linking to google would be to list examples of different variations, not to recommend usage. Certainly when Language Log (which coined the term snowclone, of course) writes on this subject, google searches are the primary tool. --Iustinus 07:34, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
- Iustinus is right - when I said "common usages" I meant to display so-called 'proof' of the snowclone - to see how it evolves in the wild, rather than to show how it can be used. As the original poster in this section said sometimes it's not clear from the definition how this snowclone looks when it's "used", so to speak. -- Yggdrasil

My view is that providing "how this snowclone looks when it's used" would be akin to the WP:NOT prescription against a "usage guide, or slang and idiom guide." As noted there, "Wikipedia is not in the business of saying how words, idioms, etc. should be used." As this is intended to be a "list", it doesn't seem necessary to provide examples of usage. However, if someone wants to post a quick WP:RFC to get some more insight from the community, I'd think that would help with the interpretation of policy. Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Language_and_linguistics seems appropriate. --Leflyman^Talk 17:43, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Again, I feel the word "usage" is misleading here. Since a snowclone, by definition, is a phrase in common usage, listing the usages of such a snowclone should be viewed as an actual citation of the term. Given that, I'll go read what the procedure is for posting an WP:RFC and see what others have to say. LisardggY 19:15, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
OK, well at the moment reading up on this subject is impractical for me, but it seems to me that "Wikipedia is not in the business of saying how words, idioms, etc. should be used" would mean that we shouldn't say things like "People commonly substitute 'fish' for X, but this is incorrect." Linking to google (whatever problems one might have with that) would by definition not be saying how an idiom should be used, but showing how it is used: we're not expressing an opinion one way or another, and as usage changes so will the google search. --Iustinus 16:32, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Here's one

Must be one of the most used ever: X 0 Y 1 (given as a soccer score). Stevage 05:57, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Added. --ElfQrin 08:33, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

It's been removed but Google shows hundreds or thousands of results for each of "* 1, World 0",

"citizens 1, * 0", "* 1, Microsoft 0", "* 1, corporations 0" "me 1, * 0", "* 1, me 0", "* 1, you 0". May be not all matches are relevant, but they surely sum up, so I'm adding it again.

Sex, Lies, and Videotape?

This one was just removed as apparently being nonnoteable, which seems odd to me, considering the first page of a a google search shows 60% snowclone uses for the phrase. I'd say it's rather noteable. What was the reasoning behind it's removal? Arturus 05:53, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

It was misplaced under "Origin dates unknown" and I didn't remember to look up the movie's year to place it where it should have been. --Leflyman^Talk 06:07, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

The X to end all Xs

The snowclone listed above is listed with a "citation needed" tag. I'm not sure exactly what needs citing for that entry so I've tried to cover all the bases (with only modest success). I hope the references I have found will be enough for the needs of this article.

The original phrase, the war to end all wars is very well known, as it was a widely used to describe World War I between the end of that war and the start of World War II. Since, clearly, World War I did not "end all wars," the term gained a rather ironic secondary meaning (and it's primary meaning became historical, to show how World War I was perceived at the time). The origin of the phrase is quite murky, often being attributed (without specific reference) to Woodrow Willson. It is likely that it came about as a variation on The War That Will End War which was the title of a book written by H. G. Wells in 1914. I've not been able to find the text of that book, so it may be that the more well known phrasing comes directly from Wells.

The first use of the snowclone version is likely to be quite hard to identify because the irony surrounding the phrase (after the start of World War II) made it a pretty obvious target for spoofing. While I was trying to find a date for the original form in the Oxford English Dictionary, I found an instance of the snowclone from 1964 (in a quotation for the word "replicator"):

1964 Listener 15 Oct. 575/1 Looking as far into the technological future as I dare, I would like to describe the invention to end all inventions. I call it the replicator; it is simply a duplicating machine. It could make, almost instantly, an exact copy of anything. [emphasis added]

I doubt that is the first usage, but it is hard to find references online from earlier dates. I did identify the earliest usage of the snowclone in Google Groups' archive of Usenet, from May, 1982 (the programming language to end all programming languages).

I hope this information will be enough to get rid of the "citation needed" tag.

--BlckKnght 06:57, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

A few more

This page is impressive and a lot of fun. I added "The good, the bad, and the X" and "Read my lips: no new X". I don't know where this is from, but how about "If X is wrong, I don't wanna be right"? --Galaxiaad 01:02, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

How about "It's all fun and games until someone loses X"? Various web pages say it comes from ancient Rome, talking about wrestling matches... but I'm not sure how much I trust that. --Galaxiaad 03:51, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

"When someone asks..."

Removed this one. Google gives around 250 results - fewer, for some reason, than the original quote. 129.7.131.202 04:28, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

The many X of Y

The many X of Y (where X originally is 'moods', I don't know what Y originally was)

I don't know, however searching Google there are more "The many faces of" than "The many moods of" --80.181.230.216 07:02, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Everything I know about X, I learned from Y

Google returns 154000 results for this. --80.181.230.201 13:09, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

X is the root of all evil

Original X: "the love of money". Apparently this one goes back to Apostle Paul (see Root of all evil).
Maybe even: "X is the root of all Y"? You be the judge...
Good one, eh? :-) --BjKa 09:51, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

This list is out of control

This article survived AfD by the skin of its teeth, but it will be in trouble next time around unless we begin to fix some of its Verifiability problems. The vast majority of items on the list have no citations at all, and some of the claims made here are contradicted by the very Wikipedia articles they link to. To take a random example, Descartes originally wrote "I think, therefore I am" in French, not Latin (as claimed here): see cogito ergo sum.

I suggest that every item on this list should have:

. An example of its use in popular culture, supported by a citation (e.g. New York Times headline, advertising campaign)
. A verifiable citation for its origin (if unknown, say "unknown").

Grover cleveland 00:46, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. I previously tried keep it down to only the most notable/recognisable "snowclones" but people kept adding in more and more cruft. I'd suggest a major pruning, leaving only those which can be verified to a source or popular usage. --Leflyman^Talk 01:02, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
- The problem is that the article isn't entitled Snowclone - it's entitled List of Snowclones. If you have a list - it had better be as complete a list as you can make it, so you can't complain that it's getting to be a long list...it's long because there are an awful lot of these things. If it were just an article about snowclones then you'd be very justified in picking a few good examples and dumping the rest. I fully agree with concerns over examples and citations though. SteveBaker 13:34, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

As a belated response: Lists on Wikipedia are not intended to be "complete" ad infinitum. Just as any article, they should include only the notable and verifiable members of a particular class/grouping. See the essay Listcruft and the guidelines What is a featured list? for further thoughts on what should be included.--Leflyman^Talk 19:47, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Bond, James Bond

Does anyone know whether this phrase appears in the Ian Fleming novels, or was it first introduced in the movies? Grover cleveland 15:00, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

X is the Y of Z

This alleged snowclone is ridiculously overbroad. It would encompass such ordinary statements as "Sacramento is the capital of California". What's next -- "X Y Z A B C", covering all sentences consisting of six words? I'm deleting this entry. Grover cleveland 03:15, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Missing Snowclone

I cant believe "could X be any more Y er" is not listed don't know about time though PiAndWhippedCream 03:37, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

21st Century

The 21st century began on January 1st, 2001, not January 1st, 2000. I am moving "Dude, where's my X" to the 20th century.(EDIT) Also moving Mastercard slogan. Not my leg 00:24, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Technically that is correct, but in mainstream usage, the 21st century equals everything after the start of 2000. For example, while there may be no year "0", when referring to decades, such as "the 90s", people do not mean "1991-2000", but "1990-1999". Hence, it's perfectly fine to include items from the year "2000" in the "21st Century" heading.--Leflyman^Talk 19:39, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Better variables

How would y'peeps feel about specifying variables better? I'm thinking something along the lines of X Y Z = nouns, N = number, R = verb, U = gerund phrase etc. Descriptions like "X is the Y of Z" are overly generic; something like immersion in a liquid is the most common method of determining the weight of an irregularily-shaped object and innumerable similar expressions fit the formula but certainly are not snoclones in the intended sense. Just using "compound" variables such as X-ing Y might be sufficient most of the time, but eg. the previous example might require something to the extent of <addictiv thing> for present Y. So, thoughts? --Tropylium 14:08, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

I think the simpler, the better. This isn't a computer program, and the intention shouldn't be to create an all-inclusive description of how every variety of "snowclone" functions. Further, the originators of the concept have pointed out that such a list misses the nuances of the meaning, in that snowclones are more flexible in their formulation than simply replacing particulars parts of speech. See this February 4, 2006 entry at the Language Log for their discussion.--Leflyman^Talk 20:52, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

No, I'm not suggesting requiring completely rigid formulas. OK, maybe part-of-speech division would be too rigid, but still, a few of the current formulas remain beyond the actual scope of recognizability. On further thought, it seems to me that the gist of my previous example snoclone is that X must relate to Z as Y does to a typical "user" of it, or something to that extent; taking another instance: George is the barber of Smallington wouldn't work, but switch Y to Salvador Dali, and it just might.

There might some day be variants of a single original snoclone that do not resemble each other the slightest, but AIUI there is still some sort of a semantic core to each entry. I can't see how it would help to oversimplify things to the point that they're just collections of prepositions and conjunctions.

Actually, I should individually list the entries I'm primarily talking about here; there's only about half a dozen:

X is for Y.
– Obviously X needs to be an actual letter, and Y something starting with it.
The X that can be Y is not the true X
– Might get better by just removing "be".
X is the Y of Z
– I addressed this alreddy. Not sure what would be an adequate fix, however.
When the going gets tough, the tough X
– Makes no sense whatsoever to me. Perhaps this is supposed to be When the X-ing gets Y, the Y get X-ing insted??
Every time X, Y.
– This is pretty generic, but like "the Y of Z" it's still not as arbitrary as the formula suggests. I can't quite tell offhand what the defining factor is, however.
This time, it's X.
– I would contest whether this is an actual snoclone in the first place... it does not seem particularily idiomatic to me. I.E. I'd imagine creating a "derivativ" form like "This time, it's downhill" would not actually require any knoledge of the original. That the original does happen to be a catchphrase of sorts is a different issue.

--Tropylium 23:12, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

I'd suggest that if you find ones to be overly broad, objectionable or unverifiable, such as some that you list above, they should just be removed.--Leflyman^Talk 02:45, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Categories: Talk archives