Talk:Set phrase
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] ˡ
What is this weird looking square supposed to denote? <KF> 14:58, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
- Probably stress, it would probably be rendered correctly with the right font, I think it's IPA. 惑乱 分からん 18:22, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Constructions
Well, I certainly trust linguistics specialists to get this right, but it seems to me I've always seen the term "set phrase" used to refer to constructions that included verbs. Most of the examples here are simply compound nouns.
I apologize that I'm no linguistics expert myself, so I can't speak to English examples. But we often use the term "set phrase" in Japanese class to refer to constructions that always go together - verb, noun, and particle - to produce a set meaning.
For example: Ki (気) can be used in various set phrases to produce set meanings that don't directly relate to the meaning of the words involved.
- Ki ni naru - to be worrying, to be weighing on one's mind
- Ki wo tsukeru - to notice
- Ki wo tsuku - to be careful
Yet, as these are quite normal everyday phrases, and not metaphors like "pulling your leg", they're not really idioms. Again, I apologize that as a native English speaker, I have trouble applying these sorts of linguistics concepts to my own language, and can only provide foreign examples. Thoughts? LordAmeth 18:44, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Clean-up
It's been quite some time since I posted the above comment, and while I've had a very brief conversation with one editor over at WP:Theoretical Linguistics, nothing has come out of it towards actually changing the article. So, here's hoping that some cleanup tags will attract attention.
I'm no linguist, and do not trust myself to be able to accurately represent what this technical jargon term means precisely within the Linguistics context. But I do know just enough to know that set phrases consist of far more than just compound nouns. Egfrank offered the wonderful example of "to put up with" - a phrase made up of several words, with a new meaning not intrinsic to any one of the parts. This is a far better example of a set phrase than simply a noun which has been modified.
Please, won't someone help this poor, misguided, article!? LordAmeth (talk) 00:27, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] (Teacher's) Tone
The introduction reads decently at first, but continues to have more of a socratic tone. This really isn't good for an encyclopedia article. Rather than trying to present this as a teacher might, editors should aim for simple clarity. Compare the linked article markedness. Examples are fine, but questions to the reader to be avoided. Ace Class Shadow; My talk. 03:24, 11 March 2008 (UTC)