Talk:I'm allergic to nuts

Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word Talk:I'm allergic to nuts. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word Talk:I'm allergic to nuts, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say Talk:I'm allergic to nuts in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word Talk:I'm allergic to nuts you have here. The definition of the word Talk:I'm allergic to nuts will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition ofTalk:I'm allergic to nuts, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.

RFM discussion: October 2011–May 2017

Latest comment: 8 years ago11 comments6 people in discussion

The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for moves, mergers and splits (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.

I'd like to move this to I'm allergic to and redirect (and hence merge) I'm allergic to aspirin, I'm allergic to penicillin, and I'm allergic to pollen. The reason is to be more inclusive. It would be possible to link to nut#Translations and any other noun where there are common allergies. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:41, 17 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I agree, and I think we should do the same for the 'I need' phrases. But we should indicate how to use the proper grammar, because some languages may need a special case form, and the translation may be less straightforward than just the translation of 'I'm allergic to' along with the translation of 'nut'. Finnish for example would translate 'to nuts' with the allative plural case of pähkinä (“nut”), while Icelandic translates 'nuts' in the dative plural of hneta, and French uses aux to translate 'to' before plural words. —CodeCat 11:56, 17 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
Phrasebook entries more or less only exist to have translations, so putting lots of grammatical detail in translation tables shouldn't be a problem. Mglovesfun (talk) 11:59, 17 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
Most phrasebooks are just bilingual, making things much simpler. DCDuring TALK 15:29, 17 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I don't endorse the idea of merging the entries. But, if people decide to have only one English sentence, as only one entry, under the subject in question, then I'm allergic to pollen would be a much better title than just I'm allergic.

The reason is: we absolutely don't need incomplete sums of parts. They just aren't more helpful than the words alone. If a reader is able to find I'm allergic to + aspirin, and recognize how to make sentences by joining the pieces and applying the grammar of the target language... Then, she might as well do the same thing by joining I'm + allergic + to + aspirin. --Daniel 12:12, 17 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I think the issue is that sentences like this are an open class. As long as there are new nouns to put at the end, you can keep creating new sentences. —CodeCat 12:18, 17 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
It's easier to join the parts I'm allergic to pollen - pollen + aspirin than it is joining the parts I'm allergic to + aspirin. The entry "I'm allergic to pollen" would show complete translations fully adapted to the grammar of other languages, while the entry "I'm allergic to" would show only a piece (an unfinished sentence) translated into pieces (unfinished sentences) in other languages. --Daniel 14:04, 17 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
Does anyone have any facts to support these assertions about what is or is not easier for the class of users of an on-line phrasebook? What are some typical profiles of such users? What proportion of users fit each profile?
If we don't know these things what model of a successful phrasebook (on-line or otherwise, translating or not) would we follow? DCDuring TALK 15:29, 17 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I maintain we should have one such entry and hard-redirect the rest. I would think it should be I'm allergic to, but perhaps Daniel's right that it should be I'm allergic to pollen (or some other): I don't know.​—msh210℠ (talk) 16:43, 17 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

If we go with Daniel's method (keep the one entry at I'm allergic to pollen or the like), then I think the headword and translations should all include pollen (and its translations) in parentheses or the like, much as we do with the headword at keep somebody posted.​—msh210℠ (talk) 17:00, 29 January 2013 (UTC)Reply
Archiving as stale. - -sche (discuss) 01:07, 14 May 2017 (UTC)Reply


Wikious
Boobota
Sagapedia