Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word Talk:attentat. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word Talk:attentat, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say Talk:attentat in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word Talk:attentat you have here. The definition of the word Talk:attentat will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition ofTalk:attentat, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
Wikipedia Edit History
This page was m:Transwikied from Wikipedia. Below is the edit history for the Wikipedia article.
Time: 2005-06-09T08:41:44Z - By: w:User:Wetman - Comment: {{Move to Wiktionary}}
Time: 2005-06-09T19:54:21Z - By: w:User:Dmcdevit - Comment: Transwikied to Wiktionary: see ]
Not an English word
Latest comment: 12 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
It's a French word.
Any French word can of course be used in English as long as it is italicized and the person using it is trying to sound clever or educated.
All occurrences of the word I can find in English are direct paraphrases from either French or German.
This is not an English word, not even a loanword, in any meaningful sense of the term. --Dbachmann (talk) 08:00, 16 April 2012 (UTC)Reply
1919, Congressional edition, Volume 7607, U.S. G.P.O.
At this point the meaning of 'attentat' should be observed. In the German Dictionary of Morwitz, the following definition appears: 'Attentat, premeditated outrage; premeditated attempt on anyone's life.'
2005, Peter Wolfe, Like Hot Knives to the Brain: James Ellroy's Search for Himself, Lexington Books (2007), →ISBN, page 216:
But the sitting president first had to die. A hit was scheduled for 18 November 1963 in Miami with an unwitting right-winger targeted for the blame; orchestrating the attentat as a conservative plot would help the mob pry their casinos away from Castro.
One definition says attentat is any appealed (i.e. claimed to be wrong) lower-court holding/ruling/whatever. The other say it's any wrong (and therefore appealed) lower-court holding/ruling/whatever. I'd venture a guess that only one of those is correct, but have no idea which. (Both might be, though.) Of course most citations won't help distinguish which meaning is correct, but careful citation-finding/reading could help. (I haven't time now, I'm afraid.)—msh210℠ (talk) 17:35, 1 March 2013 (UTC)Reply
Hmm. It could be that they are both describing the same thing, with the one sense being an objective one meant by a disinterested observer, and the other being what is meant by the appealing lawyer, who in argument would be claiming wrongness. It does sound somewhat abstract though. — Pingkudimmi13:27, 2 March 2013 (UTC)Reply
Century Dictionary c. 1914 has 3 legal senses including the two we have. On their faces, our two definitions are not semantically equivalent, nor are Century's. Keep. DCDuringTALK15:57, 12 February 2014 (UTC)Reply
Also, current literature on international law makes abundant reference to the attentat clause in extradition treaties. Some of its current relevance has to do with its possible role in providing legal protection to those who have committed politically motivated crimes. Such a term is obviously derived from the third sense in our entry. I don't know whether that the sense in attentat clause is identical to any of the sense we have or that it exists apart from its use in attentat clause. DCDuringTALK15:57, 12 February 2014 (UTC)Reply