Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word Talk:bacon and eggs. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word Talk:bacon and eggs, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say Talk:bacon and eggs in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word Talk:bacon and eggs you have here. The definition of the word Talk:bacon and eggs will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition ofTalk:bacon and eggs, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
I know this RFD has been withdrawn, but I have to say - a Google Image for "bacon and eggs" gets, on the first three pages, 40 images of bacon and fried eggs, 6 of bacon and scrambled eggs, 7 of bacon and poached eggs, one of a bacon and egg sandwich, two of eggs wrapped in bacon, and three of eggs fried with chopped bacon. I don't think this phrase actually implies fried eggs - fried eggs are the most common, but certainly not the only meal described as "bacon and eggs". I think this RFD should be reopened, in which case my vote would be delete. Smurrayinchester (talk) 10:56, 10 August 2014 (UTC)Reply
@Donnanz Deboldfaced and striken out: you've already voted above. Above, you left a comment that is not a rationale; may I ask what is your rationale for keeping this entry? Is the rationale based in WT:CFI? Oops, you already said "It usually means fried eggs.", so this would be as per WT:FRIED. --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:23, 13 August 2014 (UTC)Reply
Delete. I've had bacon and eggs at many a diner. The first question they ask is, "how would you like your eggs". However, if it is asserted that "fried" is understood, I would request that this be RfV'd for that proposition. bd2412T14:47, 18 August 2014 (UTC)Reply
Delete. Some commercial operations may limit your choice, eg, to scrambled eggs, which are easier to prepare on a large scale, but in general one has a choice of mode of egg preparation and even such possibilities as egg-whites. Bacon preparation is not really restricted either as microwaving is possible and turkey bacon could be specified or Canadian bacon, a misnomer. That there is a "typical" configuration hardly seems to merit an entry in this or most other cases. DCDuringTALK16:02, 18 August 2014 (UTC)Reply
Well, do we have any evidence whatsoever that eggs, as used in this expression, by default refers to "fried eggs"? Is this any different than saying that one is having "eggs" without reference to the bacon? bd2412T17:22, 18 August 2014 (UTC)Reply
That is the case whether we are talking about "bacon and eggs" or "eggs" alone, isn't it? Or whether we are talking about, say, "eggs and toast" or "steak and eggs" or "french toast and eggs"? bd2412T21:31, 18 August 2014 (UTC)Reply
Not only when it is paired with a breakfast dish, but anytime the context is breakfast (e.g. "He had eggs for breakfast"). However, the question at hand is whether or not it is implied that the yolk is intact. For me there is no such implication even in the phrase "fried eggs", but for other speakers there is. --WikiTiki89 22:02, 18 August 2014 (UTC) --WikiTiki8922:02, 18 August 2014 (UTC)Reply
"I had eggs for breakfast" virtually always means cooked eggs. The rarity of people eating raw eggs for breakfast makes it hard to say anything about that, but someone who would say they had eggs for breakfast instead of "raw eggs" would probably say "eggs and bacon" instead of "raw eggs and raw bacon".--Prosfilaes (talk) 22:08, 18 August 2014 (UTC)Reply
Delete as SOP. The suggestion that the term implies the eggs are cooked is mistaken — it is rather the context that implies the eggs are cooked; one does not normally eat raw eggs, neither as "bacon and eggs" nor as "some pancakes and a couple of eggs". The suggestion that the term implies the eggs are fried is dubious per Smurrayinchester's Google Image data, and if this passes on the basis that it implies frying, I'd suggest RFVing it and then re-RFDing it if the limitation to "fried" eggs is found on RFV to be unwarranted. I also agree with bd's comment of 14:47, 18 August 2014. - -sche(discuss)22:18, 18 August 2014 (UTC)Reply
Would "bacon and pancakes" or "lox and eggs" also have a different form, reached through the same construction? What I'm getting at is the question of whether there is something unique about the phrase "bacon and eggs" that would make it translate differently then similar combinations of bacon with another food or eggs with another food. bd2412T03:55, 19 August 2014 (UTC)Reply
I think that this one is right on the edge of consensus to delete. Having myself voted to delete, I don't want to be the one to make that call, but my sense is that the discussion has petered out, and we should count Wikitiki's statement of withdrawing the nomination and having changed his mind as a "keep" vote and close this as no consensus. bd2412T02:06, 26 August 2014 (UTC)Reply
Would you say, then, that you are neutral on the question at this point? If so, what would you read as the outcome of the discussion? bd2412T02:38, 26 August 2014 (UTC)Reply
I'm still for deletion. I'm not sure if I can actually vote delete though, if I am the one who nominated it and thus I am already implicitly accounted for. --WikiTiki8911:55, 26 August 2014 (UTC)Reply
Keep, erring on the side of. This is nowhere near clear-cut. Bacon and eggs can tend toward fried eggs, but does it really? As for translation target, there are some curious translations (Japanese: ベーコンエッグ (bēkon eggu), Korean: 베이컨에그 (beikeonegeu), notice the transliterations), but are they really common? Anyway. --Dan Polansky (talk) 18:19, 29 August 2014 (UTC)Reply
One can't rely on raw Google counts. Either Google N-grams or the BYU corpora and much, much more reliable. In this case the Google raw counts seem directionally wrong. Both COCA and BNC show bacon and eggs to be about 2.5 times more common than eggs and bacon, 152:62 at COCA, 59:23 at BNC. Eggs and ham is twice as common as ham and eggs at COCA. This N-gram indicates increasing relative frequency for the bacon-first version. I don't see that this kind of difference is nearly enough to count as supporting inclusion. If someone wants to argue for including quantitative criteria on this order of magnitude in CFI it would be a BP/VOTE matter.
Kept: There was no consensus to delete in the last one, and the fact that eggs and bacon gets more hits than bacon and eggs is not reason enough to revisit an RfD, particularly one that was closed just a few days ago. What it is a reason to do is create eggs and bacon, which I'm going to do right after closing this. Purplebackpack8913:14, 10 September 2014 (UTC)Reply
