Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word Talk:bad dog. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word Talk:bad dog, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say Talk:bad dog in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word Talk:bad dog you have here. The definition of the word Talk:bad dog will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition ofTalk:bad dog, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
Scolding
Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
There is an interjection with "bad" that is typically only used with "dog", "cat", "boy", and "girl". People don't say for instance, "bad human!" as an interjection. I'd say it should be kept. Fish900 (talk) 18:12, 22 April 2020 (UTC)Reply
Being able to say "bad " is strictly a matter of your relationship to - it has nothing to do with anything lexical. Human beings aren't really in a position to address other human beings as "human" in such a manner, but if they were, then "bad human!" would be quite natural. One can certainly find instances of "bad human", but they're far outnumbered by false positives, so it's probably not worth the trouble.. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:33, 23 April 2020 (UTC)Reply
It definitely should not. "You ugly bastard" and "greedy child!" also refer to people, but they are obvious from the individual words. No multi-word entry needed. Equinox◑16:29, 23 April 2020 (UTC)Reply
Keep per DCDuring's "This term is used to scold humans. Therefore it must be an idiom", unless the term is in fact not used to scold humans. --Dan Polansky (talk) 10:17, 25 April 2020 (UTC)Reply
@Equinox True enough. The idea is that a phrase that is so readily repurposed to refer to humans must have some setness/idiomaticity to it. The idea may be debatable, but it is there. Admittedly, the entry might be improved by adding a humorous sense to it; we do not do this in Czech (we do not say "zlý pejsek" to humans), and therefore, it is language behavior worth documenting. --Dan Polansky (talk) 08:13, 3 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
How is that relevant to the proposed deletion? In the sense of the interjection as defined in the challenged entry bad dog, the sense of the noun is obviously that of dog sense 1.
Sorry, it was my answer to the suggestion above that if this is used for a person it makes it non-SOP. Yes, SOP per sense 1. PUC – 20:11, 22 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
Of the many ways in which exasperated English speakers might shout at their naughty canine (“disobedient dog!”, “perverse pooch!”, “contrary cur!”, “misbehaving mutt!”, “fiendish flea bag!”), “bad dog!” is the utterance of choice. This is sense 6 of bad: not behaving or misbehaving; mischievous or disobedient. So this appears to be SOP. The only claim to idiomaticity might be that this interjectory use is reserved to pets; at least, I think parents would not generally shout “bad daughter!” to their disobedient child. --Lambiam06:34, 27 April 2020 (UTC)Reply
Serious question here: I'm not sure if this exists only in my dialect or in standard English as well: A "bad dog" can be a disobedient dog but isn't a "bad dog" a dangerous/vicious dog as well? There really could be two senses to this term: (1) a vicious dog; (2) an instruction given to a dog. -- Dentonius (my politics | talk) 11:01, 22 November 2020 (UTC)Reply
I have actually seen signs before for houses that saying "warning! bad dog." supposed to be a warning to scare away burglars. So, yes a "bad dog" can be a dangerous dog as opposed to one that is disobedient. So maybe this should be kept and the dangerous dog sense added. 2600:1700:E660:9D60:ECCF:B6AE:362F:57C14:19, 22 November 2020 (UTC)Reply
If you know what bad + dog means (by the way, you can literally substitute dog with any possible animal you can think of), then you'll understand it. If you don't, you should probably demand a refund from whichever introductory course to the English language you went to. --Robbie SWE (talk) 15:30, 22 November 2020 (UTC)Reply
Do we refer to dangerous lions, alligators, sharks, bears, and spiders as "bad lions", "bad sharks", "bad bears", "bad alligators", and "bad spiders" or do we just refer to dangerous or vicious dogs as "bad dogs"? If the latter, then bad dog should have an entry. 8.48.254.6820:10, 22 November 2020 (UTC)Reply
For "people" keeping them as pets, yes we do hear them say that. We even say that about inanimate objects; there's even a production company called Bad Robot for crying out loud. --Robbie SWE (talk) 21:02, 22 November 2020 (UTC)Reply
