Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word Talk:belt and suspenders. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word Talk:belt and suspenders, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say Talk:belt and suspenders in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word Talk:belt and suspenders you have here. The definition of the word Talk:belt and suspenders will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition ofTalk:belt and suspenders, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
RFV
Latest comment: 13 years ago7 comments4 people in discussion
Failure to be verified means that insufficient eligible citations of this usage have been found, and the entry therefore does not meet Wiktionary inclusion criteria at the present time. We have archived here the disputed information, the verification discussion, and any documentation gathered so far, pending further evidence. Do not re-add this information to the article without also submitting proof that it meets Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion.
You are right to ask. What you are seeing seems to be exactly attributive use of the noun. The notion is that, in English, at least, it is very common that a noun be used in attributive position to modify another noun. In principle every noun can be so used. Thus, if an expression that is commonly a noun modifies another noun in that way but does not otherwise behave like an adjective, we ought not call it an adjective. DCDuringTALK04:53, 24 April 2011 (UTC)Reply
Being gradable or comparable is one clue: if "X is very belt and suspenders" or "X is more belt and suspenders than Y is", then "belt and suspender(s)" must be an adjective. DCDuring can explain more comprehensively, but I didn't want him to think he was the only one concerned about the difference. Oh, but in some cases (like aliquot), things are very murky. - -sche(discuss)05:39, 24 April 2011 (UTC)Reply
Yes, and if a word can be used as a predicate after a form of "become", we consider it an adjective (forms of "be" being used in too many other ways to make an easy test). Or if a word has a semantically distinct sense when used attributively.
To completely carry out the program of eliminating all "erroneous" adjective PoS sections we would need to convince those providing translations of English nouns to think to add any distinct word forms that translated attributive use of the noun. Thus, adjectives would appear among the translations of nouns.
The purpose of this is to prevent having adjective PoS sections that duplicated the noun PoS sections (in definitions, usage examples, synonyms, attestation citations, etc). For, AFAICT, every noun sense of every noun (including every proper noun) has a corresponding adjective sense. DCDuringTALK23:28, 24 April 2011 (UTC)Reply
