Talk:bestow
RFV discussion: May 2016–May 2017
This entry has survived Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).
Please do not re-nominate for verification without comprehensive reasons for doing so.
Rfv-sense: "to dispose of". Other dictionaries do not seem to recognize this sense and the only citation does not appear to support the definition: "Here are blank warrants of all dispositions; give me but the name and nature of your malefactor, and I'll bestow him according to his merits." --Hekaheka (talk) 14:18, 27 May 2016 (UTC) Also the sense "give in marriage" seems to be missing from other dictionaries. --Hekaheka (talk) 12:34, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
- The marriage-related sense reminded me of sense 3 of give away in marriage, which at least some dictionaries have as a distinct sense. MWOnline, for example does not have it as a distinct sense as the identity of the subject (eg, father), object (bride, object's relationship to subject, or the name of the bride) and "in marriage" amply restrict the way in which give and away can be interpreted. DCDuring TALK 17:36, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
- I found a quotation from Shakespeare to "give in marriage" -sense, and consequently removed rfv-tag from that sense. Sense "to dispose of" remains. --Hekaheka (talk) 19:55, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
- “bestow”, in The Century Dictionary , New York, N.Y.: The Century Co., 1911, →OCLC. has both senses, each with a single citation. Webster 1913 had the same citation for the marriage sense, which I am about to add to the entry. I still have trouble seeing the marriage sense as not just a trivial specialization of other senses of bestow. DCDuring TALK 21:14, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
- A further consideration: should the two senses be labeled "archaic" as they are missing in current dictionaries? --Hekaheka (talk) 04:07, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
- The "dispose of" sense seems obsolete to me, The marriage sense seems SoP and dated.
- The "dispose of" sense makes etymological sense as directly from be- + stow, the other senses seeming to be developments, but I can't base it on our "Etymology" as we don't have definitions for the Middle English terms or entries for them. DCDuring TALK 05:27, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
- A further consideration: should the two senses be labeled "archaic" as they are missing in current dictionaries? --Hekaheka (talk) 04:07, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
This has been sitting here long enough! I spent some time and have found enough citations for all the senses marked "rfv". This is now RFV-passed. Kiwima (talk) 23:44, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
RFV discussion: September 2017
This entry has survived Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).
Please do not re-nominate for verification without comprehensive reasons for doing so.
Rfv-sense: (transitive) To dispose of.
Previously tagged, not listed here. There are three inline citations given, but the Rfv template remains. - Amgine/ t·e 04:02, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
- Cites look good to me. Being (not very) BOLD, I removed the tag, assuming that it was left in the entry in oversight when the RfV closed. DCDuring (talk) 12:16, 26 September 2017 (UTC)