Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word Talk:bus route. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word Talk:bus route, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say Talk:bus route in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word Talk:bus route you have here. The definition of the word Talk:bus route will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition ofTalk:bus route, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
There are 83 nouns that collocate before route at COCA with a frequency of 5 or more. bus (at 53) is much more common than "car", "rail", "sea", "train", "air", "water", "transit", or "pipeline". If we are dumbing down to be not a good monolingual dictionary with translations, but instead only a learner's dictionary with collocations of use to students, this is probably the most useful of the common collocations. The more common ones at COCA are "escape", "parade", "paper", and "trade". DCDuringTALK23:28, 7 June 2010 (UTC)Reply
They list it as part of bus: "attrib. and Comb., as bus company, conductor (CONDUCTOR 7), conductress, crew, driver, load, queue (QUEUE n. 3), ride, route, station, terminal, ticket, time-table, top; " We should do the same, if we delete it. (I like including attributive collocations in main entries) Conrad.Irwin11:58, 8 June 2010 (UTC)Reply
It would certainly be one way to do it. Although most dictionaries list all kind of derived terms under the main entry, whereas we have always given them separate pages to allow for translations etc. Ƿidsiþ12:14, 8 June 2010 (UTC)Reply
I'm unfamiliar with the OED's notational conventions, but if I'm reading that correctly (am I?), they don't list bus route at all, instead merely saying, s.v. bus, that bus, attributive, collocates with it.—msh210℠18:07, 8 June 2010 (UTC)Reply
Yes, and that is all I want us to record. But putting it on a separate page is better because a) it fits our conventions better (we always put derived terms on separate pages) and b) it allows us to provide proper translations, which are often unpredictable, as they are in this case, at least with the languages I know. Ƿidsiþ19:32, 8 June 2010 (UTC)Reply
If we are to be keeping common collocations, whether or not SoP (decoding), then separate entries are needed for translations. Run-in entries don't really do the job. We are gradually transitioning away from being a monolingual dictionary in our design choices. I hope we can remain adequate as a monolingual dictionary. It is difficult to reconcile the diverse pressures that result from having so many objectives. DCDuringTALK23:43, 8 June 2010 (UTC)Reply
I'm puzzled. The first sentence on our main page reads: "Welcome to the English-language Wiktionary, a collaborative project to produce a free-content multilingual dictionary." --Hekaheka04:42, 9 June 2010 (UTC)Reply
Keep. Many definitions of bus, many definitions of route, but only one overwhelming usage for each term in bus route. It is not the path a waiter takes to bus tables, and it is not the act of telling buses where to go. bd2412T17:44, 8 June 2010 (UTC)Reply
Delete. As long as you speak English, you know what a bus route is from bus + route. If you don't speak English, this won't help as it's written in English. Client-centered approach. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:34, 8 June 2010 (UTC)Reply
You're right, that is the problem with that argument. That's why I don't RFD a lot of stuff that's sum of parts, but still quite interesting. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:17, 9 June 2010 (UTC)Reply
I don't think we can write a good definition of it. The problem is, "the route of a bus" is of course, perfectly accurate and adding to it will only confuse matters. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:21, 9 June 2010 (UTC)Reply
I put "the set route taken by a public bus service". For an entry like this, weirdly, the definition is not that important, it just needs to disambiguate the componant parts properly. Ƿidsiþ12:27, 9 June 2010 (UTC)Reply
As is almost monotonously predictable with these, we were missing the pertinent sense of route ("regular path/itinerary"), now added. No opinion on the merits, but I do note that this passes the multilingual sub-entry lemming test, e.g. Albanian, German. In the past, many have regarded this test as a bridge too far, but this does suggest that this has as much or as little merit as Category:English non-idiomatic translation targets. -- Visviva12:41, 9 June 2010 (UTC)Reply
This falls under a vague Pawley criterion that we haven't quite summed up objectively for our own use. This is what the thing is called. What else would you call it besides a bus route? Just "route" is possible but doesn't always sound as right, whereas one would have thought "bus route" to be redundant in the contexts in which it's commonly used. Plus it's not always just "route", often it's "its route" with reference to the bus! If this were a technical term we would have kept it no problem, but because it's used by professionals and by laymen we have to delete? Why isn't that more justification to keep? DAVilla08:11, 2 July 2010 (UTC)Reply
(Sigh.) Kept as no consensus (with the crowd leaning to keep). I've removed "public" from the definition per my comment above.—msh210℠ (talk) 18:36, 1 September 2010 (UTC)Reply
WF is talking about the entry, you're talking about the thing the term refers to (at least in your first sentence). I took Metro bus line 4 in downtown Los Angeles yesterday, but I wouldn't want to have a dictionary entry for it. Chuck Entz (talk) 19:00, 28 September 2018 (UTC)Reply
Yeah, I knew that, a typical WF comment; I wouldn't have entries for individual bus routes either, that's Wikipedia material (if you're lucky). DonnanZ (talk) 22:11, 28 September 2018 (UTC)Reply
Delete because I don't think you need to know anything beyond 1. knowing what a bus is, and 2. knowing what a route is, in order to understand this phrase. I know Donnanz wants to keep it just because he likes buses/routes. But even so this is phrasebook territory at best. Equinox◑02:34, 30 September 2018 (UTC)Reply
@Kiwima: That is not what WT:CFI says. It says "Unidiomatic terms made up of multiple words are included if they are significantly more common than single-word spellings that meet criteria for inclusion". Thus, the single word spelling has to meet WT:CFI, but it does not need an entry; and I showed that to be the case in my first post, by providing three links. Anyway, I went ahead and created busroute. --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:59, 13 October 2018 (UTC)Reply
