Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word Talk:freak. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word Talk:freak, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say Talk:freak in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word Talk:freak you have here. The definition of the word Talk:freak will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition ofTalk:freak, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
Counterculture usage
Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The term "freak" was in common usage by "anti-establishment" persons in the late 1960s and early 1970s (first out in California, I imagine). "Freak" became popular jargon with those opposed at that time to the values of the American and European mainstream. Back then, the American and European mainstream tended to endorse the popular music, dress, grooming and diet of the World War II generation, support the Vietnam War, and oppose non-traditional pastimes such as rock music festivals, recreational drug use, public nudity and "free love."
So in response to the denotative meaning of "freak" in common usage by virtually everyone else in the "modern" world, that of an undesirable oddity, a misfit never suitable for integration into the societal mainstream, the counter-culture adopted "freak" as a means of favorably describing its members. http://1950andbeyond.spaces.live.com/PersonalSpace.aspx?_c02_owner=1&_c
Latest comment: 14 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
There is a quote listed by this date, do we have any earlier instances of this word being used? I am interested in its etymology, finding earliest instances usually helps in pinpointing that right? It looks like all uses in other language are derived from English at this point? Ty13:45, 24 April 2010 (UTC)Reply
Any English noun can meet that. Therefore it is not a test for adjectivity. Comparability, gradability and appearance as a predicate are sufficient to distinguish an adjective from a noun used attributively. DCDuringTALK20:31, 29 December 2011 (UTC)Reply
Great; thanks for the research. Did you mean "Comparability, gradability and appearance as a predicate are together sufficient" or "Comparability, gradability and appearance as a predicate are each sufficient"? And even if you meant the former, is there some smaller set that's also sufficient? (And on what authority?)—msh210℠ (talk) 00:13, 30 December 2011 (UTC)Reply
I think that meeting any one of the tests is sufficient for our purposes. I also think others agree, though the whole idea of fact-based challenges to PoS class membership doesn't seem terribly popular here. DCDuringTALK00:30, 30 December 2011 (UTC)Reply
I've figured out part of the reason that it passes the small test for adjectivity: freak is not stressed on the first word as (I think) is usually but rather on the second as (I think) is usually. Is that a test for nonadjectivity? If so, or if not, on what authority?—msh210℠ (talk) 00:13, 30 December 2011 (UTC)Reply
That isn't a test I use as we don't have a corpus of pronunciations. It converts the verification process from fact-based to authority-based, IMHO. DCDuringTALK00:30, 30 December 2011 (UTC)Reply
I would argue that the adj. form from this root is freakish. It was a very freakish accident. for example. Does this strengthen the argument for "freak" being simply a noun used attributively? -- ALGRIF talk16:42, 8 January 2012 (UTC)Reply
