Talk:fuck

There is information that old meanings of "fuck" are punch, strike, thrust etc., which in terms of physics means to move forward fast with further collision. Therefore it may be suggested that the "fu" represents sound which is mage by object traveling through air(flap with your hand near ear and try to vocalize that sound) and "ck" part represents the sound when two solid objects collide(clap your hand and try to vocalize that sound as well). Also pay attention that in some comics hits are represented by phrases "puck" and "tuck" which are more sounding/ringing versions of "fuck".

Just to give you an idea of how assuming that similar words in different languages actually mean the same can lead to very embarrassing situations: An ex colleague of mine was told that an English speaking visitor who was going to arrive at the company later that day bred horses. When he met the visitor they had a little chat, and at one moment my ex colleage said: "So, I hear you fuck horses." (Dutch fokken = English to breed)

I'll adapt this to false friends. ☮ Eclecticology-

I heard that fokken and fuck, possibly could be cognates...

Btw, I heard that the verb fok (It seems that Afrikaans, like english, has dropped many of its infinitive endings) was used in Afrikaans. Does anyone know if that is derived from english or old dutch, primarily?

Of course fuck and fokken are cognates. How could they possibly not be? They're from very closely related languages and almost identical in form and meaning, except that fokken isn't used for cursing, thus leaving it out of the many, many derived terms — just as no one says "Breed you, motherbreeder!" That the form is found in English, Dutch/Afrikaans and Swedish strongly suggests — nay verily, cries out — that they share a common Germanic ancestor, which may or may not link up with the Latin/IE etymology given. I would also bet (a small amount of) money that the "fuck horses" story is an urban legend. -dmh 19:40, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I don't believe it's made up; I've heard it myself, in a different form: just a few days ago I was talking with a native Dutch speaker who informed me that in the Netherlands, it's only legal to buy animals from a licensed "fucker." Needless to say I quickly corrected her. Illuminatiscott

Note: The English, Dutch/Afrikaans and Swedish forms don't look like recent borrowings, thus leaving common ancestry or stupefyingly unlikely coincidence as possible explanations. Finally, I agree that fokken is a good example of a false friend. -dmh 19:43, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Well, it could be both a false friend, as well as a true cognate. Also, I haven't found a definitve answer to my question yet, and would hope that an afrikaans etymologist would soon pass by. PS. In gay circles, "Breeder" is sometimes used for cursing... ^^ PS2 What is the Afrikaans word for "breed"? PS3, the older swedish forms aren't used very much nowadays, although recently the recent borrowings (spelled facka or fucka) during the last years have become very common. The older words seem too old to have been affected by english, though.

Sorry, looked that up, now, according to http://dictionaries.travlang.com, the most common words seem to be aanhou (on-hold), teel(?) and oplei (up-lead).

According to: http://www.dsl.ac.uk/dsl/getent4.php?plen=285&startset=18961317&query=Fuk&fhit=fuck*&dregion=form&dtext=dost#fhit ,the first use in Scots seem to be 1363, a century older than the "Flen Flyys" poem.

Thanks! I’ve added the Scots notes, though 1363 is actually a line number; the play (Satyre) is from 1540, after the (c. 1500) faux Latin.

—Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 04:08, 20 January 2010 (UTC)Reply

The phrasal verbs ("fuck off", etc) need to be migrated to separate pages, if these do not already exist. — Paul G 18:27, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Definitions next to related terms should move to the terms themselves (which will have to be created in some cases). The formatting can be standardized a bit as well, particularly for the examples. The tags like (markedly vulgar; slang - intransitive) could use a once-over, templatized where possible, and consolidated with usage notes. The wikified regular inflections should go. Dmh 05:09, 21 Jan 2005

• The wikified regular inflections are fine, and should stay. Uncle G 13:31, 14 May 2005 (UTC)Reply

Found http://www.all-science-fair-projects.com/science_fair_project_dictionary/Fuck to be kind of odd. What they get for being lazy I guess. Their goal is that "this site will serve you well in guiding and inspiring your child." --Eean 19:17, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

• That site is an out-of-date Wiktionary mirror. Uncle G 13:35, 14 May 2005 (UTC)Reply

Joder and coger are both correct (coger can be found on this pornographic web site:, and joder is defined when typing it in on this page: .67.165.217.42 01:19, 19 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Follar can be verified at the Royal Spanish Academy's website here: by typing in follar in the top-left search box. It is the fourth definition listed: Practicar el coito, "to practice coitus." Chingar can be found on the same website's second definition of the word. 67.165.217.42 21:23, 19 December 2005 (UTC)Reply

Culeado/Culeada are common South American slang terms, almost completely identical to the English word fucker as a stronger, more vulgar version of pendejo or asshole (although in many Latin American countries the word pendejo is used to refer to curious or annoying children)WatashiNoAiken 01:37, 1 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Should the "fuck with" sense of fuck go on its own page or in the verb section? i.e. "Don't fuck with me." and "Relax, I'm just fucking with him." Millie 11:07, 5 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

Probably, if it's not included already. 85.226.122.205 21:44, 13 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

slang is piling up, anyone wondering about this? LingLangLung 01:30, 5 March 2006 (UTC)Reply

• its a fucking good page... 220.236.33.183 10:57, 24 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, I had meant to RfV that, but neglected to do any research on it whatsoever. Davilla 15:53, 24 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

dengudu in telugu

by eashwar reddy

Thanks, but you have to write it in proper Telugu script, like this: తెలుగు (ˈt̪elʊgʊ) replace g with ɡ, invalid IPA characters (g). —Stephen 18:23, 16 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

you can say this in slang often. A lot of younger kids say fuck you or fuck that. Or younger kids say just fuck off!

"fuck (plural fucks)

An act of sexual intercourse.
That was a great fuck.
A sexual partner.
She’s a good fuck.
A highly contemptible person.
He is a stupid fuck.
Not caring.
I don’t give a fuck!
I don’t give a flying fuck!"

i doubt that in "She's a good fuck" the word fuck refers to her, but rather it refers to the act, just like "she's a good ride" is different from calling someone a car. and in "i dont give a fuck" the word fuck is not referring to 'not caring', but to something of extremely low value (so probably not associating with sexual intercourse, or maybe meant as 'one single act of fucking'), which is then esteemed higher then whatever the sentence is said about. --lygophile 04:13, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

• I've gone ahead and removed "not caring" as a noun definition - you are right that in "not give a fuck" it means "something of extremely low value " but I believe that sense is specific to the phrase.
• I'm not clear what you mean about "she's a good ride". Kappa 04:33, 2 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

In "She is a good ride", ride refers to the sex act, meaning sex with that person is good - not that the person is good. Same thing with "She is a good fuck." fuck refers to the sex act. --Versageek 04:49, 2 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Well you can't say "She is a good act of sexual intercourse" so I think another definition of "fuck" is necessary for this sentence. Kappa 15:45, 2 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

It is a synonym of "lay": She’s a good fuck (good lay). This is in opposition to its use as a synonym of "fucker": He’s a good fuck (good old fucker). Fuck/lay refers to the act, while fuck/fucker refers to the person with no sexual sense at all. —Stephen 12:18, 3 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

hmm..i think in this sentence "is" is used to mean "means to me", or "can provide" or something. it is slang or something you know. i think this is used more often like that, as in "he's quite a challange", where "is" - i think - means "provides".--lygophile 08:42, 13 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Most German etymology dictionaries describe "fuck" as taken over from German "ficken", which literally means to insert or to (violently) enter, but which is well known as a profanity for sex just the same way that "to fuck" is. In late medieval German it rather meant to rub (inside of something).

It actually is said to go back to Catalan language "ficar" also meaning to insert.

Also there is a Swedish word "ficka" meaning pocket.

Derived terms. This sets a poor example. Davilla 06:56, 21 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

Why does it set a "poor example". Because there are lots of entries ?? Or because you are prudish ? Swear words are a rich part of the language. Live with it.--Richardb 09:09, 23 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

No, I agree with Davilla. The derivations section is not a piece of lexicography, it's a playground for random, mostly invented, abuse. Widsith 09:29, 23 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

Because definitions don't belong there, and I didn't want to just delete them all. Judging from the number of contributors, I'd bet this page gets a good number of hits, and it would be better to have it correctly formatted. Davilla 19:22, 27 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

Easier than I thought. Davilla 23:07, 1 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

I'm a translator and i think it's unfair that i can't edit this page. I think it could be editable for old members of wikipedia, as me, who have created many reliable articles.

It’s protected because of the constant vandalism on this page. What do you want to add to the page? I will insert it for you. —Stephen 17:36, 2 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

The verb "to break or destroy" have been translated by a noun so it can't be. The candidate verbs are "bousiller", "défoncer" or "niquer". ("I fucked up my truck" -> "j'ai bousillé mon camion", "j'ai défoncé mon camion", "j'ai niqué mon camion")

Just offering portuguese (PT-BR) translations: Fuder (verb) Foda (noun) Fodido (adjective)

Leonardo 2007-07-30

Korean translation is spelt incorrectly. Instead of 시발 it should be 씨발. 218.152.32.70 15:28, 20 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

There are 4 unchecked Hungarian translations. These are:

• baszni (verb) translates to 'to fuck', refers to a sexual interaction in a general form. Often seen with the 'meg' prefix. Note that removing the prefix does not change the meaning of this example sentence: To fuck someone = Megbaszni valakit = Baszni valakit. The word can also refer to an object insertion. To fuck someone with something = Baszni valakit valamivel = Megbaszni valakit valamivel. Summary: baszni is in the translation categories "to have sexual intercourse" (verb) and "to insert an object into a specified body part" (verb).
• baszás (noun) is a noun referring to the sexual act. It falls under the category "an act of sexual intercourse" (noun).
• baszogatni (verb) is a verb that refers to an action that a person does to annoy one person directly, for example asking annoying questions all the time. It does not refer to "indirect" annoyance, which is, for example, making loud noises which makes everyone around one nervous. It does not fall under any currently listed categories.
• kibaszott (adj) is an adjective that directly translates into "fucked up".

There are also categories which do not contain hungarian translations. I have some words for most of them, here's the list.

• to insert an object into a specified body part (verb) : baszni
• to break or destroy (verb) : elbaszni
• an act of sexual intercourse (noun) : baszás
• highly contemptible person (noun) : faszfej

-Baliame 1:56 GMT+1, 23 August 2007

Is there a place, perhaps under new compound terms header, as well as a description of the unusual process of splitting another word to place the subject word in its middle, for the unique construction "in-fucking-credible"?

That’s a figure of speech known as tmesis. —Stephen 07:37, 1 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

The common form of fuck is choda often used as a suffix to express indignation or to abuse someone e.g. Boka-choda etc. Never use this word in formal or semi formal conversation, it is highly obscene and use mostly among friends or to express extreme vulgurity.

That’s well and good, but it’s not useful information unless you include the correct Bengali script. —Stephen 13:16, 19 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

We should really add "fuck face" to the list of compound terms. I was also wondering whether "four-letter word" would be a derived term? Of course, there are many four-letter words.

I have an example sentence for the following (heard more often than not when I worked PC support):

1. (often derogatory) used to emphasize displeasure with someone or something

   My fucking computer crashed again.

~Kaze13 2008-11-04 04:22

ngentot and entot is Indonesian slang word Azmi1995 12:29, 3 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Is as a synonym for feeling intoxicated. Should this not be mentioned? "Man, I am totally fucked up!"

82.35.174.251 19:47, 23 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Well, "fucked" and "fucked up" are different phrasings, and besides, isn't the main sense here something like "spaced out, exhausted, worn out, beat", rather than "intoxicated" per se? Cf. "wasted" used in a similar manner. Wakuran 12:33, 4 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

(markedly vulgar) To put in an extremely difficult or impossible situation.

If you do that, I’m fucked.

Ain't "fucked" in this case an adjective? Does this definition even function? I'm pretty sure it should be just in fucked, otherwise, we should have a better example. Hołek ҉ 10:21, 15 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

It is one of the few, possibly the only, word in the english language that can be used in some form as every word in a sentence, excluding articles. cf: "Fuck the fucking fuckers!"; does this bear mentioning?

If we document each part of speech, that should speak for itself. Incidentally, "fuck the fucking fuckers!" doesn't really show this IMO, because it requires the forms fucking and fucker are required. One could just as easily (though less idiomatically) say "smash the smashing smashers!" or "kill the killing killers!" -- Visviva 04:04, 8 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

The thuing with the other examples, is that they are (partially) redundant. "Smash the smashing smashers!" canbe rephrased as "Smach those people who smash things, are are currently smashing them!", however "Fuck the fucking fuckers!" is not encouraging copulation with those currenlty engaged. The word is used in three distinct ways in once sentence, and the meaning is only communicated by context. I think that this is a fairly unique property of the word. Although I suppose that your point about it coming across from the sheer number of entries in the article is valid 81.107.154.70 18:55, 8 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

I agree that "fuck the fucking fuckers" is not redundant; whereas, smash/kill is redundant. I am not 100% sure it would be wikipedias goal to add versitilty, but i would support unless someone could argue against it. we need a linguist here.142.68.92.110 21:42, 3 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Anotherdave 22:36, 21 January 2011 (UTC)Reply

De Sade frequently uses fuck as a mass noun for semen, e.g. (from The 120 Days of Sodom, 1785) "she would raise her skirts, display her ass, and the libertine, all smiles, would spray his fuck upon it". Was it used this way by anyone else? Should we have it? Equinox ◑ 19:29, 17 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

I think it's from a translation of French "foutre", which similarly could be used with both (and other) meanings. Probably even moreso in the 18th century when De Sade wrote his novels, and "baiser" still meant "kiss". Wakuran 23:30, 30 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Tea room.

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.

---

I am extremely skeptical of the present voluminous etymology entry for the word. The fact that some of it verges on the incredible and no attested sources or authorities are included is completely unacceptable. Also, no mention of any cognateness with German ficken is acknowledged, and that word states in its etymology that it originates at least back to Middle High German (1050 – 1350). In general I find our lack of referenced etymology entries untenable. We really should start to dig deeper in the area of etymological research, certainly commence garnering a consensus for it. __meco 15:09, 21 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

That definition is actually quite accurate and would be well-accepted by linguists. Some have suggested that the word was borrowed from Low German sometime before the first attestation in either language, but I'm not sure of the reasoning behind that. One source (Sheidlower, pg. xxv), says that it cannot be Anglo-Saxon, but the reasoning is not made clear for that conclusion. German fikken is not listed because there is a problem with the vowel in that form. It's not a clear cognate because of that. Ultimately a Proto-Germanic *fuk- is going to be derived from Proto-Indo-European *pug- making "fuck" possibly cognate with Latin pugno 'fight' (one form borrowed into English as pugilism) or Greek pugmē 'boxing' (but Greek pugē 'rump, buttocks' may be closer) and Ukrainian pkhaty/pkhnuty 'to push, give a push', etc. But there aren't certain etymologies as above written out anywhere that I've seen. The closest complete etymology I've seen is that found in Jesse Sheidlower, ed., 1999, The F Word (second edition, Random House), pages xxv-xxxii. The problem is that there are no attestations of "fuck" or its cognates in any Germanic language prior to the 15th century. Sheidlower should probably be considered the most comprehensive source. (Taivo 19:17, 21 January 2009 (UTC))Reply

Just looked up ficken in the 24th edition of Kluge (Etymologisches Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache, pp. 291-292) and he mentions the problematic vowel in relation to English fuck, but relates it nonetheless. The problem is that none of these forms (except ficken) predate the 15th century. Ficken goes back to the 11th century. It mentions the Latin and Greek cognates, adding an additional Latin possibility in pungere 'to stab' and reconstructs the PIE as *peuk-/peug- (I don't know why the k version). (Taivo 19:43, 21 January 2009 (UTC))Reply

Just looked up fokken in De Vries (Nederlands Etymologisch Woordenboek, pg 174) and he doesn't include English as a cognate, but lists Greek pugē 'rump' and Latvian pūga 'wind' as cognates. However, this definition is solely based on a meaning of fokken as some sort of sail, it seems. Fok is a foresail, but De Vries seems to be talking about a sail at the aft end. My Dutch isn't fluent by any means, but his use of Greek pugē is worth pointing out in this context. (Taivo 20:00, 21 January 2009 (UTC))Reply

• I think it's a good and full etymology. Ƿidsiþ 06:38, 22 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

According to Deutsches Wörterbuch (on which I have full confidence) the German word may originate from French piquer (or It. piccare). No mention of the English equivalent, but instead of English fidge(t) (fidge-ficken is compared to bridge-Brücke, edge-Ecke and so on). Please note that the meaning in the 19th century and before was just rub(any trace of that in ME/OE?). Thence I would disprove adding the German word as a cognate. No trace of Swedish, Dutch or dial. Norwegian, which means that they are not connected to the German word. Whether they are connected to the English word, is an entirely different question. Also, please note, that there I could not think of/find out any Danish cognate - thence the word is most likely not Common Germanic. Bogorm 14:03, 22 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

The fact that there is not a readily "memorable" Danish form does not mean that the word was not Common Germanic. The presence of a Swedish form and a cognate Dutch form (there is also a cognate Frisian form) is sufficient to place the word in Common Germanic. Taboo words like this frequently drop out of common usage. A Danish cognate is not critical. While Grimm is a good dictionary, Kluge is generally considered the more authoritative when it comes to etymology, just as the OED is a great citation dictionary, but it leaves much to be desired in the etymology department. This has always been a taboo-word related to copulation in English attestations--it isn't written down until Early Modern English times, the earliest attestation in OED is 1503. The problem with bringing in French or Italian equivalents is that the initial consonants are wrong. There is no reason why a word beginning with p in French would be borrowed into German with an initial f. More likely is that ficken is cognate with the other Germanic forms, but with an unusual vowel correspondence, just as Kluge states. (Taivo 14:57, 22 January 2009 (UTC))Reply

Some linguists, though, accept the following etymology:

-Old Dutch "folc", translated to Old English focce, Middle English fuce, Modern English fucke, more commoly written as fuck.

-Old Norman "folk'" (to do sex), from Basque "fulku" (to have sex) (fulkutxariota), from Old Spanish fullecare (to do sex) (Modern Spanish follar).

-Fullecare from Latin fullceum (to be obsessed with sex), also pulceum (someone who does sex)

-Pulceum from Greek phugis, from Turkish poghis, from Assyrian poeges, from Arabic foz-ekhes, meaning "sex".

— This unsigned comment was added by 139.139.35.70 (talk) at 16:25, 24 March 2009 (UTC).Reply

I find it ridiculous that you have nothing better to do than debate the origin of the word "fuck." I'm sure you wonderful lingual talents would be much better put to use on a more important word than fuck. — This unsigned comment was added by 70.121.163.19 (talk) at 21:43, 30 March 2009 (UTC).Reply

Considering how often this word is used in informal speech, this is probably one of the more important words to have a good entry for. — Carolina wren discussió 22:21, 30 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

70.121.163.19, I can see your point - this word is a four-letter word, proscribed in refined and elaborate language, but it is (unfortunately) one of the first words a foreign learner of English encounters. Furthermore, it is not præsent in the North Germanic languages (only in English and German and even the connection is dubious, see above for ficken < piquer), which indicates that it is a loanword (from French). Which again is curious to note, since the French word for this activity n...er is again a loanword from Arabic. The Slavic languages, on the other hand, have præserved a Slavic root for this, as have the North Germanic ones. And so forth. The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 21:14, 2 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

So how does the French foutre fit into all of this? Or indeed does it? Pingku 17:59, 3 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

It is derived from Latin futuo, futuere (third conjugation). The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 18:23, 3 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

Some comments: Deutsches Wörterbuch does mention ficken in connection to fuck, and there are similar forms present in North Germanic, alhough they appear to be rare/dialectal. Wakuran 21:14, 28 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

PS. My German is not perfect, but to me it appears that the Wörterbuch thinks the connection to piquer is implausible, it seems to prefer a connection to fegen (sweep). Wakuran 21:19, 28 April 2009 (UTC)Reply

The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Feedback.

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.

---

This page, is absolutely awful, the examples given are just out of like

(examples citing all 8, the VULGARITY and INNUENDO is unbelievable. THIS ARTICLE SHOULD BE REMOVED OR EDITED. KIDS READ WIKI ALL THE TIME FOR SCHOOL AND THIS ISN'T SOMETHING THEY SHOULD BE SUBJECTED TO.)

Well in fairness, that is what the word means, and we don't censor the Wiktionary, ever. On a more general note, the amount of "inappropriate material" is everywhere on the Internet. Without the proper parental controls, kids can access anything. Mglovesfun (talk) 17:50, 1 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

We are sorry that your sensitivities were offended by the page, but you will find similar definitions in most non-school dictionaries. Kids will (and do) find much, much worse elsewhere on the internet if they look for it. One wonders how the page could be reached by accident? Dbfirs 17:50, 1 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

"Fuck" from the proto-indo-european root *peig or *peik (evil-minded, hostile; to cut, mark by incision) > Middle Dutch "fokken" (fuck). Curiously, "sex" came from *sek-s (the cut) - *sek (to cut), that has the relation with *sēk (slack, calm; relax) > Greek hēka (slowly, softly, sweetly). Prof. Paulo Mappelli Siqueira, Brazil

Can someone please add "frack" to the list of synonyms.

Done :) —Jakeybean^TALK 04:15, 20 September 2011 (UTC)Reply

The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process.

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.

---

Rfv-sense: "A large amount." The example sentence uses fuckload which is a separate word. If it does exist, which it may, I'm not sure it could be called a noun. Something like "I made a fuck of money" would demonstrate this sense, something like "I made a fuck ton of money" doesn't seem to justify a noun, and probably not this definition either. Mglovesfun (talk) 09:28, 28 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I have heard fuckload used in this way as Gloves has demonstrated, but not fuck. It just doesn't go with the flow of the sentence. Jamesjiao → ^{T ◊ C} 21:25, 3 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

Do they perhaps mean "a fuck of a lot of money" (same construction as "a hell of a lot")? Equinox ◑ 21:32, 3 November 2011 (UTC)Reply

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 00:13, 22 March 2012 (UTC)Reply

I wonder how we should cover this, though. You can certainly talk about "an X of a lot" of something (X = fuck, heck, hell, ...others?), and I don't think it's only used with "lot". My own user page admits that I make "a fuck of a fuss about commas". Equinox ◑ 01:43, 6 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

Can we put "fuck them" rather than "fuck her" here? — This unsigned comment was added by Peterbruce01 (talk • contribs) at 01:33, 20 August 2012‎ (UTC).Reply

The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Tea room.

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.

---

Look at the interjections. Are these really supposed to be separate interjectional senses of fuck? I think somebody has got mixed up and used it as a catch-all list for terms that contain fuck (e.g. what the fuck), which should and do have their own entries. Equinox ◑ 16:35, 24 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

(This got lost like this, I'm just returning it here. --Duncan 16:03, 25 February 2009 (UTC))Reply

I agree. Apart from the intensifier sense, the meaning applies to the phrase, not the word. And as an intensifier sense, the word is not the interjection. Pingku 16:20, 25 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

Okay, given the lack of dissent I'm going to tidy up. Equinox ◑ 23:01, 10 March 2009 (UTC)Reply

To my knowledge, "fuck" is the only English language word that can be function effectively as an interfix (e.g. "abso-fucking-lutely" or "fan-fucking-tastic"). Is this perhaps worth a subheading? Cheers. DLPFC 43 (talk) 18:04, 19 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

See entry at -fucking-. Equinox ◑ 18:06, 19 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

I wonder if the usages in "Zero fucks were given", "Fucks sake!" and "You fucks!" should be included in the fucks page. Or are they different usages?--Auric (talk) 20:06, 16 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

We have the first under the noun heading here ("A thing of no value, a small amount") and the third here ("A highly contemptible person"). The second needs an apostrophe: for fuck's sake. Equinox ◑ 20:24, 16 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

Okay, I understand. Thanks for clearing that up.--Auric (talk) 20:31, 16 October 2013 (UTC)Reply

The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for verification (permalink).

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.

---

fuck

Rfv-sense "(vulgar, colloquial, usually followed by “up”) To break; to destroy." Obviously fuck up exists, but just fuck, with this sense?__Gamren (talk) 18:46, 23 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

Trivially meets RfV because fuck up does.

As to a possible RfD, someone who encounters a use of fuck collocated with up could legitimately expect to find guidance among the definitions (not just the derived terms) of fuck. DCDuring (talk) 05:24, 24 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

That doesn't seem right. Would you want put to have sense lines for each of put up, put off, put through...? They aren't just put! Equinox ◑ 10:43, 24 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

I would like the entry for put to at least include definition lines that made some sense for someone trying to understand the collocations or phrasal verbs (if indeed they are phrasal verbs). How would a new user even know to go to derived terms for the verb + particle combinations? DCDuring (talk) 17:31, 24 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

We've historically often handled this by listing fuck up in the "derived terms" section of fuck, and likewise with put up/off/through as "derived terms" of put. (In some entries, conversely, we've handled it with senses like the one here labelled "with up" or "usually with up".) I am sympathetic to the view that we should do something more noticeable/prominent, like have an {{only in}}-like sense line directing users to all the phrasal verbs. - -sche (discuss) 07:44, 28 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

This sense can also be used without "up" I think. I've found three citations but can't put them on the page because it is locked. Can someone else put them there? GaylordFancypants (talk)

1. • Lua error in Module:quote at line 2971: Parameter 1 is required.
   • Lua error in Module:quote at line 2971: Parameter 1 is required.
   • Lua error in Module:quote at line 2971: Parameter 1 is required.

fuck

Rfv-sense "(vulgar, colloquial) To play with; to tinker." The usex and citation have instances of fuck with.__Gamren (talk) 18:50, 23 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

Trivially meets RfV because fuck with does.

As to a possible RfD, someone who encounters a use of fuck collocated with with could legitimately expect to find guidance among the definitions (not just the derived terms) of fuck. DCDuring (talk) 05:24, 24 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

What? It doesn't "meet RfV" unless fuck is used to convey this sense without with. As for redirecting readers: that's what "Derived terms" is for. It's no different from compound nouns with spaces, or adjective-noun combinations.__Gamren (talk) 17:33, 25 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

Right. - -sche (discuss) 07:47, 28 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

We go the route of duplication of content every time we include terms like coal mine, not to mention cases not sanctioned by the eponymous rule. Even to serious amateurs like us, it's not as if it is obvious what is a phrasal verb, what is a verb that has definitions whose substitutable wording differs according to the following PP, or what is a purely SoP collocation of verb and a PP or adverbial/aspectual particle. I don't think we need a separate sense of bucket and kick for kick the bucket, but I do think we have to be willing to countenance duplication of content to aid our human users and leave the spurious ideal of no-unduplicated-content to Wikidata (if even they bother). DCDuring (talk) 13:26, 28 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

We don't duplicate definitions between coalmine and coal mine, and we shouldn't between fuck and fuck with, because they'll fall out of sync and inaccurately say to readers that there's a difference. However, I agree that more prominent linking is good (I also feel this way about plural-only senses that people probably look up the singulars of, like messages/message). I noticed that abide was already using a template to give a definition-line pointer to abide by, and have overhauled it to accept up to eight phrasal verbs on one line (tweaking abide to use the revised template): presenting {{used in phrasal verbs}}. - -sche (discuss) 15:52, 28 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

I like the solution abide uses (it's more pleasing to the eye when those sorts of definitions are listed at the end, however). I don't like the idea of giving fuck the same definition as fuck with because it implies that the word can be used on its own that way, without the "with." Andrew Sheedy (talk) 18:16, 28 July 2018 (UTC)Reply

OK, I've deployed {{used in phrasal verbs}} to fuck. - -sche (discuss) 21:22, 10 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

RFV-resolved Kiwima (talk) 04:47, 27 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

fuck a-you --Backinstadiums (talk) 11:34, 26 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Just an extra syllable to make it fit the beat, I imagine. Note that a or a- has been used for a very long time (e.g. in Shakespeare, IIRC) for this purpose, with no particular meaning. Our entries might cover this but they are too long for me to read right now. Equinox ◑ 14:28, 26 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I guess both a and a- are variants of what we currently have as -a an discussed at Wiktionary:Tea room/2020/May#-a. (I guess {{altform}} senses need to be added...) - -sche (discuss) 22:26, 7 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure if this is well established, or if I'm even using it correctly here, but I recall hearing examples of the word fuck being used in British English after a rhetorical question to imply that the answer to a question is an emphatic yes; it's as though the answer is so positive that the question seems redundant, like this: "Do you like Nando's?" "Do I fuck!!" (i.e. "Do I like Nando's?! I fucking worship Nando's!") Or perhaps I'm wrong and it's usually just used in response to a question to which the answer is obviously yes, similarly to "no shit", although I believe I've heard the latter used in the above sense as well, so I guess they might be synonymous. As you can see I'm not sure exactly how this construction is used, since I heard it a while ago, so please let me know if you happen to have heard it recently. I heard it from young (aged 14-16), working class British English speakers in the South West of England. Scvrkls (talk) 19:38, 7 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

The verb entry currently numbered 9 says "To make a joke at one's expense; to make fun of in an embarrassing manner."

But no example sentence is given, and I'm not sure I've heard this one before, so I don't fully understand the difference between sense 9 and sense 8. In sense 8, one can say "Ignore him, he's just fucking with you"; I get the feeling that sense 9 does not include "Ignore him, he's just fucking you". :)

Is it sort of an intensity thing, like "He really fucked you this time" to mean that his joking was strong and well done? TooManyFingers (talk) 16:03, 10 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).

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.

---

fuck

"To make a joke at one's expense; to make fun of in an embarrassing manner." As pointed out on the Talk page recently, this may be confusion with fuck with. Or can one really say "I fucked him", meaning teased?! Equinox ◑ 17:04, 10 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

I think "to fuck with" is what's trying to be said here, but is just used incorrectly. I'm not sure "fucked" is ever used standalone in a manner like that. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Yumigotcha (talk) 13:51, 25 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

RFV-failed. - -sche (discuss) 05:29, 14 June 2024 (UTC)Reply