Talk:period
À propos this remark in the Noun section:
- (chiefly Canada, US) Punctuation mark ending a sentence or marking an abbreviation.
That is not relevant. The "Language" category is about the language in which this punctuation mark is called a "period", not about the languages in which it is actually used. Compare to punt, punto or точка; the entries for these foreign names for the same punctuation mark are all marked with the language in which it's called thus. Fyrius 19:08, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
- Just to answer the question, Russian does, but Sanskrit, Japanese, and Chinese do not. They have different symbols for this purpose. —Stephen 21:25, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
- Further: We would have an entry for ] but for the fact that software doesn't allow. The near-substitute for the entry at Appendix:Unsupported titles#. is marked "Translingual", which doesn't mean omnilingual. DCDuring TALK 23:57, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
Mathematical meaning
One of the listed meanings is: "(mathematics) One of several similar sets of figures or terms usually marked by points or commas placed at regular intervals, as in numeration, in the extraction of roots, and in recurring decimals."
I can't make anything out of this. A numeration might go like "1, 2, 3, ..." and then you have commas placed at regular intervals. Are the figures "1", "2", "3" etcetera then periods? Why then "sets of figures"? I've never seen points or commas placed at regular intervals in the extraction of roots or in recurring decimals. Can anyone give an example where the term period has been used in this sense? --Lambiam 13:10, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
- Is it referring to the comma notation like 1,000,000 to represent a million? Equinox ◑ 13:11, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
- I'm not sure of the multiple applications of the meaning in that "definition", except for the one that Equinox mentions. I saw what looks like a use in an old plumbing journal that was giving instruction in the calculation of square roots. Unless it can be found in modern dictionaries or usage, I'd be inclined to label it obsolete. I think the source of the definition in question is Webster 1913. See also “period”, in The Century Dictionary , New York, N.Y.: The Century Co., 1911, →OCLC., which also has another mathematical definition, one which I see used in classical function theory and in chaos/fractal theory, missing from our entry. DCDuring (talk) 15:22, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
- It would appear indeed that the definition here was copied from Webster 1913; but for the replacement of “circulating decimals” by “repeating decimals”, the definitions are identical. While I know now where it comes from, I still don’t know what it is supposed to mean. I understand the individual words, but – although I’m rather well-versed in maths — strung together I can’t make head or tail of it. The second sense listed in the Century Dictionary's definition under (b) is almost identical and must have a common origin, but has the interesting contextualization ”In vulgar arithmetic,” (in contrast to highfalutin arithmetic?). It also has the addition, “Sometimes called degree.” That doesn’t shed light either; I see no relation to any of the many mathematical meanings of the term “degree”. The first sense, under (a), is the one I’m familiar with too. It is essentially the same as given in the Wikipedia article Periodic function.
My hope in posting this query was that it would help me understand the definition given here so that I could improve the wording, but such enlightenment appears out of reach now. In principle I’m not adverse to listing an obsolete but attested meaning, but in light of the fact that it is not only (presumably) obsolete but also entirely incomprehensible, I would prefer to leave it out equally entirely. The currently common mathematical sense, as the length of the interval after which a periodic function repeats, should be listed though. When I find the time, I’ll add it – replacing the current inscrutable definition. --Lambiam 19:49, 6 June 2018 (UTC) 
Done --Lambiam 15:46, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
- It would appear indeed that the definition here was copied from Webster 1913; but for the replacement of “circulating decimals” by “repeating decimals”, the definitions are identical. While I know now where it comes from, I still don’t know what it is supposed to mean. I understand the individual words, but – although I’m rather well-versed in maths — strung together I can’t make head or tail of it. The second sense listed in the Century Dictionary's definition under (b) is almost identical and must have a common origin, but has the interesting contextualization ”In vulgar arithmetic,” (in contrast to highfalutin arithmetic?). It also has the addition, “Sometimes called degree.” That doesn’t shed light either; I see no relation to any of the many mathematical meanings of the term “degree”. The first sense, under (a), is the one I’m familiar with too. It is essentially the same as given in the Wikipedia article Periodic function.
- I'm not sure of the multiple applications of the meaning in that "definition", except for the one that Equinox mentions. I saw what looks like a use in an old plumbing journal that was giving instruction in the calculation of square roots. Unless it can be found in modern dictionaries or usage, I'd be inclined to label it obsolete. I think the source of the definition in question is Webster 1913. See also “period”, in The Century Dictionary , New York, N.Y.: The Century Co., 1911, →OCLC., which also has another mathematical definition, one which I see used in classical function theory and in chaos/fractal theory, missing from our entry. DCDuring (talk) 15:22, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
A more plausible meaning of "period" as an interjection
- "Nothing more and nothing less; used for emphasis"
I don't see much justification for this apparent meaning, in fact I consider it to be a special case of the following.
A period in text means "and that's the end of the sentence". Whatever follows is a new sentence. An emphatic use of the word itself at the end of a declaration - "Blah, blah, period!" - means "and that's the end of the matter". If it is about quantity at all, it is not about lesser or greater amounts of information or meaning, it is that no further discussion will be tolerated or accepted.
If I were to have ended the paragraph above with "Period", it wouldn't mean that I've said as much about this as is needed and as much as is possible (i.e. nothing less, nothing more), it would imply that I'll brook no argument. That's not the case, of course. ;-)
I've added this definition to the article. Although I would prefer to remove the "nothing more, nothing less" (as it always implies "end of discussion"), I've left it in place. 92.3.210.192 11:09, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
- Agree; will RFV it. Equinox ◑ 12:02, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
RFV discussion: July–August 2018
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.
"Nothing more and nothing less", as distinct from the other sense ("that's the end of the matter"); the latter sense, which to me seems to best cover both sense's cites, was just added by an IP who has made some notes on the talk page that led to my creating this RFV. Equinox ◑ 12:03, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
RFV-failed Kiwima (talk) 21:15, 21 August 2018 (UTC)