Talk:kanker
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.
Rfv-sense — This unsigned comment was added by 46.204.1.158 (talk).
- If I understand the sense correctly: [1], so such constructions as kanker duur, kanker lelijk, kanker mooi etc., pretty well-spread in Randstad at the very least. Alternative spelling of kanker-, so I'm not sure it's really a noun. Thadh (talk) 19:54, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
- Already nominated above, so quick closed. Don't create duplicate discussions.
←₰-→Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 20:35, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
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.
Rfv-sense
The 2nd definition is also correct. In dutch, flemish and german (among others), one can use nearly any disease, vulgar term or otherwise negative word as a prefix to the noun or adjective as an offensive intensifier. It's also possible to use kanker or other diseases as a prefix to a positive adjective to put emphasis on it. — This unsigned comment was added by 24.132.96.66 (talk) at 13:02, February 16, 2021 (UTC).
- Moved to Wiktionary:Requests for verification/Non-English#kanker (Dutch). --Lambiam 13:28, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
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.
Dutch. RFV-sense of "Something incredibly bad, poor or annoying", noun. I only know this intensifying usage as a prefix, not as a noun. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 15:47, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
- The following moved here from #kanker. --Lambiam 13:33, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
- Rfv-sense
- The 2nd definition is also correct. In dutch, flemish and german (among others), one can use nearly any disease, vulgar term or otherwise negative word as a prefix to the noun or adjective as an offensive intensifier. It's also possible to use kanker or other diseases as a prefix to a positive adjective to put emphasis on it. — This unsigned comment was added by 24.132.96.66 (talk) at 13:02, February 16, 2021 (UTC).
- That usage is not the disputed one. The prefix already exists at kanker-, but the definition and the part of speech of the contested sense clearly is that of a noun.
←₰-→Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 13:44, 16 February 2021 (UTC)- @Lingo Bingo Dingo: I've seen the prefix being spelled as a separate word online, e.g. "kanker lekker" or "kanker goeie"; I doubt this can be verified in durably archived sources because of its highly colloquial and vulgar nature. Thadh (talk) 09:08, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
- @Thadh: I agree that exists and I would not contest something reflecting that, although I think, hypothetically speaking, that presenting that by having kanker as a prefix is somewhat debatable. However, the contested sense is explicitly a noun.
←₰-→Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 17:53, 26 September 2022 (UTC)- @Lingo Bingo Dingo: I think this is a case of non-native-like morphology where Dutch can create compounds with spaces in between (like in English, for instance "butter milk" contains two nouns, yet the first one acts as a modifier). The problem is that Dutch doesn't usually do this except in the case of these colloquial/slang vulgarities like "kanker", "tyfus" etc. I think that the current label is explicit enough, if we want we can also add a usage note and label it "proscribed" (?). Thadh (talk) 18:06, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
- @Thadh: What are you talking about? I have no issue with the intensifying prefix, it is the noun with which I have an issue.
←₰-→Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 18:21, 26 September 2022 (UTC)- @Lingo Bingo Dingo: Okay, let me reformulate: The noun is a noun, but it's only used in combination with another noun, similar to how we can have senses preceded by the label
{{lb|LANG|in compounds}}, but this form of the noun doesn't attach itself to the following word, but rather acts like a first part of a separately spelled compound. Thadh (talk) 18:32, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
- @Lingo Bingo Dingo: Okay, let me reformulate: The noun is a noun, but it's only used in combination with another noun, similar to how we can have senses preceded by the label
- @Thadh: What are you talking about? I have no issue with the intensifying prefix, it is the noun with which I have an issue.
- @Lingo Bingo Dingo: I think this is a case of non-native-like morphology where Dutch can create compounds with spaces in between (like in English, for instance "butter milk" contains two nouns, yet the first one acts as a modifier). The problem is that Dutch doesn't usually do this except in the case of these colloquial/slang vulgarities like "kanker", "tyfus" etc. I think that the current label is explicit enough, if we want we can also add a usage note and label it "proscribed" (?). Thadh (talk) 18:06, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
- @Thadh: I agree that exists and I would not contest something reflecting that, although I think, hypothetically speaking, that presenting that by having kanker as a prefix is somewhat debatable. However, the contested sense is explicitly a noun.
- @Lingo Bingo Dingo: I've seen the prefix being spelled as a separate word online, e.g. "kanker lekker" or "kanker goeie"; I doubt this can be verified in durably archived sources because of its highly colloquial and vulgar nature. Thadh (talk) 09:08, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
- That usage is not the disputed one. The prefix already exists at kanker-, but the definition and the part of speech of the contested sense clearly is that of a noun.
- @Thadh I think that this is the intended sense. It is certainly attested, so that is not a concern anymore if you agree. It is however neither slang nor an intensified.
←₰-→Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 18:40, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
RFV resolved. This was a confusing entry, but at least we got a new definition out of it that had somehow been overlooked. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 19:19, 8 February 2023 (UTC)