Talk:put paid to
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.
Rfv-sense: "To demonstrate as completely false."
That sounds like a definition that would only apply in mathematics or logic. Wouldn't we be better off either rewording the definition or, better, including it in the definition "To put an end to"? DCDuring (talk) 04:14, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- To demonstrate a mathematical conjecture as being false (which in mathematics is just as strong as “completely false”) is a way of putting paid to any hope of proving the conjecture. But the meaning is indeed more general: “However the vote would appear to put paid to his hope of leaving with a deal at the end of the month in nine days’ time.”[1]; “Thus it was that the Japanese period did not put paid to colonial empires for ever, ...”[2] The definition should include, though, that the end is a definitive one. Also, that which is terminated is, I think, generally something immaterial, such as an idea, an aspiration, or a fear. If I install a spam filter to put an end to an incessant stream of spam, it would be strange to say that I “put paid to” spam.
Why was a link to The London Economic blocked by the spam filter.? --Lambiam 16:40, 17 October 2020 (UTC)- "To put an end to once and for all", but I'm not sure that usage requires the "end" to be definitive. DCDuring (talk) 19:55, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
- Personally I think "put paid to spam" is acceptable (admittedly there is only one Google hit). On the entry as a whole, we presently have THREE idiomatic definitions, whereas I would argue that we need ONE. Mihia (talk) 08:33, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- The first definition seems archaic to me. It might be or, at least, might have once been SoP if it were written put "Paid" to. I think that the wording of definition three doesn't cover the cases where the object is some kind of proposition (idea, notion, argument, etc) often in a that clause. I think current definition 2 is substitutable in all modern uses that I have seen and eliminates the need for both definition three and definition four. DCDuring (talk) 14:23, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
- I agree that something along the lines of #2 ought to suffice for all three. The only minor or fussy comment I would make is that "put an end to" is itself semi-idiomatic and leads to a definition "To terminate or abolish", which arguably no more or less covers the case you mention than does #3, if that is a concern. Mihia (talk) 21:38, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- The idiomaticity of put an end to bothered me a bit, too. The definition of put an end to could be reworded (improved?) to prevent (something or someone) from continuing or bring its existence to an end. DCDuring (talk) 00:08, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
- I agree that something along the lines of #2 ought to suffice for all three. The only minor or fussy comment I would make is that "put an end to" is itself semi-idiomatic and leads to a definition "To terminate or abolish", which arguably no more or less covers the case you mention than does #3, if that is a concern. Mihia (talk) 21:38, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
- The first definition seems archaic to me. It might be or, at least, might have once been SoP if it were written put "Paid" to. I think that the wording of definition three doesn't cover the cases where the object is some kind of proposition (idea, notion, argument, etc) often in a that clause. I think current definition 2 is substitutable in all modern uses that I have seen and eliminates the need for both definition three and definition four. DCDuring (talk) 14:23, 19 October 2020 (UTC)