Talk:European dragon

Deletion discussion

The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process.

It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.

---

European dragon

Chinese dragon

A dragon from Europe? A dragon from China? We've had a lot of crazy entries fall to SOP; I'm surprised that these stayed. Purplebackpack89 20:25, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

It's a little more complicated than that: these are two completely different mythological "species". The European dragon is a malevolent, fire-breathing devourer and destroyer, while the Chinese dragon is an ebullient symbol of strength and vitality. The question is whether the two concepts are present in the language as discrete entities independent of their parts. I'm inclined to think they aren't, though there's a small amount of usage set in fantasy universes/alternate realities where they're treated as actual species- sometimes even with taxonomic names. Chuck Entz (talk) 21:48, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Regarding the nuances between European and Chinese dragons, those nuances a) are kinda encyclopedic, and b) don't exist in the definitions RfDed at the moment. Purplebackpack89 21:55, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

I think the nuances are present in the Chinese entry, at least, in as much as I think its sense 2 (which details the appearance of the dragon) is the same as its sense 1. (I've added a RFD tag to sense 2.) I agree with Chuck on all his points, and am inclined to delete these. Frankly, I think it would make more sense to have two senses at [[dragon]], as we already do. - -sche (discuss) 22:18, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

• Delete European dragon, but keep Chinese dragon. A European dragon is basically just the generic idea of a dragon; the Chinese dragon imports additional qualities. Also, the definition as written suggests that Asian dragons generally are called "Chinese". If a dragon from Vietnam or Mongolia is therefore "Chinese", then this would seem to be idiomatic. bd2412 T 00:33, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Both look rather encyclopaedic to me, i.e. I'd lean toward deletion. Equinox ◑ 12:57, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

• Delete While it's true that Chinese dragons are different to western dragons, they're not consistently called Chinese dragons. "Asian dragons", "Eastern dragons", "Oriental dragons", "Japanese dragons", "Korean dragons" are all citable, as is simply "dragon" used to refer to Chinese-style dragons (for example, this description of a scene in Spirited Away simply says "The first time is when Haku, in his dragon form, has been attacked by paper planes, and he's bleeding profusely", without ever mentioning that his "dragon form" is based on an Asian dragon.) These entries should definitely go, although I would support keeping the current subsenses at dragon (which explain the distinction quite nicely without getting too encyclopaedic). Smurrayinchester (talk) 16:01, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

• Delete. The differences are encyclopedic, not lexical. --WikiTiki89 16:36, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
• Abstain. --Dan Polansky (talk) 07:49, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
• Keep Chinese dragon. It's a different creature from normal dragons, e.g. it can't fly. It's a single word in CJKV languages (single character and single syllable). --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 10:06, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

  The fact that it is a single-character word in Chinese is completely irrelevant. --WikiTiki89 11:31, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

• Keep Chinese dragon, because I think it belongs to the vocabulary of the English language. The fact that there are synonyms is not a reason to delete. I don't understand The differences are encyclopedic, not lexical: the lexicographical importance relates to the term, not to characteristics. Note that, according to Bernard Heuvelmans, this dragon was inspired by observations of a species of marine mammal. However I think that this marine mammal is never called Chinese dragon. I know that there was such an observation by soldiers from a French military vessel in the Hạ Long Bay, and note that this name Hạ Long Bay refers to a legend stating that the bay was created by a dragon. Lmaltier (talk) 10:23, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

  There's some slight controversy about whether this type of dragon is Chinese from Japanese, Korean or Vietnamese point of view but from the Western perspective, it's probably Chinese but there may be some variations in Japanese, Korean or Vietnamese mythologies. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 02:28, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

  Delete both (accidentally voted twice). It does not "belong to the vocabulary of the English language". When people talk about Chinese dragons, they usually call them "dragons". The fact that they are Chinese is just an occasional clarification. Even though dragons are different in European and Chinese mythologies, the word "Chinese" does not create a lexical difference. --WikiTiki89 11:31, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

  Of course, they usually call them "dragons". Just like they usually call red foxes foxes. Lmaltier (talk) 19:08, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

  Yes, but you would never call a "red fox" a "fox that is red" or a "maroon fox", because "red fox" is a set term that refers to a type of fox. But with "Chinese dragons", you could just as easily say "dragons in China", "dragons in Chinese mythology", "Asian dragons", or even "dragons in the Far East" to mean the exact same thing. --WikiTiki89 19:13, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

  Chinese dragon is a further clarification, just like "brown bear", which is also a bear, you don't have to call them "brown bears" every time you talk about them. A Chinese lantern is also a type of lantern. Brown bears and red foxes can also be called bears and foxes but they are brown bears and red foxes, not simply bears and foxes. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 22:31, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

  Once again, you can't call a "brown bear" using any other synonym for "brown". You can't call a "Chinese lantern" using any other synonym for "Chinese". But you can call a "Chinese dragon" using any synonym for "Chinese". --WikiTiki89 02:03, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

  I disagree. I've cast my vote and let the RFD take its course. "Chinese dragon" is not just the name of the creature but has some symbolism, as in Zodiac, hence "Year of the Dragon", which is not using a common dragon in the European sense. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 02:28, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

  Notice how it's the "Year of the Dragon" and not the "Year of the Chinese Dragon". I am not denying the existence or separate identity of the dragons of Chinese folklore; I am only denying that they are idiomatically named "Chinese dragon". --WikiTiki89 02:32, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

  The same can be said about Chinese lanterns. You don't need to use "Chinese" all the time, e.g. in "lantern festival". --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 02:38, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

  The first part of the above can be said about "Chinese lanterns", the second part (the part about not being idiomatically named) cannot. "Chinese lantern" is idiomatic because "lanterns in China" are not necessarily "Chinese lanterns", but "dragons in China" are the same thing as "Chinese dragons". --WikiTiki89 02:44, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

  No, dragons in the Chinese fashion are the same thing as "Chinese dragons". A translation that put Middle Earth in the Middle Kingdom would not turn Smaug into a Chinese dragon; TMZ's Dargon the Dragon, originally a mislabeled Chinese stuffed animal, was always a European dragon made in China.--Prosfilaes (talk) 06:18, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

• Keep Chinese dragon; the use of panda alone does not make red panda and giant panda not words; likewise with Chinese dragon. I'm less sure with European dragon, as it seems to be the default for dragon to mean the European dragon in English, with European just being a geographic clarifier.--Prosfilaes (talk) 18:41, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

  Yes, "European dragon" seems to be used only in comparison with other types of dragons, such as Chinese dragons. Noteably, for East Asians, 龍 and its Sino-Xenic descendants is the default and European and other dragons would need clarifications. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 22:50, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

At present, the balance of the discussion is as follows:

European dragon

0 keep, 6 delete (Purplebackpack, BD2412, Equinox, Smurrayinchester, WikiTiki89, -sche)

Chinese dragon

4 keep (BD2412, Anatoli, Lmaltier, Prosfilaes), 5 delete (Purplebackpack, Equinox, Smurrayinchester, WikiTiki89, -sche)

On these numbers, I would close this as a clear delete for European dragon, and no consensus for Chinese dragon. Does anyone object to this reading of the outcome? bd2412 T 16:28, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

...

Deleted European, No consensus on Chinese, per the above. bd2412 T 14:43, 27 August 2014 (UTC)