Talk:calling name
RFV discussion edit
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.
Apparently created to be a tranlsation, but I've never heard this term in my years of working in onomastics. --EncycloPetey 14:05, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- google books:"his|her calling name" has sufficiently many hits ([1], [2], [3], [4], [5], and [6], and possibly Nepal, Jailbreak, [7], Mountains, and Spiritpath) in the sense of "name that one is called by, though it may be a nickname or otherwise unofficial"; perhaps that what the contributor meant?—msh210℠ 17:27, 30 June 2009 (UTC) Edited inconsequentially.—msh210℠ 21:51, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- An idiomatic definition that seems to encompass all the quotes is "nickname" not "given name" which, I thought, is more official (appearing on a birth certificate etc). Not a term I remember hearing or reading before, but easy to infer its meaning from context. DCDuring TALK 17:45, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, except that some of the above hits seem to use calling name to refer to an official name (i.e., not a nickname) by which one is familiarly known: Nepal, Jailbreak, Spiritpath, and possibly Mountains.—msh210℠ 17:51, 30 June 2009 (UTC) Edited inconsequentially.—msh210℠ 21:51, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- I also noted more than a few hits for a sense referring to "a name that an animal is trained to respond to". (search "dog" "calling name"). We may end with three or more senses. DCDuring TALK 22:13, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- Are those not all the same sense? A name one goes by (is called by).—msh210℠ 22:22, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- Would that include screen names (computer), stage names, aliases, pen names, affectionate names like "meathead" and "mon petit chou", and surnames, all of which one may be called by? The regrettable speciesist tendencies among normal users may prevent them from realizing that "one" applies to animals. And speciesist animal users might also have a problem. I suppose that if we have all the synonyms listed the human senses should be covered. I'd still be a little concerned that a user (say a translator) might not be discriminating in the choice of synonym to translate from. For a short entry like this, why not be nuanced ? DCDuring TALK 02:03, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- As both onomastics and biology are ong-time interests of mine, I think a nuanced entry in this case would be spiffy. --EncycloPetey 20:59, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
- Would that include screen names (computer), stage names, aliases, pen names, affectionate names like "meathead" and "mon petit chou", and surnames, all of which one may be called by? The regrettable speciesist tendencies among normal users may prevent them from realizing that "one" applies to animals. And speciesist animal users might also have a problem. I suppose that if we have all the synonyms listed the human senses should be covered. I'd still be a little concerned that a user (say a translator) might not be discriminating in the choice of synonym to translate from. For a short entry like this, why not be nuanced ? DCDuring TALK 02:03, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
- Are those not all the same sense? A name one goes by (is called by).—msh210℠ 22:22, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- I also noted more than a few hits for a sense referring to "a name that an animal is trained to respond to". (search "dog" "calling name"). We may end with three or more senses. DCDuring TALK 22:13, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, except that some of the above hits seem to use calling name to refer to an official name (i.e., not a nickname) by which one is familiarly known: Nepal, Jailbreak, Spiritpath, and possibly Mountains.—msh210℠ 17:51, 30 June 2009 (UTC) Edited inconsequentially.—msh210℠ 21:51, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
- An idiomatic definition that seems to encompass all the quotes is "nickname" not "given name" which, I thought, is more official (appearing on a birth certificate etc). Not a term I remember hearing or reading before, but easy to infer its meaning from context. DCDuring TALK 17:45, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
RFV failed, sense replaced with {{defn|English}}. —RuakhTALK 22:19, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
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-senses:
- 2 A name an animal has been trained to respond to.
- 3 A nickname. such as Bob for Robert, Hank for Henry, or Peggy for Margaret.
We are the only OneLook dictionary that has an entry for the term. We have four definitions, two of which are domain-specific and probably both attestable. I suspect that these two definition lines exist because some imagine that there should exist because they would be convenient as calques. DCDuring (talk) 16:30, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
- At least one sense (it doesn't say which, on the talk page) previously failed RFV. If that is the sense(s) re-added without citations, they may be deleted at once. Equinox ◑ 20:32, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
- The definition that failed RFV in 2009 was just “usual given name (i.e. by which one is usually called)”, which
I think is a bit distinct from either of these though it might be roughly sense 2is probably sense 4 on the entry, having looked at it, not these ones. —Al-Muqanna المقنع (talk) 20:41, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
- The definition that failed RFV in 2009 was just “usual given name (i.e. by which one is usually called)”, which
- I'm not sure that def. 4 is attestable either. What might be attestable is a definition which makes calling the head and name its complement (ie, the calling of a (person's) name), though I can't come up with am appropriately narrow, context-specific, non-SoP definition off the top of my head. DCDuring (talk) 00:43, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
RFV Failed - there are hits for "his/her calling name" but nothing specifically suggesting animals or nicknames. Ioaxxere (talk) 01:33, 23 February 2023 (UTC)