Talk:chillin'

From rfd page

Also the image on the page.
Could also be a dialect form of "children". If this were to be kept at all it should be as chilling, otherwise we would leave ourselves open to including every present participle with the "g" clipped off. The concept should really be at chill. Eclecticology 18:38, 2005 Jun 13 (UTC)

• Delete - We already have -in' and I've just added that suffix as an alternative form at -ing. That should be sufficient for anyone to put two and two together and make colloquial gerund forms (which, incidentally, is the best kind of maths). As an aside, the dialect form wouldn't really have the apostrophe. --Wytukaze 19:08, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Keep. It perhaps should be marked as a USism, (and the entry expanded a lot) but as Wytukaze points out, it wouldn't really have the apostrophe, but it does. It is there for emphasis, pronunciation and to set context. --Connel MacKenzie 20:17, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Marked as US, removed absurd image. --Connel MacKenzie 20:40, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Delete - What does it mean that "chilling" doesn't? The idea that it should remain because it has the supposed, self-referential defintiion "so relaxed that one cannot pronounce the 'g' at the end of the word" is preposterous. By the way, Eclecticology, are you thinking of chillun?

"Chilling" can have wildly different connotations...clarifying the spelling as chillin' removes doubt as to which connotation you mean. Sorry if I worded that meaning preposterously - {{makeitbetter}} if you can. (Why do Brits always nominate USisms for deletion? Get yer own fuckin' language.)  :-) Keep. --Connel MacKenzie 15:36, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I was about to bowdlerize the above, having just noticed taking the piss again. But in that particular article, it is listed as take the piss and the example lists takin' the piss! --Connel MacKenzie 03:35, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• • Material kept on benefit of doubt. Eclecticology 06:09:36, 2005-07-31 (UTC)

---