Talk:money

Latest comment: 2 years ago by BD2412 in topic monies/moneys

Translations: In Croatian more apropriate would be: "novac", and not "pare". Word "pare" is used in pejorative meaning or as a joke. (pavor) — This unsigned comment was added by 193.198.140.164 (talk) at 15:10, 7 August 2006 (UTC).Reply

Projectlinks edit

{{projectlinks}} exists for entries like this. Let's get those overlapping boxes moved to in-line text in an ===External links=== section, shall we? --Connel MacKenzie 07:25, 10 January 2008 (UTC)Reply


Major Revision edit

The "definitions" of money previously given were actually descriptions (excepting #6, an incorrect definition) of popular usage rather than a definition of what money is .

  • "#1" is covered in the new definition.
  • "#2" removed - inaccurate - other entities implies a private institution which cannot guarantee the value of currency without the state; the remainder is covered in the new definition.
  • "#6" removed - inaccurate - money does not have intrinsic value, this would be a commodity.
  • 2nd 3rd and 4th items under synonyms are word-for-word repetitions of previous definitions.

--2share 08:11, 30 January 2009 (UTC)Reply


Maintained Format: Simple Addition edit

Since I was being accused of mangling & destroying the formatting of the money page without any specific explanation or constructive criticism, I reluctantly conceded to this one simple addition:

  1. A legally or socially binding conceptual contract of entitlement to wealth, void of intrinsic value, payable for all debts and taxes, and regulated in supply.

--2share 19:46, 31 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

monies/moneys edit

I came here because I'm not sure if monies/moneys is a real word, could someone enlighten me? — This unsigned comment was added by 84.216.47.5 (talk) at 06:59, 9 April 2009 (UTC).Reply

Yes, monies is a real word. It is a rather technical word that means amounts of money for payment or collection. —Stephen 15:55, 9 April 2009 (UTC)Reply
But that meaning is missing, as well as information on which senses are un/countable. Now some users will think the word is sometimes used in the plural in all senses.--Espoo (talk) 16:53, 21 May 2016 (UTC)Reply
monies should be the plural of moni only --Backinstadiums (talk) 19:30, 3 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
Use of "monies" as a plural of "money" is well-attested. bd2412 T 19:24, 4 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Moroccan Arabic edit

I've heard money as in "Do you have money on you?" in Moroccan Arabic that sounds a bit like the German Fluss. How do you write it in Arabic? User:Mallerd (Zeg et es meisje) 20:02, 31 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

That’s ڢلوس (flūs, "money"), which is the plural form of ڢلس (fils, "a small coin"). In Standard Arabic script (to the east of Morocco), it is spelled فلوس. —Stephen 20:47, 31 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, Stephen. User:Mallerd (Zeg et es meisje) 22:23, 31 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

It's [flus]. So it doesn't sound like German "Fluss" except in a Bavarian accent. It's a mystery to me why Dutch people always interpret the German [ʊ] as [u]. For me it's the other way round. The closest Dutch vowel to German [ʊ] is Dutch /ɔ/ (usually [o] in practice). Dutch "oe" sounds like German [uː], though I do recognise that it's a little shorter. 92.218.236.143 08:55, 8 May 2020 (UTC)Reply
Maybe it is because the Dutch go skiing so often, so they hear a lot of Austro-Bavarian German... I don't know. I mean, I can see that with Dutch lacking one vowel in the system, you have to reinterpret, but why it's ever and always in the direction of [u] is what I don't understand. 92.218.236.143 09:04, 8 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

Excessively wordy edit

I removed item 1 because it was excessively wordy and not in keeping with a dictionary format. 2share 02:05, 28 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

RFD discussion: March–April 2018 edit

 

The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process (permalink).

It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.


Rfd-sense 9: "(as a modifier) Of or pertaining to money; monetary." --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 13:46, 19 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Definitely not, keep. Check derived terms. Maybe "monetary" can be removed. DonnanZ (talk) 14:11, 19 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
EDIT CONFLICT: ::The two examples listed (money supply and money market) are both compound nouns. This is just attributive use. The definition is worded as if money were an adjective. I would be inclined to delete Leasnam (talk) 14:16, 19 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
Comment: isn't that just an attributive use? — SGconlaw (talk) 14:15, 19 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
Yes it is. --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 14:18, 19 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
Delete, the usage examples of 9 aren't even in the same sense. This sense purely exists to cover attributive use. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 14:40, 19 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
It is correctly shown as being a noun modifier, which happens to be used attributively, but it is not an attributive adjective. Money supply is a supply of money, money market is a market for money, a money bag is a bag for money. DonnanZ (talk) 15:06, 19 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
  • Delete. Almost any noun can be used attributively, as a regular feature of the English language:
cupboard: Of or pertaining to cupboards (cupboard door)
cabbage: Of or pertaining to cabbages (cabbage soup)
and so on, about 10,000 times. I don't think we need that. Mihia (talk) 20:32, 19 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
If it prevents an adjective being added it's worth keeping. DonnanZ (talk) 21:07, 19 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
If there is a true adjective sense then that should be added. I can't think that there is, but if anyone wants to make a case for it ... Mihia (talk) 21:51, 19 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
Delete. There are already senses that cover the two usexes and any adjective-like use, namely the other senses, which are being used attributively. As Mihia says, this sense would be like adding a sense "of or pertaining to cabbage" to cabbage: unnecessary, because it's just the existing sense(s) being used attributively. - -sche (discuss) 21:23, 19 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
Deleted. - -sche (discuss) 18:42, 30 April 2018 (UTC)Reply


marry money edit

How should the expression marry money be dealt with? --Backinstadiums (talk) 15:09, 17 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

Possibly a new sense at money meaning "rich people". There are at least a few other expressions where money means rich people, e.g. old money, new money. Equinox 15:13, 17 August 2019 (UTC)Reply
@Equinox: But in marry money is it plural also ? Uncountable maybe? --Backinstadiums (talk) 18:14, 17 August 2019 (UTC)Reply
Uncountable, same as normal cash money. Equinox 18:23, 17 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

near money edit

any asset easily made liquid, as government bonds or savings deposits. --Backinstadiums (talk) 16:50, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Return to "money" page.