"Plural noun" fails to address verb agreement in many cases edit

Many members of Category:English coordinated pairs take both singular and plural verbs. We don't usually call them plural only. Eg, mortar and pestle is used with both singular and plural verbs. Twig and berries is another case where {{en-plural noun}} doesn't work, not showing twigs and berries as a plural (admittedly possibly not an attestable one). Scissors is used with both singular and plural verbs. DCDuring (talk) 20:00, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

@DCDuring: How do our templates deal with this? How should I create such entries in future? The only reason why "a twig and berries" or "a mortar and pestle" could have an 'obvious' plural is that the first element is singular: "a chips and fish" is unlikely. Equinox 02:12, 28 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
IMHO, the inflection line for twig and berries" should say something like "with plural verb and pronoun" or "plural in construction" (which requires a glossary entry) and show the plural twigs and berries too. This particular configuration is unusual. I guess it is limited to expressions including elements joined by and with one element singular or plural. It is so unusual we might want a usage note in addition.
I think plural only doesn't really address what matters: whether verb and pronoun agreement is singular (eg, vespers), plural (ablutions), or both (eg, scissors), so Category:English pluralia tantum, label {{lb|en|plural only}} (and variants), and template {{en-plural noun}} should all be deprecated. Also, to me it seems that we have many definitions labeled "plural only" that are better labeled "usually with plural verb and pronoun" or "usually used in the plural".
I hesitate to bring this to BP, especially as a proposal. One problem is that we seem to value homogeneity across languages, even in cases where it is imposed, not actual. Perhaps I should bring the problematic meaning of "plural only" for English and invite proposals, offering the above proposal(s) as examples. DCDuring (talk) 17:56, 28 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
To answer your first question, both {{lb|en|plural only}} and {{en-plural noun}} put entries into Category:English pluralia tantum. DCDuring (talk) 18:01, 28 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
@DCDuring: I recently changed fish and chips to {{head|en|noun|g=s|g2=p}} (fish and chips sg or pl) to address this, as it is found as both singular and plural (e.g., “those fish and chips” in the quotation I added or “Fish and chips is a hot dish” on Wikipedia). I also added a reference to The American Heritage Dictionary, which designates it a “pl[ural] n[oun]”, and the attributive forms. J3133 (talk) 18:07, 28 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
fish and chips brings up the question of how to handle uncountable nouns, whether or not in entries with and. I'm reasonably happy with our current treatment, but the kind of change mentioned above might warrant some change in the inflection line for uncountable nouns as well. DCDuring (talk) 18:40, 28 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
@User:J3133: Not mentioning uncountability means we are not communicating that fish and chips is not used with quantifiers like many and is used with quantifiers like much. The uncountability/countability distinction seems to be declining in scope ("This line for 10 items or less" is abundant, displacing "This line for 10 items or fewer".), but still continues. Very few would say "Too many fish and chips"; more would say "Too much fish and chips". DCDuring (talk) 19:56, 28 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
@DCDuring: We use {{en-noun|-}} (- (uncountable)) for singular uncountable nouns and {{en-plural noun}} (Template:en-plural noun) for plural uncountable nouns; fish and chips can be both. I have added “uncountable” to the headword, and a quotation using “have a fish and chips”; how should we handle the possibility of a? J3133 (talk) 09:40, 29 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
For many nouns we avail ourselves of the options in {{en-noun}}, which allows for nouns that are used more commonly as mass nouns, but also as sortals (a word I just came across in the wild) and vice versa, more commonly as countable nouns, but also as mass nouns. We do not have a separate definition that accommodates too much fish and chips. I don't know whether such a definition could be supported by citations. DCDuring (talk) 13:40, 29 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
@User:J3133 For 21st century uses at Google Books of much fish and chips see this search. DCDuring (talk) 13:44, 29 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
@DCDuring: I added “uncountable” per your point to “communicat[e] that fish and chips [] is used with quantifiers like much”. I am not sure what kind of separate definition you wish to include. J3133 (talk) 13:52, 29 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
Maybe we could make do with a usage example for countable usage and one for uncountable usage. DCDuring (talk) 15:22, 29 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

Mainframe edit

It is evident from historical sources that the term "mainframe" in computing arose from earlier mechanical terminology that referred not to a cabinet, but to chassis-mounted machinery that might or might not be in a cabinet. (Private-sector systems were enclosed in cabinets, but not so much the early research systems.) Examples of the mechanical terminology can be found in patents up through the early 20th century and in documents concerning mechanical and electromechanical computers. In computing, there was a further emphasis on the specific chassis that held the calculating equipment, to which other components were connected.

  • [1] (the "main frame" of the Moore School differential analyzer, which was not enclosed, and its attachments)
  • [2] ("main frame and various auxiliary units" of the Ural 4)
  • [3] (the use of connected storage devices to reduce "main frame" computing time by caching recurrent calculations)

magic nigger edit

Equinox,

I have added several citations to https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Citations:magic_nigger. Would you be so kind as to unlock this uncreated term so I can enter it? It is widely used on the Internet and in newsgroups to refer to a "black person that behaves outside the stereotypical norm". newfiles (talk) 05:55, 13 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

Equinox, I just added three more citations from books (and not vulgar and obscene newgroups) to this entry. newfiles (talk) 22:33, 14 March 2024 (UTC)Reply

example sentences on Wiktionary edit

oye, I've been adding some example sentences on Wiktionary. sometimes they would be decent and sometimes they would be deleted. I need some advice for better example sentences. I've recently been quoting from rap and song lyrics. -I wrote a Wiktionary page for the phrase put the boom down. do you know how I can specify that I was quoting from an episode of the Hoarders and not an article? -for think with one's other head I've added an example sentence based on a real-life example of an 85-year-old man arrested and seen on an episode of I Can't Make This Crap Up. the example was obscure, but I used an example from the original news story for pocket and that was good. is direct quoting better? -for "let oneself go" I originally wrote "My grandma's wife let herself go; Daddy told me she fell down the tree of ugly and hit multiple branches." that got deleted, but then I revised it to "Jack stated Cherri fell down the tree of ugly and hit branches galore upon letting herself go." 'twas less redundant the second time do you have any more advice? it would be appreciated. thank you! Flame, not lame (talk) 18:34, 14 March 2024 (UTC)Reply