Talk:-load
Latest comment: 3 years ago by BD2412 in topic RFD discussion: June 2020–July 2021
The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process (permalink).
It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.
I doubt that this is a genuine suffix. And Category:English words suffixed with -load has a small population. DonnanZ (talk) 22:42, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
- The paucity of entries in that category is explained by most potential entries being analyzed using
{{compound}}rather than{{suffix}}, such as arkload, armload, assload, autoload, bagload, barrowload, bellyload, binload, boatload, bootload, boxload, busload, buttload, coachload, containerload, crateload, horseload, jetload, lorryload, muleload, planeload, raftload, sackload, shipload, sledload, tankerload, tonload, trailerload, trainload, tramload, trunkload, and vanload. Perhaps an argument can be made that -load is not a genuine suffix, but I think the size of the current population is not a strong one. --Lambiam 12:29, 11 June 2020 (UTC)- Derived terms for load are a bit of a mess at present, there are two sections for nouns, including Category:English words derived from: load (noun) which is somewhat non-standard (like this "suffix"). Some terms appear both as suffixes and normal derived terms. being listed twice. Not all terms are single-word compounds either, like axle load and unit load. We need some consistency. DonnanZ (talk) 16:32, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
- I have put the two noun sections under one heading, but there's still some work to do. DonnanZ (talk) 16:57, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
- In axle load, the meaning is “load on the axle”; this is a standard compound noun, used in such contexts as “the axle load should not exceed 10,000 kgf”. In the cases where the first component is a container, the meaning is ”the amount that fits in such a container”, and the typical use is “a <container>load of ...”. In this use, -load is a synonym of -ful. --Lambiam 15:24, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
- Your comparison of load compounds with those using the genuine suffix -ful fails to take into account that -ful can't be used on its own, unlike load; for example vanful - "a vanful of merchandise" can only be split as "a van full of merchandise". Whereas a word like carload is a load in a car, whether it is a motorcar or a railroad car. But there are other terms like shitload, which I know you edited, doesn't mean "a load of shit", but must still derive from shit + load. DonnanZ (talk) 16:41, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
- Not all words ending on -load can be analyzed the same way, but there is a clear commonality among those in which the first component is a container. This appears to be somewhat productive. For example, although Wiktionary does not have an entry for barrelload, this term can, non-surprisingly, be attested: [1], [2], [3]. The meaning of such compounds is also predictable; if you know the meaning of urn, you know what is meant here by the term urnload. Productivity plus a fixed meaning are IMO enough to establish suffix status. --Lambiam 11:40, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
- The only dictionary evidence I have found to support your theory is in Cambridge, which is not overwhelming support for a suffix, and hardly enough. No suffix is recognised by Oxford. In fact Oxford prefers to create two words: ‘Approximately 120 bags and 10 trailer loads of rubbish were collected and removed by Waterford Co Council.’, ‘The biotechnology company has, through a number of well-timed share placements, bucket loads of money.’ and more. So Cambridge's support for a suffix should probably be ignored. DonnanZ (talk) 14:06, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
- The Oxford usage examples appear at load, they also have bucketload and many more compounds of load, but no entry for trailerload. DonnanZ (talk) 14:32, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
- Not all words ending on -load can be analyzed the same way, but there is a clear commonality among those in which the first component is a container. This appears to be somewhat productive. For example, although Wiktionary does not have an entry for barrelload, this term can, non-surprisingly, be attested: [1], [2], [3]. The meaning of such compounds is also predictable; if you know the meaning of urn, you know what is meant here by the term urnload. Productivity plus a fixed meaning are IMO enough to establish suffix status. --Lambiam 11:40, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
- Your comparison of load compounds with those using the genuine suffix -ful fails to take into account that -ful can't be used on its own, unlike load; for example vanful - "a vanful of merchandise" can only be split as "a van full of merchandise". Whereas a word like carload is a load in a car, whether it is a motorcar or a railroad car. But there are other terms like shitload, which I know you edited, doesn't mean "a load of shit", but must still derive from shit + load. DonnanZ (talk) 16:41, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
- In axle load, the meaning is “load on the axle”; this is a standard compound noun, used in such contexts as “the axle load should not exceed 10,000 kgf”. In the cases where the first component is a container, the meaning is ”the amount that fits in such a container”, and the typical use is “a <container>load of ...”. In this use, -load is a synonym of -ful. --Lambiam 15:24, 12 June 2020 (UTC)
- Delete: I see no evidence that this is a suffix rather than a compound element load, I see no books referring to a or the google books:"suffix -load" or to the use of google books:"load as a suffix". Whereas, the ability to split the compounds ("a car load", etc) suggests they are indeed compounds with load, not uses of a suffix. - -sche (discuss) 19:44, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. Mark as colloquial. - Dentonius (my politics | talk) 16:16, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
- Delete. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 06:13, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
- Delete. A suffix is, by definition, a bound rather than a free morpheme. Clearly that doesn't apply to load. Not sure if I'm missing something more subtle here. Colin M (talk) 22:37, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
- Delete per sche. DAVilla 01:03, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
Deleted. bd2412 T 21:53, 14 July 2021 (UTC)