Talk:antecipate
Deletion 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.
I am not convinced that this is an actual English word based on a single citation for each entry. The references given could just as well be misspellings or typoes.
Googling for "antecipate -anticipate" (and skipping the auto-correction) gives results that are primarily in a mix of English and another language. I believe this may be a misspelling that can happen when the writer's native language is one where the word for "anticipate" begins with "ante".
The etymology given is not actually an etymology, and when it says "Retaining the correct ante- spelling", that suggests this entry might have been written as a hypercorrective attempt to change English spelling. Rspeer (talk) 12:02, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
- Let's say we find another two citations. How should the entry then look? We only have "common" misspellings. This is not going to be "common". So, if it is a misspelling, it will be deleted. But is it really a misspelling? If it is an uncommon, but defensible spelling, what do the facts of its usage say about how users should be warned against using it in normal circumstances?
- In Classical Latin apparently both prefix forms existed with antecipio being more common than anticipio, but antecipatio more common than anticipatio in the Perseus corpus. Google books finds but one English usage of antecipate but many of anticipate from 1600 to 1799.
- I would think we would want to delete this. DCDuring TALK 13:43, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
- I agree with Rspeer and DCDuring and find that the few citations in the entry are not conscious uses of some "(hyper)correct" Latin prefix, but most likely misspellings by non-native speakers. I have therefore followed DCDuring's advice and deleted the entries. - -sche (discuss) 02:36, 22 July 2013 (UTC)