Talk:quack
Etymology
editThere was a time when people that practiced medicine, when dealing with contagious diseases, would wear on their face a cone/pointed shaped face mask, in an attempt to prevent their own infection.. They commonly came to be called "quacks" because of it's resemblance to a ducks bill. Kittybrewster 23:01, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
The sound made by a frog?
editThis article is so biased towards ducks, one should think a duck wrote it! Where is the mention of 'quack' also being the sound a frog makes! I realise this oddity that ducks and frogs make the same sound, but is that not the case? It is even mentioned in the etymology! --Svippong 22:40, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- You must be thinking of Danish. In English, frogs don’t go quack, only ducks go quack. Frogs say ribbit. —Stephen (Talk) 07:44, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
- Wait, who down the line confused ducks for frogs? Or the other way around. I'm so confused. --Svippong 08:22, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
- I've added one cite to the cites page.--Simplificationalizer (talk) 20:04, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
2017 RfD
edit
The following information passed a request for deletion.
This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.
Adjective: "Falsely presented as having medicinal powers". That's the noun, isn't it? 2.24.119.144 12:22, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
- The definition is not expressed as a noun, so perhaps you can clarify what you think the problem is? There is a usage example of the adjectival use: "Don't get your hopes up; that's quack medicine!". — SMUconlaw (talk) 15:40, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
- It does feel like attributive use of a noun; cf. "that's doctor talk!". Equinox ◑ 04:17, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
- Oh, I see. Hmmm. I do see some usage of the superlative quackest, though they may be facetious or non-standard uses: [1], [2], [3]. However, I didn't see any use of quacker in the comparative sense. — SMUconlaw (talk) 09:51, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
- Found one cite for more quack than: [4]. — SMUconlaw (talk) 09:54, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
- Keep: I'm familiar with the adjectival sense of the word. It exists, if very uncommon. — This unsigned comment was added by Human-potato hybrid (talk • contribs).