| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Catuli |
Posted - 01/12/2007 : 05:15:39
Well, I've discussed almost every type of reason for declining a review, but here's a new one, "review has more than four words." Which one of the spate of dictionaries out there--Websters, Chambers, American Heritage, Funk & Wagnall's, etc.--has precedence in resolving what a word is. I'm sure you know my asking has an undertow of specificity in addition to general curiosity. To that end, are we all in agreement that "landsakes" and "handshakes" are both words. Please say yes.
|
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| TitanPa |
Posted - 01/21/2007 : 07:04:23
I know I might be digging up and old topic. But I have hear dof Landsakes. Its usually when you stumble upon something. But they usually use it more in the American South. |
| Rovark |
Posted - 01/12/2007 : 23:07:00
I never knew if it was Land-sakes, Lansakes or whatever, but to anyone who thinks they've never heard this expression before - exhibit one
It was always one of those Beverly Hill Billies kind of expressions "Lansakes Jeb, what are you-a-doing-of" |
| Conan The Westy |
Posted - 01/12/2007 : 22:31:31
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
You seem to have had a particularly 'generic' period in late summer (or in your case winter) 2003. 
Guilty as charged. That was the period where I cranked out over 2000 reviews in under 6 months. With a less stringent application of the generic rule, an over-worked benj doing solo approving and keeping the site up-to-date, and fewer films on the database to compare against, I consider myself fortunate to have only had a few reported.   |
| Downtown |
Posted - 01/12/2007 : 21:53:10
When two men shake hands, the event that just occured is DEFINITELY a "handshake." Maybe there's a dictionary out there that lists it as two words, but I've NEVER seen that spelling anywhere. I'd go so far as to say that even if the dictionary says it's two words, spelling it as a single word is so overwhelmingly common that the dictionary is WRONG.
But I don't know what a landsakes is. |
| lemmycaution |
Posted - 01/12/2007 : 20:43:21
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
I tend to use dictionary.com (since I can always remember the url) for quick reference, but I'll consider arguments if it's believed wrong in some instances.
Ideally, this being a UK site in origin, we should probably use the OED or something
The thing about dictionary.com is that it provides variants so the reviewer is more likely to get a break and find his/her spelling there (or not as in the case of "land's sake" which is definitely two words and has no relation to handshake).
Now let's shake hands and come out spelling.  |
| benj clews |
Posted - 01/12/2007 : 20:05:06
I tend to use dictionary.com (since I can always remember the url) for quick reference, but I'll consider arguments if it's believed wrong in some instances.
Ideally, this being a UK site in origin, we should probably use the OED or something |
| ChocolateLady |
Posted - 01/12/2007 : 16:42:39
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
quote:
Originally posted by Catuli
I'm surprised that the concern over what dictionary governs hasn't been raised before
I expect that it has and the answer has been the same - that's there isn't a set one.
[gangster voice]Yeah. We don need no shtupid frigging dicshonary. Wes got ours creativity and that should be enough for them pesky MERPs, it should! Just lettem try and throw the dicshonary at me and I'll shows em, I will![/ganster voice]
|
| demonic |
Posted - 01/12/2007 : 14:17:48
Personally if I'm not sure about something (usually whether or not something is hypenated or not) when I'm submitting I check with Dictionary.com first. If it's in there, I use it. |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 01/12/2007 : 14:14:52
quote:
Originally posted by Catuli
I'm surprised that the concern over what dictionary governs hasn't been raised before
I expect that it has and the answer has been the same - that's there isn't a set one.
|
| Catuli |
Posted - 01/12/2007 : 13:38:49
I think I'm actually giving a thread rebuttal to my initial post. I just Googled "landsakes" and the term consistently is cited as being two words. My previous effort indicated one word -- or so I thought. It is an expression suggesting alarm or amazement, basically synonymous with "egads," "zounds," or "gadzooks." Hmmmm, I would have thought that when your alarmed you'd be quick and compress everything into one word, but my research rejects that idea.
I'm surprised that the concern over what dictionary governs hasn't been raised before, since words are such a precious commodity for our reviewing purposes.
|
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 01/12/2007 : 12:27:04
quote:
Originally posted by Conan The Westy
Don't report me I've been good lately.
In response to what you mentioned in one of the threads, I ought to admit that I did report a small number of your reviews while reading your 1500 1-voters or however many it was. You seem to have had a particularly 'generic' period in late summer (or in your case winter) 2003. However, I like your "HolyWord" review and I have cited it in the past as evidence that two words punning on one are allowed as one.  |
| Conan The Westy |
Posted - 01/12/2007 : 12:14:14
Don't report me I've been good lately. |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 01/12/2007 : 11:38:31
I've never heard of 'landsakes' in my life, but assuming that you are punning on 'handshakes', the precedent was set by Conan here/here that two words punning on a single word could appear as one word. |
| ChocolateLady |
Posted - 01/12/2007 : 10:13:47
I didn't find "land sakes" in the urban dictionary either - not as one word and not as two. But according to http://www.texas-brigade.com/slang.htm it is a polite way of saying "Lord sakes" - whatever that means. And Online Etymology Dictionary seems to think the same, but quotes it as "land's sakes". In both cases, it is two words. When you google it as one word, you get practically nothing except www.forlandsakes.com.
|
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 01/12/2007 : 09:13:34
There's definitely no set dictionary. If something is a single word (or hyphenated) in any normal dictionary, then I think it would have a very good chance of being allowed if you cite this. Bear in mind that numerous things that are definitely not single words (e.g. "DaVinci" [sic]) are allowed here.
|
