As an anonymous user, you can only add new data. If you would like to also modify existing data, please create an account and indicate your languages on your user page.

DefinedMeaning talk:果汁 (6645)

From OmegaWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Italian, Portuguese and Spanish have definitions not on par with the other languages. The history shows time stamps for these three languages, but not for the others, which might(?) be an indication that the others are older. In that case a semantic drift has been introduced, and the current Swedish Expression is not valid for the definitions as given in the three just mentioned languages, but is valid for the definitions of the others.

Cf also DefinedMeaning:juice%20(6249)

  • outofsync|ita|Italian
  • outofsync|spa|Spanish
  • outofsync|por|Portuguese


Hi Sannab, the original text does not define the meaning; rather, it includes auxiliary words to show how a complex word is decomposed and, in some languages, it could be included as a synonym. In these cases, a more complete definition is generally welcomed. --Ascánder 11:26, 7 June 2009 (EDT)


  • fra done --Kipcool 14:24, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
  • The definition in language "nld" (Dutch) is out of sync.
  • The definition in language "deu" (German) is out of sync.
  • The definition in language "bre" (Breton) is out of sync.

Delete[edit]

Please delete this page.‎

why: redundant with DefinedMeaning:juice_(6249)

Also, defining "fruit juice" as "juice obtained from squeezing a fruit" is a Sum-of-parts definition. --InfoCan 18:54, 3 May 2012 (CEST)
It is not redundant, because one is limited to fruits, and the other one includes vegetables.
You are right that it is a sum-of-part definition (at least in English, not sure for Japanese). However, not all sum-of-part definitions should be deleted. Even though I couldn't really write a rule that says how to decide which sum-of-part to keep and which sum-of-part to delete, it is clear for me that this one has a linguistic interest and should be kept. The fact that it is also defined at Wiktionary [1] is also an indication that they have found some reason to keep it. --Kip 19:30, 3 May 2012 (CEST)
The definition includes all plant parts in general, so juice obtained from a fruit is included in this definition. The Wiktionary definitions would probably have been merged but they seem to have been kept distinct because they distinguish between the countable and uncountable senses of the word ("I gave them two juices" vs. "Tequila is made from cactus juice"). However I am uncertain about this distinction. Then all words that are about uncountable substances could be made into countables ("Kids, come drink your milks" etc.), and this should be a generic transformation of the meaning of a word. Other online dictionaries don't make the distinction that Wiktionary does [2][3][4][5]. I am inclined to believe that Wiktionary is wrong. --InfoCan 20:38, 3 May 2012 (CEST)
On second thought, perhaps we should add a new definition as "a portion (a glass, a bottle, etc.) of juice", with the grammatical property of "countable". --InfoCan 20:45, 3 May 2012 (CEST)
Well, I still think that "juice" is more general and a different meaning than "fruit juice", and that "fruit juice" (even if I admit it is a borderline case considering sum-of-part) has a linguistic interest for its translations.
I am not sure about distinguishing countable and uncountable. I see it rather as a figure of speech (you designate a glass of something by its content - it is called a Synecdoche). However, if the figure of speech is used massively in a language, then it can enter a dictionary. So, if you believe that it deserves a DM, I won't prevent you from creating it ;-). --Kip 20:09, 4 May 2012 (CEST)
We can leave this discussion until more opinions are expressed. For now there is plenty of other stuff to work on. :-) --InfoCan 21:28, 4 May 2012 (CEST)