Jump to content

Talk:Collocation

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Shevajia.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:02, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

http://www.visuwords.com/?word=referee http://llohe-ocd.appspot.com/

Peterkempen (talk) 09:56, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For the section, ‘expanded definition’, it would be beneficial to expand on the theory by Gledhill about the 3 different perspectives of collocation and possibly provide examples so that readers can understand a bit better. Also, if the article could expand on how collocation is presented differently in usual phraseological studies compared to Gledhills 3 perspectives. I do not understand in what way that they are different in this small paragraph. Providing at least one example to the six main types of collocation would also help reader grasp this concept better. User:sofiamcor 11:58, 18 Sept 2014

Should there also be a discussion of collocation in the mathematical (PDE approximation method) sense here?

How about in the computer server sense, i.e., the Wikipedia servers are collocated at a data center in Florida? cluth 11:05, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps examples would aid in understanding this, I'm not 100% clear on what a Collocation is after reading this is.

I'd like to contribute but am not sure about the terminology. Is a collocation a semantic unit? Is 'united states of america' a colocation ? If yes I could write a lot about it, but I don't want to mess with something else... Kh251

U.S.A. is more a compound word IMHO - not a collocation. The problem with collocations is, that there is not the "one definition". Several linguists have tried to define this phenomenon, and some of these definitions differ slightly (as far as I know). For example there are some who believe, that collocations can only be made off two lexems while other linguists say that they can contain more than two. There is no clear cut border between collocations and compound words on the one side and collocations and idioms on the other. Collocations are relatively free in their syntactic use, much more than ie. proverbs are. I think another good example of a collocation is the word "commit" in English. Commit has a relatively fixed set of words which co-occur with it. Commit is very often found with crime words like: commit (a crime / suicide / murder / etc.). You wouldn't say, I don't know: to peform suicide or something like that. (of course there is also "to perpetrate a crime", but this is far less frequent, isn't it). So "commit" + crimeword = collocation - AFAIK. --80.129.150.208 10:59, 5 December 2005 (UTC) LINNE[reply]

Regarding the fine line between collocations, compounds, and idioms --

IDIOMS differ from the other two because their meaning is not literal. Collocations and compound words pretty much mean what they say. The latter two categories are hierarchical.

COLLOCATIONS are more general because they can be either within or across syntactic categories e.g., "row a boat" and "commit suicide" include both verbs and noun or noun phrase; "crystal ball" is a noun phrase.

COMPOUNDS are either NOUNS or VERBS, without mixing, for the most part: (N) greenhouse, (V) look after

The reason compounds and collocations are so easily confused is that most discussions leave out prosodic features.

COLLOCATIONS are stressed with default phrase intonation - adj NOUN - "crystal BALL"; verb phrase - "row a BOAT" COMPOUNDS shift stress to make one large noun: PARKing meter or one large verb: look AFter --66.30.203.16 13:58, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Something someone may want (or not) to address:

I've always wondered about the words commingle and collocate. At first glance (and the first time I heard them), I thought they should be colocate and comingle (co signifying "with," as in cooperate, coworker, etc.). The definitions of both words certainly seem to indicate that the co- prefix is an accurate description of the word, so why is there a double letter after the co- prefix? Why collocate and commingle? It looks funny and doesn't make any sense. You wouldn't write coooperate or cowworker (unless that worker were a real moo-er...); why this?

Someone know the etymology or something? Should it be addressed here and in commingling? cluth 11:05, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to the OED, it comes from latin ad. L. collocQtiZn-em, n. of action f. collocQre (see prec.). Cf. F. collocation. Also, the orthography for collocation signals a couple of things--first, this is *not* "location" plus prefix "co-", rather it's a borrowing from Latin with its original use being as a noun describing an action (1600s). It's first use in Linguistics is shown as 1940; I'd say the spelling is fixed at this point.

Anyway, if you say the words (using the prescribed pronounciation, at least), you'll see that there's definitely some lengthening of the glide "l" in "collocation" vs. "location" and the nasal "m" in "commingle" vs. "mingle." Hope that's useful. King Mongo 17:35, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

motor cyclist?

[edit]

I think the motor cyclist example is a poor one. A google search today shows about 57,800 hits for "motor cyclist" with the quotes, and about 3,100,000 hits for motorcyclist, about six times more common. A better example would be any two-word compound that is never combined to form one word. But, as I am not a linguist, I leave it for someone more expert to confirm my intuition and make this change. Anomalocaris 06:03, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

kick the bucket

[edit]

'kick the bucket' (an example used) is more than a collocation - it is an idiom!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.191.64.147 (talk) 08:40, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Collocation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:08, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Collocation?

[edit]

Dear writer, I don't know if I am here at the right address, but by here my remark.

As far as I could analyze the word "mad" is a collocation of the words "mean angry and dangerous".

Am I wrong?

Regards. 85.149.24.135 (talk) 12:48, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

For one thing, the word mean got that sense long after the word mad ('insane') existed. —Tamfang (talk) 06:43, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ingliz tili

[edit]

Describe a helpful a person at study — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.113.196.186 (talk) 15:17, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Collocation&oldid=1215291085"