Talk:Shakespeare's influence

message: Source 31 no longer works.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Winkie (talk • contribs) 00:00, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source Error 

message: Should Shakespeare's influence and Shakespeare's influence on the English language be merged into Shakespeare's influence? I believe they should. At this point there isn't a need to have two separate articles on these subjects.--Alabamaboy 02:13, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is discussion on this subject already at the List of English words invented by Shakespeare AfD discussion and Shakespeare's influence on the English language pages.  Andy Jones and I both think they should all be combined here. Wrad 02:21, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd leave the list of words as their own separate article, but definately combine Shakespeare's influence and Shakespeare's influence on the English language. But the list of words is too long--and too complete a unit as is--to combine into one article.--Alabamaboy 22:24, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no list anymore.  Take a look at the article and the discussion on the deletion page. Wrad 22:26, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As mentioned by Wrad above, I've already indicated elsewhere that I agree with a merge. One advantage is that there's quite a bit of unsourced OR in Shakespeare's influence on the English language, and a merge would be an opportunity to trim some of that. AndyJones 12:29, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, now I've said that, I see the page has been considerably cleaned up and sourced since I last looked at it. AndyJones 12:32, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Let's do it.  I think we'll see better exactly what we're dealing with as we go along anyway. Wrad 16:42, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge articles? 

message: I added a cleanup box to the vocabulary section.  The 2nd paragraph is just strange.  It seems as though it's written by a college student who's writing beyond his or her level of understanding.  I added a couple adjectives to rescue a sentence that claimed his language was more expressive because English at the time lacked grammar?!  (True, Shakespeare didn't learn made-up grammar "rules" in school, but every language has grammar, structures that determine how words can be put together.) But more serious rewriting is needed. Craig Butz (talk) 06:31, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vocabulary 

message: I have merged in "Shakespeare's influence on the English language". Was quite easy. Good.
That leaves "list of words...". My problem here is twofold:
#Lots of duplication with the newly merged article. Therefore a more careful line-by-line merge will be required.
#No inline citation at List..., so it's difficult to identify which parts are sourced from where. I'm really quite worried about merging for that reason: in the newly merged page it will be even more difficult to work out the source for any sentence. AndyJones 07:48, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: The vocabulary section has an incorrect figure. Shakespeare used 20,138 "base" words, not 20,138 "new" words. His works are credited with the first known written instance of around 1,700 words. 71.242.202.239 (talk) 00:11, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vocabulary (again) 

message: The vocabulary section propounds a myth that originates from a misunderstanding of the preparation of the Oxford English Dictionary.  The section contradicts the well-cited dicussion in the article Coinage of words by William Shakespeare. --Romanempire (talk) 00:42, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction 

message: Oh come on. That's gonna go.yes
 MaryJones (talk) 01:48, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Obsessive Compulsive Dictionary"? 

message: There seems to be nothing at all here about Shakespeare's influence outside literature in English. Really, a big failing in perspective. Charles Matthews (talk) 19:45, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Scope - world literature?

message: Just a note on merger history, for reference; so far 2 pages have been merged here (links to pre-merger versions)
* Coinage of words by William Shakespeare ([ last version])
* Shakespeare's influence on the English language ([ last version])
:—Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 06:57, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger history 

message: An enduring myth is that Shakespeare coined a vast number of words, and this is a central topic of the article (as reflected in the discussion above) – some commentary follows.
This is idiotic on its face, as it supposes a popular playwright used a significant number of words that his audience had never heard before. Rather, Shakespeare is the earliest attestation given (earliest citation), notably in the OED (and, earlier, Johnson, A Dictionary of the English Language), both because he is a famous early English writer, and because his language was more colloquial than much of the archaic, stilted language that was previously fashionable, hence captured many more recent words and senses.
This is not to take away from his undeniable artistic skill and influence – many phrases are almost certainly original to him, English at the time was producing many new words, and by poetic license he likely expanded vocabulary and senses beyond what they were before, but extravagant claims (20,000 words!) should be refuted, and claims for “Shakespeare coined 1,000 words” or the like should be cited – in a predominantly illiterate culture, words were generally widely used before being set to paper.
For reference, the [ last version of Coinage of words by William Shakespeare] gives a useful discussion (and references) of this topic.
Hope this helps – I expect this to be a continuing topic due to the prevalence of the misunderstanding.
:—Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 07:16, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Exaggerated number of coinages 

message: There are two sections titled "Influence on the English language," someone might want to change that. --71.251.187.200 (talk) 23:17, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Influence on the English language" 

message: Shakespeare wasn't just one of the greatest authors in England, but in the world. French lit was hugely influence by him. In the late 19th – mid 20th centuries in Germany, it was popular to claim that Shakespeare was German, as he and Beethoven were the fathers of German lit and music. Verdi felt he was inadequate to make Shakespearean operas. And a large chunk of Kurosawa's output was Shakespearean. His influence has been nearly global, and the article should cover that. — kwami (talk) 13:22, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  provincial 

message: is a fine example of what happens when articles are neither protected nor properly watched. Argh. And it's not like it was all OR without any refs anywhere; some of it was even augmented with inline refs in the meanwhile. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 21:03, 4 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism 

message: In Act IV, Scene II, Titus Andronicus
 DEMETRIUS: Villain, what hast thou done?
 AARON: That which thou canst not undo.
 CHIRON: Thou hast undone our mother.
 AARON: Villain, I have done thy mother.
Shakespeare, or whoever it was writing as him, invents the Your Mom joke in the 16th century? (From a Cracked.com article, 5 Dirty Jokes in Modern Movies) Knowing someone would probably delete it if I just put it in by itself, I looked it up; William-Shakespeare.com shows the same text here (search for "Villain, what hast thou done?".) It's linked on the 'maternal insult' page linked above. --StarChaser Tyger (talk) 09:23, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  The first recorded 'Your Mom' joke?  

message: It seems to me that these are two different areas. "Shakespeare's influence" seems to indicate discussion of derivative works such as Verdi, Berlioz, Césaire et al, while this article is mostly focused on his influence on the English language only. This is probably because of the merger with the "Shakespeare's influence on the English language" article, but I think it would be more useful to split them into two again: one article an in-depth look at his effect on the English language, and one about his influence on artistic works and culture across the world. Kilburn London (talk) 21:50, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cultural influence vs linguistic influence 

message: Perhaps a mention of Shakespeare's influence on the introduction of the European starling to North America. The impact of which approach $2 billion annually. ZerglingChamp (talk) 02:24, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  American Acclimatization Society 

message: Repeated vandalism of this page by IPs gives a case for WP:Semi-protection. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:29, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Semi-protection

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Shakespeare's handwriting which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 13:36, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress 

message: This page contains an infobox that is almost identical to the one in the main article (William Shakespeare) although slightly different (presumably changes that where made to the main article but not copied here). It seems strange to use Infobox person in a non-biographical article and is inconsistent with similar articles about Shakespeare such as Religious views of William Shakespeare and Reputation of William Shakespeare which just contain The Chandos portrait. I think a similar thing should be done here (infobox replaced with a single image) as all of this information in the box can be found on the main article.
If we want to keep the infobox here I think it should be turned into it's own template so that it can be kept always constant between the two articles. Cakelot1 (talk) 13:48, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox