Talk:List of irregular English adjectives

message: :added header —Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 20:52, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Great page, and other words 

message: Yes, adjectives whose comparatives and superlatives are formed in an irregular way.Here are some example trios in the order of absolute, comparative, superlative
good, better, best bad, worse, worst little, less, least many, more, most
How did anyone miss out on these? D.A.W.98.81.0.222 (talk) 19:59, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Here is what we really mean by irregular adjectives!

message: A computerised survey of about 80,000 words in the old Shorter Oxford Dictionary (3rd ed.) was published in Ordered Profusion by Thomas Finkenstaedt and Dieter Wolff (1973) which estimated the origin of English words as follows:
* French, including Old French and early Anglo-French: 28.3%
* Latin, including modern scientific and technical Latin: 28.24%
* Old and Middle English, Old Norse, and Dutch: 25%
* Greek: 5.32%
* No etymology given: 4.03%
* Derived from proper names: 3.28%
* All other languages contributed less than 1%
Despite that, Matt sees fit to make this edit. Why? A reliabe source says that 5.32% of English words have Greek origin. It's misleading to set Greek alongside Latin, who contributed 28.24% of English vocabulary. There is a vast difference between those two figures. This seems like POV to me. Izehar 15:47, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm... even if it is a facutal observation which seems to touch upon original research (!) and has no reliable source to support it - never mind, we'll base it on Matt's self-induced scholarly research. Why bother with losers like Oxford University Press, when we can quote Matt's publications. Sarcasm aside - despite these defects, I'll leave it alone as it makes sense and probably is true. If you find a source which confirms this, please add it to the references section (if there is one by then). Izehar 18:13, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Greek - where? 

message: Much of the text on this page (but not the list itself) might do better on the main "Adjectives" page. There could be a section there on "adjectives of relation" (or whatever these things are technically called) which could mention the "standard" methods ("-ous", "-ic" etc.) and then explain the "non-standard" forms and link to the list. In particular, the para about "-ish", "-y" and "-like" is nothing to do with "non-standard" forms. Any thoughts? If no-one objects then I might just go ahead and do it anyway. Matt 22:00, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Move text back to "adjectives" article?

message: I’ve tagged the page to be transwikied to Wiktionary – it would make a splendid appendix there, with such neighbors as Appendix:English irregular verbs!
:—Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 20:51, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transwiki 

message: When I think of "irregular adjectives", I think of adjectives that inflect irregularly, (such as good-better-best), not of adjectives with a different etymology from a noun with a related meaning (collateral adjectives). I therefore think that this page should be titled List of collateral English adjectives, whether here or at Wiktionary. A list of irregular English adjectives (in the inflectional sense) would be pretty short. Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 01:25, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 13:08, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Collateral adjectives 

message: A discussion is taking place to address the redirect :A list of adjectives. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 4#A list of adjectives until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 15:04, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "A list of adjectives" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]