Talk:Pseudo-anglicism

message: Even after all the items that do not meet the definition are removed, some languages may still have too many examples.  Wikipedia is not a dictionary and is not an indiscriminate collection of information: For each language, a few illustrative examples could be kept, with preference for ones that are significant for some reason, such as the iconic dressman in German which has been addressed numerous times in the literature.  There is no reason to have a long list for each language, and the temptation to create an exhaustive list should be resisted. Mathglot (talk) 04:20, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not an indiscriminate list 

message: Can we have translations for every word in the list please? I assume that "rallye-paper" is a paper chase and "shake-hand" is a handshake, but I shouldn't have to guess. --Doric Loon (talk) 18:25, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: That's reasonable, but it also depends on what's available in the sources.  In most cases, I imagine they provide this, so it's a good idea. Mathglot (talk) 12:13, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Doric The example of "rallye-paper" goes back to the 19th century, and is a version of "hare and hounds" played with paper scraps. Might make sense for the body of the article, to show how long ago such faux amis were recognized, but makes no sense in the lead.  I'll move it and add a reference. Mathglot (talk) 06:16, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Translations needed 

message: Not sure how to handle the Multiple languages section, which is a list of examples, except more than one language per English word.  Each language listed is really a separate pseudo-anglicism which needs its own reference, but having them listed with multiple languages like that, seems to discourage that. My current thinking, is that for those examples where a single source can be found that lists several languages for one English word or expression, we can keep it in the list, but for those examples that would require separate citations, one for each language, those should just be shipped out to the languages in question.  
Does Recordman really mean "a sports record-holder in French, Greek, Italian, Romanian, Russian, and Turkish"?  Who knows; but each of those languages needs a reference, unless one source mentions all of them. If not, Recordman should be shipped out to whatever language section (or sections) does have a citation for it. Mathglot (talk) 01:23, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Moved a couple of sourced entries to the Italian section. The remaining entries were unsourced since they were added, some time before May 2018. They, and the section header, have been removed. Mathglot (talk) 20:19, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Multiple languages 

message: How come autostop appears as a pseudoanglicism? Look at its use in English!
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=autostop%2CHitchhiking&year_start=1920&year_end=1940&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cautostop%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CHitchhiking%3B%2Cc0#t1%3B%2Cautostop%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CHitchhiking%3B%2Cc0
--87.125.72.111 (talk) 07:30, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, look. Click some of those yearly links below.  Extend the graph to more recent than 80 years ago. I think you answered your own question. Mathglot (talk) 08:58, 2 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: What's more, if you look at the examples of autostop in English before 1940, they're about devices that stop automatically, not hitchhiking. --Macrakis (talk) 21:31, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Autostop 

message: Both Spanish examples use Spanish words with an -ing suffix.  The main word "puente" or "rebajas" are clearly not English.  I'll be bold and delete the section, if anyone disagrees, come back here and discuss this.  Martin of Sheffield (talk) 09:30, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: But what is your rationale? I don't necessarily support or oppose the removal strongly, but clearly the pseudo-anglicism is the application of the English suffix -ing to non-English words, not the resultant words themselves. Nardog (talk) 14:01, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Compare with "Salaryman" (Japanese) or "relooker" (Fr) (the word only has a French ending for grammatical purposes) or "Wellness" (German).  "Puente" and "Rebajas" are clearly not English. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 14:39, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  , There are various definitions for pseudo-anglicism, so it's sometimes hard to make these calls. I tend to be conservative, in the sense of following Duckworth (who everybody else follows, or strays from but owes a debt to), so in my book it has to be "made up of English elements". Does that mean "every" element must be English?  I'm not sure, but examples given in sources about pseudo-anglicism don't usually look like the "puenting" example. The closest to  would appear to be Onysko's hybrid anglicism example , but even that has a full English word embedded, not merely a suffix. Also, I view any example where a source actually claims that the term is a pseudo-anglicism as the gold standard for inclusion here, although those are harder to find. So following my "conservative" druthers, I do agree with Martin, although I'm open to persuasion if there's another angle on this. Mathglot (talk) 02:57, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

text:  This paper, in section 6, calls the puenting a "faux or fod cod anglicism", and gives additional examples: , , the Darwin-award technique of , and, my favorite: : "" (which seems like a perfect candidate to add to the article Untranslatability, although I think that whole article should be deleted; but that's another story). Mathglot (talk) 04:10, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the link to the paper.  This article is about Pseudo-anglicism which specifically excludes all except his section 5.  The use of the English gerund (I must admit, I'd analysed it as a present participle) on a Spanish word is a grammatical contrivance and is not the misuse of an English word; indeed it's closer to a loan word. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 08:49, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spanish 

message: I removed all three examples, but left the section title, and added an  tag. Hopefully someone will add something here. Some possibilities: , ,  (),  (),  (),  (), maybe  (unless it's a calque from Chinese 手機). Someone familiar with K-pop or youth slang could probably come up with more. Mathglot (talk) 03:10, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Korean 

message: Many of these pseudo-English terms are found in multiple languages, like smoking for smoking-jacket, auto-stop for hitchhiking, basket for basketball, etc. They should probably be grouped. I suspect that most of them were coined in French then borrowed by other languages, but we can't really assume that -- we need to find some sources. --Macrakis (talk) 21:34, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: International

message: Many of the edit comments and the discussion here on the Talk page seem to assume that there is a sharp distinction between pseudo-anglicism, false friend, and borrowing. In fact, these terms can overlap. Consider, for example, the Italian term jolly, meaning the Joker in a pack of cards.
This was apparently borrowed from an American English expression "jolly joker"Matthew Anderson, "The foreign words that seem like English – but aren't", BBC Culture 13 October 2016 (the usage is documented in the 1896 Slang and Its Analogues Past and Present s.v. but was apparently rare enough or slangy enough that it isn't found in the OED) and shortened to "jolly" in Italian. So the term was borrowed into Italian.
However, "jolly joker" is no longer current in English, so that at least makes it a false friend, in the sense that a translator would be mistaken to translate Italian Jolly as English Jolly. Is it also a pseudo-anglicism, i.e., do Italian speakers think it is an English word with the meaning "joker"? Howard Moss, a lecturer in Italian at Swansea University, thinks so, as does Cristiano Furiassi (whom we cite several times) in his article "How jolly is the joker? Problemi di traducibilità dei falsi anglicismi".in the Atti del 5° congresso di studi dell’Associazione Italiana di Linguistica Applicata (AItLA). Bari, 17,18 febbraio 2005 And "jolly" apparently was never used in English without "joker", and so falls into the pattern of pseudo-anglicism formation that Ayres-Bennett calls "ellipsis".Ayres-Bennett. --Macrakis (talk) 17:44, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Pseudo-anglicism vs. false friend vs. borrowing