Talk:-holism: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
really? wouldn't it just be nymphomania? what's the word for being like a chocoholic, but for booze? |
really? wouldn't it just be nymphomania? what's the word for being like a chocoholic, but for booze? |
||
:You're thinking of booze-a-holic. [[User:Calgary|Calgary]] ([[User talk:Calgary|talk]]) 05:03, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
:You're thinking of booze-a-holic. [[User:Calgary|Calgary]] ([[User talk:Calgary|talk]]) 05:03, 28 May 2008 (UTC) |
||
:Wouldn't that be alcoholic? --[[Special:Contributions/65.87.242.28|65.87.242.28]] ([[User talk:65.87.242.28|talk]]) 17:10, 20 June 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 17:10, 20 June 2008
Portmanteau
Perhaps this page should be moved to the portmanteau page. I'm not familiar with the rules about this kind of article, but it seems odd to have a whole page about a suffix. Scobiedont (talk) 23:45, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
- It's really not a suffix such as it is a morpheme. And, quite significantly, a neologism. In standard English, adding "holic" to the end of a word is not a gramatically accepted practice. Still, while WP:NEO discourages articles about neologisms, one of the notable points about this neologism is its evolution and its introduction into popular speech. So it's not really a suffix, it's more of a...neologistic morpheme. But yes, as long as there is notability (see here) and verifibility, it's acceptable to have an article. Calgary (talk) 05:02, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
Sexaholism?
really? wouldn't it just be nymphomania? what's the word for being like a chocoholic, but for booze?
- You're thinking of booze-a-holic. Calgary (talk) 05:03, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
- Wouldn't that be alcoholic? --65.87.242.28 (talk) 17:10, 20 June 2008 (UTC)