Talk:Muslimo-

RFD discussion: November–December 2018
Merely with -o- as an interfix. DonnanZ (talk) 13:03, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
 * That is its etymology, but it doesn't invalidate considering it to be a prefix in its own right. (As with .) Keep. Ƿidsiþ 08:51, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Even so, it's not a true prefix but what I think should be called a combining form. It is only being treated as a prefix for convenience. DonnanZ (talk) 10:44, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
 * The half-dozen entries recorded as using it could easily be revised etymology-wise, e.g. to Muslim + -o- + -phobia. DonnanZ (talk) 11:46, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
 * But so what? You could just as easily reanalyse entries in Islamo- as being Islam + -o-. Why does that make this entry invalid? Ƿidsiþ 09:48, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Oxford doesn't appear to have any Muslimo- entries, which is hardly surprising, and their treatment of Islamo- seems to vary. I found a couple of entries saying it's from Islamo-, and another one giving as Islam + -o- -phobia. DonnanZ (talk) 16:31, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete: This is a PaM toy and keeping it would be as silly as adding Christiano- or Hinduo- as a prefix. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  11:10, 29 November 2018 (UTC)


 * We do have . Agreed this is a PaM obsession entry; the usual prefix is . Equinox ◑ 11:49, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
 * True, though that more often seems to mean "Christian" than "Christ", and it is a Kulturwordlike prefix present in several European languages—the English pronunciation even differs from a putative Christ + -o- combining form. You wouldn't expect Muslimo- outside English coinages. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  12:19, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
 * is in the OED with citations going back to the 17th century. Ƿidsiþ 09:48, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
 * That would make for an acceptable lemming argument, but I'm not going to extrapolate from there. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  10:27, 11 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete for reason stated by OP. Fay Freak (talk) 11:38, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per Donnanz. Per utramque cavernam 18:03, 29 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep unless you want to delete magneto-, which is magnet + -o-; magneto- is in multiple lemmings including M-W. Similarly for iono- = ion + -o-. The existence of the form is significant, I think, and should be documented. We would have to delete Christo- and Islamo-. CFI specifies in terms of separate components; we keep greenness = green + -ness. --Dan Polansky (talk) 23:21, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
 * "We would have to delete Christo- and Islamo-." We wouldn't, both prefixes are also used with the meaning "adherent", and Christo- is phonemically distinct from Christ + -o-. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  10:27, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
 * The adherent argument has some force for Christo-, but I do not see how it applies to Islamo-: fear of Islam and fear of its adherents must be the same thing, I figure. What about magneto-? Is it a prefix and if so why so, and why not Muslimo-? --Dan Polansky (talk) 10:52, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Magneto- can be justified by the lemming criterion anyway, and some terms with that prefix may in fact be borrowed. In that case the analysis magnet + -o- would be bizarre. I am just more prone to accept fairly widespread elements of Kulturwörter as affixes, especially because -phobia is so incredibly productive in informal English: fatphobia, scatphobia, catphobia, dogphobia, dingophobia (which is "fear of dings", not "fear of dingos", and not durably attestable). Perhaps that preference isn't entirely justifiable, but oh well. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  09:57, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I think is a nice illustration. I am not certain that the German word predates the English (EN from 1883) (DE from 1884), but the sense "tape recorder" was borrowed from German. Words of this type are often borrowed crisscross and the same goes for many of their meanings. ←₰-→  Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  10:18, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete, since I'm not finding any evidence that it is a prefix and not, as others have said, Muslim+-o-; this is in contrast to e.g. Judeo-, which is in other dictionaries and is discussed in literature as a prefix, and Christo- which at least forms compounds that are hyphenated as if it were a prefix, like Christo-centric (which resembles Judeo-Christian and contrasts with *Christ-o-centric which sounds like a carnival game or ride, counterpart to a Christ-o-matic). One text I found while looking for evidence of "Muslimo-" as a prefix, B. Erdenir's tract on Islamophobia in Muslims in 21st Century Europe: Structural and Cultural Perspectives, specifically says that in "the term Muslimophobia [...] the 'Muslim-' prefix stands for" Muslims and the -phobia suffix for fear (i.e. the prefix is not Muslimo-). - -sche (discuss) 23:02, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
 * "Muslim-" is not a prefix by any stretch; the quoted reference claiming as much is thereby weakened as a source of analysis for the subject at hand. The question why magneto- is a prefix is left unanswered. --Dan Polansky (talk) 10:47, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * exists; why do you think "Muslim-" "is not a prefix by any stretch", if you think "Muslimo-" is a prefix? That seems inconsistent, unlike my view that both Muslimphobia and Muslimophobia are formed using Muslim. - -sche (discuss) 22:13, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * It is because Muslimphobia is a compound: it is Muslim + phobia. Muslimophobia certainly is formed using Muslim but there is the implied Muslimo- as a middleman; it is only a question of bracketing or nesting, like a + b + c vs. (a + b) + c, or plus3(a, b, c) vs. plus2(plus2(a, b), c). And Muslimo- is not a standalone form, so it is a prefix, which admittedly can be seen as sum of parts; Muslim is a standalone form. --Dan Polansky (talk) 17:09, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
 * By the way, I would be happy to call these things combining forms rather than prefixes, but that's orthogonal to whether the entry should be deleted. --Dan Polansky (talk) 10:55, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Saying that you can analyse words beginning this way as Muslim + -o- is not an argument for deleting this. You can ALSO analyse them as Muslimo- with just as much justification. We already list Islamo- quite uncontroversially, and we could just as easily analyse all examples as Islam + -o-. Ƿidsiþ 13:03, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * To me, "you can also analyse them as Muslimo-" seems like an empty argument: you could also analyse "catfood" and "dogfood" as using the prefixes *"cat-" and *"dog-" and the suffix *"-food", but why? Is there evidence? To me, it seems simpler (Occam's razor) to not posit any more affixes than necessary. I suppose to you and Dan, your view seems simpler. I would say that this might just be an intractable philosophical difference like with lumpers vs splitters, except that I would be won over by any actual evidence, like works on grammar or other dictionaries, that said Muslimo- existed as a prefix. I don't see any, whereas it's easy to find evidence that the word Muslim and interfix -o- exist. - -sche (discuss) 22:13, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I think we can agree that Muslimo- results from Muslim + -o-; we only disagree about whether Muslimo- should be deleted and on what grounds. For your consideration, would you ever consider -ophobia as a thing, as if the b + c part of the a + b + c sum? For some reason, I tend to bracket -o- to the left, maybe because there are so many customarily recognized prefixes or combining forms that do bracket -o- to the left, such as physio-. We might ask why physio- is not analyzed as physi- + -o-; and since physi- exists, should physio- be deleted as sum of parts, to make Occam happy and minimize the number of entities in the world? --Dan Polansky (talk) 17:55, 19 December 2018 (UTC)