Talk:antessive case

antessive case
This is defined as "The grammatical case that is antessive.", which is obviously an unidiomatic sum of the parts undefined: + undefined:; therefore, either this is defined incorrectly and should be redefined or it ought to be deleted. — Raifʻhār Doremítzwr ~ (U · T · C) ~ 23:39, 15 February 2012 (UTC)


 * "The grammatical case that is antessive" is a correct definition. Equinox ◑ 14:20, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

KEEP. The definition could be more idiomatic as, "The antessive grammatical case" (though "The grammatical case that is antessive" is not so bad). This begs the question, hmmm, how is the nominative case defined? As it stands, with language describing the case function somewhat redundant of that found in nominative. Hmmm, the dative case relative to dative. It might be a small project to bring the semantic style of all the cases, well known and otherwise, into harmony as to how they present. I feel certain, however, that the article antessive case should remain. -SM 07:28, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I thought we were keeping all the x case entries for no apparent reason. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:02, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * For this (and all the other case entries) why not just write "The antessive." --Mglovesfun (talk) 12:03, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Ha, your first comment (of 12:02) is right on target. I'm not opposed to keeping x case entries, but we could also have all the definitions at x, because the cases can always be used the way you describe, as "the x" (without "case"). - -sche (discuss) 22:00, 16 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete per nomination. &#x200b;—msh210℠ (talk) 22:42, 16 February 2012 (UTC)


 * So what do you people want? I myself previously put one of the "___ case" entries up for deletion on the grounds that it was just the grammatical case that was "___" (unfortunately I can't currently find which one it was). We have had ablative case, nominative case, etc. for ages. I only created this entry (and a bunch of related ones) because they were requested and I understood there was community consensus to have them, per my own RFD I've just mentioned. If we don't want them, let's delete them all, not on a case-by-case (groan!) basis. Equinox ◑ 22:58, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Agreed! - -sche (discuss) 23:43, 16 February 2012 (UTC)


 * per the discussion and voting at, to be later found at Talk:nominative case. The current definition is crap. --Dan Polansky 10:58, 17 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Kept as no consensus. — Ungoliant (Falai) 16:52, 13 August 2012 (UTC)