Talk:block

RFV discussion: December 2016–April 2017
Rfv-sense noun-sense # 19: "A section of split logs used as fuel."

I don't find this in other dictionaries plus it seems different from other senses, which convey an idea of something solid and complete. --Hekaheka (talk) 09:19, 4 December 2016 (UTC)


 * I have added three citations (along the lines of "another block on the fire"), though I suppose one could argue that they fall under "a substantial, often approximately cuboid, piece of any substance". Equinox ◑ 09:36, 4 December 2016 (UTC)


 * It doesn't have to be logs. Blocks of compressed wood chips, sawdust or even paper are also sometimes used, though they are more often called briquettes.  I agree that it's really just a special case of sense 1.    D b f  i  r  s   17:22, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * User:Dbfirs you have contradicted yourself. Compress blocks are called briquettes. They are distinctly different from the blocks described in the definition.  Not sure if this needs a regional tag, but this meaning is wide-spread and distinct in Ireland, and I think also in the UK also.--Dmol (talk) 19:51, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see them described as blocks, too, but perhaps this varies by region as you suggest. Is there a valid distinct sense?    D b f  i  r  s   20:31, 12 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Note also the existence of Yule block. Equinox ◑ 15:14, 18 March 2017 (UTC)


 * RFV passed. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 06:04, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

RFV discussion: December 2020
RFV sense 4.1:


 * 4. A contiguous group of urban lots of property, typically several acres in extent, not crossed by public streets.
 * I'm going for a walk around the block.
 * 1. The distance from one street to another in a city that is built (approximately) to a grid pattern.
 * The place you are looking for is two long blocks east and one short block north.

Seeking verification (by opinion, I guess, since citations probably won't help resolve it) that 4.1 is a separate sense from 4. For instance, I could say "He sits three desks away from me" but that doesn't IMO make a separate dictionary sense of "desk". Or, if the presence of qualifiers "long" and "short" are supposed to be a distinctive point, then I can equally well find examples such as "Great location only two short streets away from the main central square". Is there anything special about "block" that merits the extra sense of 4.1? Mihia (talk) 22:24, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
 * They are different to me. You can replace a use of sense 4.1 with a distance in feet or meters.  Vox Sciurorum (talk) 23:13, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I would make a couple of commments on that. First, the "long" and "short" modifiers seem to me to be deliberately chosen to justify the sense (though I cannot be certain), yet there is no such thing as a "short" or "long" metre. Secondly, "three desks away" could equally be expressed in feet or metres. Mihia (talk)
 * I see them as at least slightly different. For starters, 4 refers to area, whereas 4.1 is a unit of length/distance. I would also tend to use phrases like "around the block" in cities/towns that are not on a grid system, whereas I wouldn't talk about "walking several blocks" in that case, which to me justifies "in a city that is built (approximately) to a grid pattern" as expressing a greater specificity or a distinctness relative to the main definition. I think it's appropriate to keep one as a subsense of the other, but I do think there is a legitimate distinction to be made. Andrew Sheedy (talk) 05:09, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
 * In the US, at least, a city block is one of those informal units of measure used to help people visualize large numbers, like a football field or an olympic-sized swimming pool. For instance, the length of the Titanic is described in several books in terms of city blocks. Just plain "blocks" seems less standardized and less used in the abstract, but it's still used a lot to describe distances, especially when giving directions.
 * As for the "long" and "short" blocks: Manhattan is probably the most common location on which block measurements are modeled, and it's much longer than wide, but with far fewer north-south streets than east-west. That means the blocks are wider east-west than their north-south length. In Manhattan, at least, you're talking about two different block measurements depending on the direction, so it makes perfect sense to talk about long blocks and short blocks. Chuck Entz (talk) 07:49, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
 * City blocks are usually not close to square, so the long/short distinction is necessary for a block count to be a useful measure. In my experience, using block as a measure of distance is common in an urban area only if the grid pattern is fairly regular, as it is in several gridded parts of Manhattan, Queens, Bronx, and Brooklyn. In my experience, such grids are limited to areas laid out in the 19th century and early 20th centuries.
 * In giving driving directions it is not distance being indicated, but rather useful small-scale landmarks. This is not limited to gridded areas. The use is comparable to using stop signs or traffic lights in providing directions.
 * I'm not sure whether we need a separate definition of block (or stop sign or (traffic) light for the usage in giving directions. DCDuring (talk) 09:54, 13 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the comments. If we compare e.g. the example given by Chuck Entz of "city block" being used to measure the Titanic, I think the problem with the present usex at "block" 4.1 is that, because "block" is being used here about actual city blocks, it is impossible to prove which sense is intended -- the literal one or the measurement one. I think it would help solidify 4.1 if we could give an example of "block" used to measure something other than actual city blocks. Mihia (talk) 12:29, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I added one use in the sense familiar to me, "about as long as a city block", in a context that is clearly not about walking any specific blocks in any specific city. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 14:00, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks; for me, the hypothetical nature of the example "I couldn't walk three blocks with the Danish woman's bulging backpack" does not seem in itself persuasive. A literal usage would always seem to license a hypothetical one, as far as I can see. For example, if the context is known to be trains, then perhaps one could say "I walked ten carriages with that bag", and then it would follow that one could also say, hypothetically, "I couldn't walk ten carriages with that bag". Is there a qualitative difference between "carriages" and "blocks"? I'm not sure. On the other hand, it seems harder than expected to think of plausible and comparable substitutions of "arbitrary" (not specifically measurement) nouns into the "couldn't walk three blocks" sentence, especially substitutions that would be understood generally as measurements, without special guiding context, so I'm coming to the view that this separate sense for "block" is most probably justified. Mihia (talk) 02:18, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

RFV-passed Kiwima (talk) 21:31, 24 December 2020 (UTC)