Talk:dress

RFD discussion: November 2020–January 2021
The adjective POS. This is just attributive use of the noun, with the comparative and superlative borrowed from dressy. On second thought, it seems more likely that it comes from the verb- but it's still attributive. Chuck Entz (talk) 19:26, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
 * In the glossary for my novel, dress is indeed indexed as an attributive noun regarding the term, Green Dress Jacket, which was part of the U.S. Army Service Uniform for formal business situations from 1954-2015. The underlying noun can attributively apply to dress shoes, a dress shirt, or dress pants, etc. Merriam-Webster, by contrast, applies the same meaning of the word in an adjectival sense: Look here: Merriam-Webster (dress; adjective). My glossary is hyperlinked to outside resources for further reading, but because of licensing considerations and erstwhile employment issues, it's more expedient to link the adjective version of dress to Wiktionary than to the Merriam-Webster page. Incidentally, the Wiktionary entry for dress/noun doesn't include the sense of "dress(y)" clothing.


 * Keep --Kent Dominic (talk) 03:37, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Move to a “in compounds” sense or a usage note. I find that the stress makes it clear that it is a compound, besides predicative use and morphological comparison gives ridiculous results. Fay Freak (talk) 11:22, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Move to noun sense labelled "attributive" (with appropriate tweaks to def). Not an adjective IMO, and the comparative and superlative are clearly wrong as mentioned. Mihia (talk) 18:40, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete definition. Add attributive usage examples to appropriate noun definition(s), possibly also a label indicating attributive use as common or frequent (or not). DCDuring (talk) 17:17, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Yep, delete. I nominated dress for WOTD a while back in 2019, so it would be nice to remove this "adjective" before a date is set. Moving it to the noun is fine. DonnanZ (talk) 21:45, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
 * FYI: I added the adjectival sense solely because that's how Merriam-Webster defines it. (Look here: Merriam-Webster (dress; adjective)). While I disagree with their typology, I can't disagree with defining "dress" as an adjective, I can't deny that's it's considered as such, usage-wise, at least in the States. It's no fret to me if we delete the adjectival sense here, but I would caution against it because of the usage consideration. If deleted, a nominal sense needs to be added here. --Kent Dominic (talk) 10:39, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Seeing that there's an entry for dress shoe here and a page for Dress shoe at Wikipedia, I truly don't get why nominated this for deletion. I mean, I agree with him from a linguistically purist POV, but not from a semantic usage POV. For me, the usage factor is dispositive.--Kent Dominic (talk) 11:00, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete, plus lifetime bans for people who can't tell an adjective from compounds or attributive use. ←₰-→  Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  19:12, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
 * dress (adjective)
 * 1) Suitable for formal occasions: dress shoes.
 * 2) Requiring formal clothes: a dress dinner. ("dress" at The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language) --Kent Dominic (talk) 06:52, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
 * dress (adjective)
 * 1) Suitable for formal occasions: dress clothes; dress shoes.
 * 2) Requiring or permitting formal dress: a dress affair
 * 3) Relating to or used for a dress: dress material. ("dress" at Merriam-Webster.com) --Kent Dominic (talk) 06:52, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
 * dress (adjective)
 * 16. of or for dresses: dress material.
 * 17. worn on formal occasions: a dress suit.
 * 18. requiring formal clothes: a dress occasion. ("dress" at Collins Dictionary) --Kent Dominic (talk) 06:52, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Re: "of or for ", that seems like a clear case of attributive use of a noun.  "Car door", "porch stairs", "ham sandwich".
 * That said, the formal sense seems more compelling as an adjective, and also idiomatic enough that it isn't quite covered by the verb to dress alone, though it does seem to be covered by the longer construction to dress up.
 * Agreed that the comparatives don't belong in this entry: and  are clearly from, not .  Thinking through the formal sense usage, I don't think this would have any comparative at all: one would have to switch to the term  to discuss any comparison.  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 18:35, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Right, while IMO none are true adjectives, the "of or for dresses" and "Relating to or used for a dress" examples quoted from those dictionaries are quite clearly not, which doesn't exactly inspire confidence that those dictionaries can tell the difference. Mihia (talk) 20:48, 4 December 2020 (UTC)


 * RFD-deleted. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 22:31, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Edits to the etymology
please point me to a policy page specifying that and  are to be used in the way you describe? I’m not aware of one, and we have multiple categories in the form “English terms derived from the Proto-Indo-European word XYZ” and “English terms derived from the Proto-Indo-European root XYZ”. — SGconlaw (talk) 03:29, 31 December 2021 (UTC)


 * @Sgconlaw: I am not aware of any policy page, but yes, this has been enforced in the past. Isn't it just so redundant, if you categorise, say all words like compounds etc by words? Another point: the categories say "terms that originate ultimately", however this term could be ultimately attributed both and . —Svārtava [t•c•u•r] 03:50, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
 * in that case I think we should discuss it in the Beer Parlour and see where the consensus lies. — SGconlaw (talk) 05:38, 31 December 2021 (UTC)