Talk:fo shizzle

Independent use? --Connel MacKenzie 08:01, 22 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I know this one. It's hip-hop slang, and Snoop Dogg's catchphrase.  The correct spelling ought to be "fo' shizzle".  RobbieG 14:17, 23 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Cited. What is Snoop Dogg's first use of this phrase? DAVilla 01:29, 5 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I'd contend that the Sunday Lee quotation is an example of the set phrase fo shizzle my nizzle, not fo shizzle. Can you find one more example of fo shizzle without my nizzle appended? &mdash; Beobach972 04:39, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I do find it interesting to see that fo shizzle my nizzle, as in the first quotation given, seems to originally have been not set &mdash; it translates into English as ‘it is certain [pause] that my friend used to...’, and one could equally say ‘fo shizzle the teacher played basketball’ instead, whereas it now, as in the Lee cite, translates as one unit: ‘it is certain, my friend, [pause] that ... ’, and one would say ‘fo shizzle my nizzle, the teacher played basketball’. &mdash; Beobach972 04:39, 5 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Rfvpassed unfortunately. Andrew massyn 16:37, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
 * That is a very inappropriate remark. H. (talk) 13:14, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

fo shizzle my nizzle
The etymology listed is "fo shizzle + my + rhyming variation of nigga". It's a sum of parts, with the rhyming element -izzle one of the parts. (-izzle is simply used to rhyme the phrase with fo shizzle, and is not a general-purpose suffix used even when it doesn't rhyme; in that case, I suppose it wouldn't get an entry, although that's a separate discussion.) &mdash;msh210 19:28, 30 July 2007 (UTC)


 * If it’s an English phrase, then it should be kept. I don’t have the faintest idea what it means. —Stephen 16:26, 1 August 2007 (UTC)


 * You suggest to deletgest 'cause you think it's understoink? Ridiculous. Set phrasious. I vote to keepote. If that's not clear, you've made my pointear. Not every rhyme is widespryme. DAVilla 17:25, 1 August 2007 (UTC)


 * There's no attestation of this one's being anything other than a sum of parts. The 2002 citation used in the entry uses the same suffix -izzle for a few more words, and the other citation uses -iz- in a different word. If we accept fo shizzle my nizzle we should also then accept dizzles, wizzle, jizzle, and liz-arge, all from the citations. And don't say that fo shizzle my nizzle is widespread while the others are not: fo shizzle my nizzle is widespread precisely because it rhymes. You see that in the same context (i.e., while rhyming -izzle) other such words are used, too, which is evidence against any special treatment (i.e., an entry in the dictionary) for fo shizzle my nizzle. &mdash;msh210 20:13, 1 August 2007 (UTC)


 * What about quotations like this? The good points you make about individual quotations don't really apply to the phrase itself, wholisticly. Looking through the hits, I'm a bit less certain of its legitimacy though. Mostly just people playing around. DAVilla 20:33, 1 August 2007 (UTC)