Talk:forecall

Request for verification
This seems very rare. No forecalling: on Google Books for example. If it's a keeper, it will need some explanatory glosses (rare, archaic?). Equinox ◑ 20:06, 5 June 2009 (UTC)


 * I went through all Limited-Preview and Full-View Google Books hits, and all free Google News Archive hits, for all forms. The great majority of them were scannos for . One books hit merely included it in a long list of words, without so much as a gloss or an indication of its part of speech. One is a use of forecalled in a 1903 edition of Philip James Bailey's Festus, but earlier editions don't seem to include that passage. (That's not a fatal problem, but I'm not sure quite how to handle it.) The rest may be seen at Citations:forecall. I think it's fair to say that the noun fails (only one cite), but I'm not sure about the verb; we have one cite for the bare form, and four for, and of the latter, IMHO only one is unambiguously using it as a verb. My preference is to RFV fail the noun and to RFV pass the verb in a vague sense, maybe "To call in advance." —Ruakh TALK 00:08, 6 December 2009 (UTC)


 * O.K., I've implemented that, since no one objected. —Ruakh TALK 20:08, 19 December 2009 (UTC)