Talk:i.e.

I've included ie: in usage notes, and created an entry ie: to REDIRECT to i.e.. Why ? Because I've seen ie: in use in plenty of places, and foreigners reading current English, in business documents etc, might want to be reassured that i.e. and ie: are really the same thing.--Richardb 13:53, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Well, I was going to create an entry ie:, but Wiktionary won't let me, as it appears ie: has a special meaning to Wiktionary. How do we get around that ?--Richardb 13:59, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

In essence
The mnemonic "in essence" is by far the easiest way for people to remember which ("e.g." vs. "i.e.") is which. The meaning of those two words can be synonymous with "that is," depending on context. It seems beyond absurd for something useful like that to be removed. Removed because it is useful? Because other dictionaries don't have it positively is not the rule here; never has been and probably never will be. --Connel MacKenzie 00:21, 21 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Made an equivalency in my head between "id est" and "in essentia", both of which would yield the same latin abbreviation, although in my language (serbian) there is no abbrevation for "in essence". Id est is abbreviated as "t.j.", which is pronounced as "to [as in "torrent"] yest(e)", "yeste" meaning "is". Funny how everything is somehow connected, because "yes" in english is affirmative, which is the short equivalent to "is, am, etc." used in a sentence, yes? I think "da yeste". ("da" here means "that [something]..."), going back again to "that is". My mind is short-circuiting now. False analogies?

Requests for verification - kept
Kept. See archived discussion of May 2008. 15:02, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Viz.
"The three U.S. states on the west coast (i.e., Washington, Oregon, and California) have favorable climates." Wouldn't this call for viz. rather than i.e.? Leucosticte (talk) 14:57, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Given that it's an exhaustive list, it does fit i.e. but the issue is that's it's still a terrible example, because from that you could easily conflate it with e.g. from that example sentence. --Sugarfrosted (talk) 01:12, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

I would disagree with the notion that it fits i.e. based on it being an exhaustive list; viz. is also used for exhaustive lists. This Wiktionary page itself says that the difference between viz. and i.e. is that the former is used when it expands on what was previously stated i.e. it provides new information, while the latter is used for the purpose of rephrasing what was previously stated i.e. it clarifies what was said but provides no new information.

I think that the list of states could be fine for i.e. if it is assumed that it is common knowledge that Washington, Oregon, and California are the three U.S. states on the west coast), however, viz. could also work there if it is not assumed to be common knowledge, which can be true for those of us outside the U.S. For the sake of making an example which can be easily compared with and distinguished from viz., if no one has any objections I think I might provide the following example of rephrasing:

"While the final episode was made, the show itself was immediately cancelled after the penultimate episode i.e. the final episode never aired."

In this case, what comes after i.e. provides no new information. If what came after had the name of the show, or maybe the air date or something, it would be expanding on what was previously said--Sivaalio (talk) 10:15, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Better example sentence.
I think this definition needs a better example of usage. Although i.e. is in proper use here, since the list is exhaustive, I think this is a bad choice, as it seems easy to conflate this with e.g. based on the example of usage. So I think a better example of usage is in order, though I can't really think of any of the top of my head that aren't scientific or mathematical. --Sugarfrosted (talk) 01:21, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

Comma following "i.e."
"American English prefers a comma after i.e.; in British English a comma does not follow i.e. "

The reference seems outdated, as the (redirected) page has no mention of this difference in usage (and only recommends putting a comma).

Syrak (talk) 20:51, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

RFM discussion: November 2020–April 2022

 * See