Talk:imbastire

RFV discussion: January–February 2023
Created by User:Imetsia. I don't doubt that imbastirsi has this meaning, see e.g. ; but I can't verify this as a non-reflexive verb. If it is real, can we add cites? Thanks! Benwing2 (talk) 04:32, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Also if this is real what is the auxiliary? Benwing2 (talk) 04:33, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
 * @Benwing2: I don't really watch sports much, so I've never really heard imbastirsi. I found imbastito as an adjective (etymologically from the past participle of imbastire) in Zingarelli and Devoto Oli, describing an athlete who's having a crisis because of exertion or stimulants abuse, but not the reflexive verb imbastirsi. De Mauro does have it (imbastirsi]) and classifies it as "intransitive pronominal verb", which I can only interpret as "reflexive verb". — Sartma 【𒁾𒁉 ● 𒊭 𒌑𒊑𒀉𒁲】 09:40, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
 * @Benwing2: Sorry, Devoto Oli does have imbastirsi, also classified as "intransitive pronominal". — Sartma 【𒁾𒁉 ● 𒊭 𒌑𒊑𒀉𒁲】 09:43, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
 * It is not unheard of for senses that one would expect to be on a reflexive to get used as intransitive and viceversa: like in abbaluginare, and even things like girare, invecchiare, incrudelire, but also arrabbiare, etc. In some cases the reflexive got obsolete, in some case it was the intransitive to die and in some cases they're both still in use. In these cases of refl/intr-leaking, the auxiliary should always be essere. I can't vouch for this (like Sartma, I also never heard imbastirsi in that sense), nor can I find any cites (though I can't find any cites for that imbastirsi either), but it's not impossible and if Imetsia added it he probably heard and used it. Catonif (talk) 14:15, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks both! I'll wait for Imetsia to comment. I encountered this because I'm going through cleaning up uses of old verb templates and came across this verb. Benwing2 (talk) 18:31, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I added it simply because the Devoto Oli has it, but even I am having trouble finding citations for it. I'm not sure what the auxiliary verb is, although sounds right. Imetsia (talk) 18:52, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Devoto Oli definitely has it as imbastire not imbastirsi? If so I guess we can include it but it would be great if we can have at least one citation. Benwing2 (talk) 19:05, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Devoto Oli marks it as an "intransitive pronominal," which in our system is just a reflexive. Note that, for any reflexive verb, the Devoto Oli will place it on the base non-reflexive verb entry. Thus, for example, is included on the entry for, but the dictionary clearly marks it as a reflexive/pronominal and writes it as such. The same is true for . Imetsia (talk) 18:33, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks. Here for Italian at least we lemmatize reflexive verbs including the reflexive particle even if a non-reflexive equivalent exists, so I'll delete the sense from the non-reflexive verb. (Possibly we should change this; Spanish and Portuguese lemmatize reflexive verbs under the non-reflexive equivalent if it exists.) Benwing2 (talk) 19:25, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

RFV failed, striking. Catonif (talk) 11:04, 20 February 2023 (UTC)