Talk:incazzare

RFD discussion: July–December 2020
The word is only ever used reflexively (incazzarsi), and this unreflexive form doesn't really exist. As confirmation, all the Italian dictionaries I referenced only include the reflexive entry and exclude this one. Imetsia (talk) 20:37, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
 * How about in far incazzare? See, a number of results on Google Books. Tulros (talk) 11:04, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
 * For instances like those, I would say the object is implied or transposed. In the first Google Books example, "Non è facile... far incazzare," a literal translation would be "It's not easy... to make angry." Even in English, that doesn't really make sense. So there is an implied object there of "someone" ("It's not easy... to make [someone] angry"). We sometimes treat the Italian reflexive particles as not necessarily connoting reflexivity, but acting as a stand-in for "one" or "someone." (Take as an example, "farsi male" [to do someone harm] or "darsi fastidio" [to give someone bother]; I've made similar comments in another discussion). There seems to be something similar happening here for those "far incazzare" examples. So, it still seems like the non-reflexive entry should be deleted. Imetsia (talk) 17:11, 5 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep - added IPA, hyphenation; expanded defined term; added ux -- Dentonius (my politics | talk) 09:05, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Can you add a citable use instead of a ux? Vox Sciurorum (talk) 18:13, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Done. &mdash; Dentonius 18:25, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
 * That use is probably not durable per CFI, but I see a few similar transitive uses of ha incazzato in Google books so it does seem to be a thing, if rare. Italian editors, what do you think? Vox Sciurorum (talk) 19:51, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

RFD kept &mdash; Dentonius 06:16, 16 December 2020 (UTC)