Talk:inchoactive

RFV discussion: December 2017
This is readily attested, but is it a deliberate blend of inchoative + active, or a misunderstanding/misformation/misspelling of inchoative? ? --Barytonesis (talk) 15:46, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
 * The senses given look like this entry started out as a misspelling of inchoative. If "inchoactive" is real, then either our senses are wrong, or it's just a misspelling of inchoative. —Mahāgaja (formerly Angr) · talk 15:48, 6 December 2017 (UTC)


 * It is now cited. It looks to be pretty clearly an alternative form or misspelling of inchoative. Kiwima (talk) 20:23, 6 December 2017 (UTC)


 * If a misspelling (try to judge by the rarity) then we should gloss it as such and probably not split out the separate senses. Equinox ◑ 20:25, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually, I'm certain some instances are pure misspellings/misformations, judging by the context (when it's used as a synonym of ingressive, or contrasted with terminative, for example); I'm just hesitant to say that all of them are. --Barytonesis (talk) 20:39, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
 * From the entry histories it seems that our entry [[inchoactive]] was created in 2004 and our entry [[inchoative]] was a copy of the state of [[inchoactive]] in 2006.
 * I don't see any indication that anyone has defined inchoactive, just that it is used only where inchoative would be a perfect substitute, often in books or articles that have both spellings. DCDuring (talk) 20:49, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I have converted the entry to say this is a misspelling, since it looks like we have consensus on that. Kiwima (talk) 01:54, 7 December 2017 (UTC)