Talk:lorsqu'il

RFD discussion: May 2019–July 2021
lorsqu' + il. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 10:25, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Do we have a policy or guideline for contracted forms? In English we have, , , , , and so on and so forth. For French we also have , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , and probably some more I didn't think of. If we delete such contracted forms, we should try to be a bit consistent and not just delete a few random ones. --Lambiam 14:29, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
 * In absence of any policy, keep. Harmless and relatively easy to mistake for a word in its own right, for those who would not define this as a word already. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 15:59, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I was inspired by the request above for and . If all of these are included, what would prevent us from include things like ? — justin(r)leung { (t...) 06:00, 8 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep. We have all the English contractions (and even double contractions like wouldn't've); I see no basis in policy for excluding those in other languages. I do note, however, that we exclude possessives formed by appending an apostrophe-s to a name or comparable common noun, so I think we can reasonably exclude forms like which are comparable to that construction. bd2412 T 12:48, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I guess this means we should add, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , and . But how far should we go? We have and we have . When they come together, you get , which we don’t have. Should we include that too? And then what about , , , , , , , , , , , , and ?  --Lambiam 09:01, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
 * We should allow them (if they meet cfi), but not go out of our way to actually add them. SemperBlotto (talk) 09:03, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
 * No we should not. Canonicalization (talk) 07:54, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Not allow them, or not go out of our way? --Lambiam 11:45, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Not allow them (besides, there are some misspellings and wrong forms in there: **, **, etc.). Canonicalization (talk) 14:51, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep per above. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  14:41, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete, not a word. Canonicalization (talk) 14:53, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete, as all of those mentioned by Lambiam. It isn’t like English. One can contract much more and the forms are more predictable, and the apostrophized forms have entries unlike English. Fay Freak (talk) 17:21, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete: not a word for native French speakers. It’s the same as and different from . — T AKASUGI Shinji (talk) 13:33, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete for all the reasons given above. —Mahāgaja · talk 07:23, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep all. I give my blessing for the creation of all the contracted forms which aren't obvious for somebody who's just begun to learn French. -- Dentonius (my politics | talk) 21:26, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. HeliosX (talk) 18:08, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete wrongly gives the impression that this is a word. Troll Control (talk) 12:12, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Is "they're" a word? &mdash; Dentonius 12:18, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
 * No, but it's a unit. Troll Control (talk) 21:42, 28 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete. We have lorsqu' which is the regular apocopic form of lorsque in liaison before a vowel. Lorsqu'il is neither a word nor a unit, it is the two words lorsqu(e) + il. The case is not different from that of lorsqu'Anne already mentioned or indeed of any other possible combination. — Tonymec (talk) 02:16, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per Lambiam. Imetsia (talk) 20:13, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
 * RFD-deleted. Imetsia (talk) 20:13, 25 July 2021 (UTC)