Talk:man-

RFD discussion
Not a prefix, just "man" as the first half of various compounds. Category:English words prefixed with man- is empty, presumably because there aren't any. Mglovesfun (talk) 12:10, 5 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Strong delete. Not a prefix. Might as well have an entry for lawn- because of lawn-mower. Equinox ◑ 12:14, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Ƿidsiþ 12:16, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. — Ungoliant (Falai) 16:24, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete existing senses. Is there a case for man- as derived from . Though I think inclusion of affixes that have never been productive in English is simply wrong, there might have been some productive use of this in some vintage of English, eg, perhaps manhandle. DCDuring TALK 19:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
 * The way I've heard "manhandle" used stresses the masculinity of the action. More recent verbs include manwhore and manscape. DAVilla 03:05, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * It's hard to account for the emergence of folk etymologies. They don't justify much of anything except in a synchronic view. DCDuring TALK 16:28, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
 * per Equinox. Compound words do not make a prefix. ~ Röbin Liönheart (talk) 19:46, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. --Æ&#38;Œ (talk) 00:55, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. The terms listed in the entry as derived from "man-" (man-eater, man-eating, manhandle, manhole, manhunt, mankind, manslaughter, and manwhore) are compounds of "man". --Dan Polansky (talk) 08:57, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I didn't know verbs could be compounds. DAVilla 02:51, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
 * You seem to be right. From looking at, it seems that the term "compound verb" is used in a way that does not apply to "manhandle". However, the process by which "manhandle" might originate by combining "man" (noun) + "handle" (verb) (if it really does so originate) seems to show some analogy to noun + noun compounding. But even if "manhandle" would imply a "man-" prefix, a single case cannot serve as sufficient evidence of prefixing, I think. --Dan Polansky (talk) 11:39, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
 * That is why I gave two other examples above, also verbs. DAVilla 23:13, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I would think that if you're looking for prefix usage, things like man-hour and man-year would be a lot closer. bd2412 T 17:05, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * By my lights, "man-hour" and "man-year" are hyphenated compounds; no prefixing going on there. --Dan Polansky (talk) 18:55, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * That's why my vote is still to delete. I'm just saying that "man-hour" and "man-year" are closer to prefix-type usage than words like "manscaping" and "manpower". bd2412 T 17:44, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, so "manhandle", "manwhore" and "manscape" would be the verbs under consideration. It is now your business I think to show that the process of combining "man" with a verb as possibly seen in "manhandle", "manwhore" and "manscape" is more of a prefixing than an analogue of noun + noun compounding. --Dan Polansky (talk) 18:44, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * FWIW, Compound (linguistics) mentions verb–verb compounds, and there's also a Compound verb although skimming thru it haven't found such examples as man-eating and manhandle. Anyway, IMO this is for delete. --biblbroksдискашн 12:39, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Manwhore is a bad example, because it's just a verb made from the already-combined noun- no more significant than the pan in panhandle. Manscape isn't unique- see Category:English words suffixed with -scape (most are nouns, but a few can be used as verbs). As for the lack of noun-compound verbs, here are a few: hogtie, frogmarch, pistolwhip, bitchslap, bumrush, bellyache, belly dance, blow-dry, body surf, and sportfish (also attested: flyfish, icefish). That's not including some obscene ones. Chuck Entz (talk) 22:21, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, not a freestanding prefix. bd2412 T 16:00, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Leasnam (talk) 03:02, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

deleted -- Liliana • 05:49, 16 November 2012 (UTC)