Talk:suffrage

Pronunciation
I'm new to editing Wiktionary so I was wondering why in the pronunciation it shows a "&" sign as a letter in the pronunciation. The answer may be obvious, but then again it could be a spelling error... Which one is it? If it is correct than what does 's&-frij mean?


 * I think the & sign is supposed to be a schwa. But this is exactly why we need a proper coded pronunciation, like IPA or SAMPA. Spelled-out approximations just aren't good enough to convey real sounds. Equinox ◑ 18:45, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

RFV
I don't really doubt that these senses exist — they're listed in other dictionaries — but I suspect that they require tagging as or  or. I'm listing them because their existence has been given as a reason for keeping, on the theory that that phrase always implies the primary sense; but if the word itself always implies the primary sense, as I believe it does, then that argument falls apart. —Ruakh TALK 21:41, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Do you want to RFV the "express an opinion" part? Siuenti (talk) 21:52, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * No; do I need to? Is anyone claiming that suffrage can mean "the right to, among other things, express an opinion", but that women's suffrage cannot mean "the right of women to, among other things, express an opinion"? —Ruakh TALK 22:00, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I, for one, don't think the modern sense of suffrage is about the expression of opinion. It is about the right to vote for elected representatives. The encyclopedia article on the women's suffrage movements would undoubtedly include this in some way, but it seems like an historical association that has not altered the meanings of the component terms. DCDuring TALK 01:52, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

—Ruakh TALK 21:14, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * A little vague as a definition. I have inserted 2 definitions from Webster 1913, one of which is much more specific. DCDuring TALK 22:07, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * The term is still used in the 1979 Book of Common Prayer of the Episcopal Church (USA), so it's not or . It may well be, since even I as a fairly regular Episcopalian churchgoer wasn't familiar with this meaning. I trust the BCP itself counts as "durably archived" since it exists on paper; here's a (non–durably archived) example of the word being used rather than mentioned. —Angr 22:15, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * That a term is used in prayer does not mean it's not archaic. The Pentateuch and many other parts of Tanach are recited as part of services in many synagogues, but I tag many words therefrom, I think rightly. &#x200b;—msh210℠ (talk) 01:00, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * It's not used in prayer AFAIK, it's a word for a kind of prayer. It's used in sentences first written in this century. —Angr 12:53, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Here's some usage of the term outside the Anglican tradition; it seems to be a 1940s translation of Thomas Aquinas' Summa Theologica. —Angr 22:28, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * It seems to me that the term is likely used currently among clergy-members. Among participants in the religion, it may only be a part of the ritual and, as such archaic to them. But I think there is an analogy between clerical use of the term and the use of specialized terms for the stage, the circus, musical performance, etc, by the insiders of those performances. DCDuring TALK 02:03, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Maybe what we need is some sort of tag. —Angr 12:53, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * ? - -sche (discuss) 19:13, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I guess that works for this, if we accept the definition that Collins, Cambridge learners, and Macmillan have that restrict it to Christianity. Our treatment at ecclesiatical does not, which is wrong, I think, though MWOnline, RHU, and AHD agree with us. If the term is fundamentally ambiguous in the religious context, it might not be the best choice.
 * @Angr: Isn't the Book of Common Prayer something that might be owned by a lay person, not just a clergyman? DCDuring TALK 20:06, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * sounds good; is "suffrage" in this meaning ever used outside of Christianity? And yes, laypeople also own and use the BCP. I own both the American one and the English one myself. —Angr 20:43, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * @Angr: you note that a "prayer" sense is (or can be) attested. After the start of the RFV, DCDuring added two more prayer senses next to the RFVed one. The 1940s translation of Aquinas you link to seems like it is covered by the "A prayer, as one offered for the faithful departed" sense DCDuring added (and which I adjusted the wording of). In fact, that sense seems general enough that the RFV-tagged sense seems redundant to it. I have therefore simply removed the "A kind of prayer" sense. If you were arguing, above, that "A kind of prayer" is attested as a sense distinct from "A prayer", please re-open this discussion. - -sche (discuss) 00:28, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

PS it'd be nice if someone could add a citation or example of the "aid" sense. - -sche (discuss) 00:28, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

—Ruakh TALK 21:14, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * cited IMHO. DCDuring TALK 22:05, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I think the senses need to be worded differently. The sole "modern" political sense it seems to me, is "The right to vote for elected officials in a representative democracy.", which sense sometimes applied to earlier usage. Earlier usage and some historical usage is about direct participation in substantive decision-making, sometimes in a direct democracy. The earlier and historical usage seems to include the right to vote in general, the right to vote on a specific matter, and a particular vote. DCDuring TALK 01:47, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * RFV-passed. - -sche (discuss) 00:28, 17 October 2012 (UTC)