Talk:time stand still

RFD discussion: May 2024
Both the entry and the definition are grammatically incorrect. The definition is somewhat nonsensical as well: "to occur an apocalyptic event." Even the part of speech is incorrect. The correct expression is time stands still. newfiles (talk) 19:24, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Speedily deleted as an obvious error redundant to . — Sgconlaw (talk) 19:28, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you kindly. newfiles (talk) 19:29, 9 May 2024 (UTC)


 * It isn't totally obvious to me that time stands still is the correct (or only) lemma. time stood still, at least, is obviously possible in the same idiomatic sense. Something like "may/let time stand still" is possible also, but it becomes less clear that it is truly the same idiomatic sense. Also there are variations such as "time seemed to stand still", so this is by no means an invariable fixed expression. Mihia (talk) 20:50, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * you can certainly start an RFD for time stands still if you see fit. — Sgconlaw (talk) 20:57, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, I don't presently have a definite better idea of how this should be treated. We do have stand still, and I did wonder whether the uses with "time" could go there, but I don't know if this would lose too much of the expression. Mihia (talk) 21:04, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I just added a Cambridge dictionary entry reference to "time stands still" to indicate its validity. newfiles (talk) 21:06, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Doesn't prove anything, except that they also overlooked e.g. "time stood still" and/or didn't know how else to list it. Mihia (talk) 21:21, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Sgconlaw @Mihia I think there is a wider point that we don't have a systematic way to handle phrases which can take multiple tenses. Another one is, where is easily attestable. Theknightwho (talk) 22:17, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * this issue has come up before. I think the most practical way to deal with it is to lemmatize at what is perceived to be the most common form, and then add a usage note indicating variations: see . — Sgconlaw (talk) 22:27, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Ideally we would list under an infinitive form, but it is not clear how this would be expressed. Mihia (talk) 22:44, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * which is why this issue has come up before, and my recollection of the discussion is what I summarized above. — Sgconlaw (talk) 22:55, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * As it happens, Ngrams, which, I don't know if we totally trust, but must be better than general-search unexplained Large Random NumbersTM, shows "time stood still" overall more common than "time stands still", but in any case, for consistency, it might be better to consistently use present tense, unless present tense is odd, which approach would retain the status quo wrt "time stands still". I am not personally a massive fan of the afterthought-by-usage-note approach to inflections as at, but, again, sadly I do not at the moment have a better suggestion. Mihia (talk) 23:13, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * The only way I can think of to get an infinitive out of this phrase is to make it the object of certain verbs: "make time stand still", "watch time stand still", "have time stand still". Chuck Entz (talk) 02:29, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
 * What about "for time to stand still"? PUC – 09:24, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Or as a question: "Does time stand still in Sleepy Hollow?" DonnanZ (talk) 09:12, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
 * For sake of argument: it could be the subjunctive! Equinox ◑ 21:07, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Right. Mihia (talk) 21:21, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Just added three cites from 17th and 18th centuries if anyone's interested. newfiles (talk) 21:57, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * attestability is not the issue here—once again, the question is whether it is SoP. — Sgconlaw (talk) 22:27, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I do understand that issue. newfiles (talk) 22:28, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Are you sure you meant to say that the issue is SoP? I don't see anyone arguing that. I would be happy that it is idiomatic enough, at some lemma. Mihia (talk) 23:22, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I can readily see how this may be SoP: + . But a separate RFD should be started for that. The issue here was the entry time stand still. — Sgconlaw (talk) 13:03, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I have now nominated time stands still for deletion as being SoP—see below. — Sgconlaw (talk) 12:34, 20 May 2024 (UTC)