This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Eating:English:Om nom nom... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.118.40.77 ( talk) 16:57, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
See Talk:Onomatopoeia#IPA -- Ersaloz ( talk) 17:40, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
This article has no citations and a lot of these things aren't even used. Someone should fix this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.57.140.142 ( talk) 22:13, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
This article is a disgrace. Where do I even begin? "Because of the nature of onomatopoeia, there are many cross-linguistic cognates of onomatopoetic sounds". And what might that nature be? This wording implies that onomatopoeia are intrinsically more likely to resemble that which they refer to than any other word, when the truth is that, just like with any other symbol, onomatopoeia are only linked to that which they refer to by means of an arbitrary relationship. This article, which does little more than highlight a list of nothing more than anecdotal information and implies all sorts of things that simply are not the case (primarily, that onomatopoeia are in some way non-arbitrary signs), does not meet WP:V, WP:N or WP:INDISCRIMINATE, and should not be in Wikipedia. Furthermore, it gives the impression that onomatopoeia are in some way non-arbitrary signs by quoting "some (many) conventional examples" that turn out to be both a very carefully selected list of "examples", and a list that highlights words whose relations are dubious at best, on most cases. This is probably the single most arbitrary listing of meaningless and unencyclopaedic words I have ever seen in my life, and the fact that it is _in_ and encyclopedia portrays it like something it is not. Jjatria ( talk) 06:20, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
Let us keep it. I have used it professionally (not as a scientist, tho). Zezen ( talk) 12:21, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
The first listing for an eating onomatopoeia in the United States is "om nom nom". While this is my favorite onomatopoeia, I feel it isn't used nearly often enough to be the first one listed. Might this be better moved to the end? Chomp and Gulp are much more commonly used and should probably be listed first. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.225.182.249 ( talk) 14:27, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
It used to say "munch munch" I think. Googling "miam miam" and "njam njam" seems so show they're legit -- but I'm worried that the whole section could be vandalism. It's one big Citation Needed. Fyedernoggersnodden ( talk) 05:41, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
I believe that there are many modern Hebrew words that originate in ancient aramaic, one of the main languages of the Talmud. The word 'pook' in Aramaic means to expel. It can be found in many places in the talmud. this may be the origin of the word 'pook' in Hebrew; to expel (gas). I am not deleting it (yet) because I don't know for sure if this word originates in Aramaic, or is an Onomatopoeia. Perhaps a Hebrew etymology dictionary should be consulted, if one exists — Preceding unsigned comment added by Darkkelf99 ( talk • contribs) 06:50, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
No anglophone that I know says "throb throb" to describe a heart beating. Throbbing is a verb that hearts do, but it is not an onomatopeia. I added "ba-bump" and similar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.142.208.112 ( talk) 19:01, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
Some cross longuistic examples can be found here.
http://books.google.com/books?id=90RAAAAAYAAJ&pg=PR27#v=onepage&q&f=false
Rajmaan ( talk) 22:29, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
The page currently claims "Because of the nature of onomatopoeia, there are many cross-linguistic cognates of onomatopoetic sounds." On this page, cognate seems to be used to mean words which are derived from a common phenomenon, such as all of the onomatopoeia for kissing being derived from the sound of people kissing (presumably). However, the term cognate in linguistics means two words which are derived from one earlier word, such as the English word "father", the Italian "padre", and the German "vater", are all direct descendants of PIE *pəter. I am unsure of how to adequately rephrase this. Calling this a list of translated onomatopoeia seems the most accurate to me, but such a name raises the issue of the point of having this page on Wikipedia at all rather than on Wiktionary. For now, I am merely adding the disputed tag. 198.29.34.242 ( talk) 02:23, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted the "clinking" section under "other" at the end of the article and was accused of vandalism. Apologies for not explaining my reason for deleting it at the time. The section is entirely obsolete. This article is for "cross-linguistic onomatopoeias", not simply a list of onomatopoeias. The "clinking" section contains only three words in English, and no other languages. Furthermore, the words "clink, tink, chink" are already listed further up the page under the header "Sharp Strike".
Also requesting the deletion of the section "White Water" as it contains only one language and one word. That is not "cross-linguistic". Perhaps move it to another section and point out that it applies only to white water?
This is an awesome page and should be a site of the day! 193.167.124.158 ( talk) 10:38, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
The "Eagle soaring" column of the "Wild birds" table has only one entry in it. It should be deleted. Maybe it could be replaced with an "Eagle screeching" column, for which there are more examples: "scree" or "kikiki" in English and "صعير" (sa'eer) or غقغق (ghaq ghaq) in Arabic, among others. -- Chumash11 ( talk) 15:03, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
«Glu glu» is only used for the drinking sound, not for swallowing. As far as I know, there is no commonly used onomatopoeia for swallowing in spoken Italian; in comic books, «glom» is sometimes used.
«Rutt» simply does not exist as a belching onomatopoeia in Italian. It looks like an invented word based on «rutto» (belch, noun) and «ruttare» (to belch, verb).
For coughing, «coff coff» (clearly derived from English «koff») is sometimes used in comic books. -- Sdrumma 31 January 2019 —Preceding undated comment added 09:59, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
User EN-Jungwon reverted my additions to Basque language. I got this messagge:
Hello, I'm EN-Jungwon. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Cross-linguistic onomatopoeias—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. EN-Jungwon (talk) 16:32, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
So why wheren't they constructive? Just because he decided so?
gilentxo ( talk) 16:45, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
What is this table supposed to tell me? It lacks context. i kan reed ( talk) 17:52, 8 December 2020 (UTC)