Talk:Idiosyncrasy

I
I just finished cleaning up. -ba

Added: By the same principle, linguits state, that words are ... idiosyncratic signs. I'm not quite sure how to differ sign/symbol.

I highly question the second paragraph
Claiming that "The word idiosyncratic is often used as a label to denote a group attitude or opinion that regards the own group as righteous and superior, everyone else or a selected outgroup as an evil enemy, while at the same time regarding all criticisms towards the own position as hostile attacks." needs more support, or at least some examples, such as the idiosyncratic North Korean regime, or something else to suport its validity. This description is also not very descriptive, and this whole entry should be marked as a stub. Check Goggle for "idiosyncratic professor," or "idiosyncratic guitar player" and you'll find a whole host of people who are doing something that's uniquely to their tastes. There's no talk about them being superior, defining an evil enemy, and most of them probably don't fear criticism to the extent described in the quote above. To flesh this entry out in more detail, some historically-relevant idiosyncrasies should also be added, such as Howard Hughes obsession with personal hygene, and so on. Distinctions should be defined within the context of the people, or movie characters, pets, etc. in such a way as to contribute to a full explanation of this delightful, yet woefully underused word. The tone of this entry covers the range from the purely theoretical, such as signs, but it doesn't really cover any ground about idiosyncrasies of the average Wikipedia user. I, for one, have an idiosyncrasy about complaining when Wikipedia entries don't give me enough "meat." If this entry is linked to Wiktionary, then there should be relevant, current examples (preferably from a verifiable newspaper or magazine) that shows how the word's currently being used in context by writers around the world. This is my humble contribution to this Wikipedia entry. --Torchpratt 12:37, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Note to "Band" below: If they're relevant enough to have a proper Wikipedia entry, they should be added at the top of the page under "Idiosyncrasy (band)" under the banner. Can you help, BA?

2007-02-7 Automated pywikipediabot message
--CopyToWiktionaryBot 02:31, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Band
There's a band by this same name. Should that be mentioned here?

When you are known, or a celebrity, or a writer, or somebody who has some 'laurels' to his name, there are certain things you do that appear peculiar, with regards to the way things were rational, per se. For example, Elvis Presley partly pouted to the left part of his face when yodeling a tune- nobody does that before and therefore it is way out of the ordinary thing that singers during the time do. If you are virtually unknown, like this writer for sure- nobody cares what I do because I am not yet famous, but I am a voracious reader that I fancy reading; from even a kid's scribble to a used book below the piles. What Elvis, and I did, were idiosyncrasies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.217.4.73 (talk) 11:40, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Reference
By the same principle, linguists state that words are not only arbitrary, but also largely idiosyncratic signs.

→ Surely that needs a reference? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.174.123.32 (talk) 12:29, 16 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Indeed, many linguists would dispute that assertion, or at least think it hopelessly oversimplified. See for example George Lakoff's arguments in Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things. --David-Sarah Hopwood ⚥ (talk) 19:14, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I guess there are better references but Steven Pinker states this point of argumentation in Pinker(1998) ("Words and Rules" in Lingua accessible at his Harvard website http://pinker.wjh.harvard.edu/articles/index.html ) --78.52.195.184 (talk) 22:26, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Consistency?
In the etymology section, the breakdown from the Greek says "(from ἴδιος idios, "one's own", σύν syn, "with" and κρᾶσις krasis, "mixture")."

But following the Wikitionary link, we find that the etymology is listed as "from ἴδιος ‎(ídios, “one’s own”) + σύν ‎(sún, “together”) + κρᾶσις ‎(krâsis, “temperament”)."

Should we be consistent in the translation of 'krasis'??

WesT (talk) 19:55, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Morbidity and not mortality
In the pharmacology section, it is stated as follows, I paraphrase: "Type B reactions have the following characteristics: They are usually unpredictable, might not be picked up by toxicological screening, not necessarily dose-related, incidence and morbidity low but mortality is high"

First of all, mortality cannot be high, otherwise we would be talking about a major concern for society and it isn't the case. Furthermore, for definition, a type B reaction cannot be highly obeserved in the population of study otherwise it would turn into type A reaction and would be easily discovered in the clinical trials. Thus, this point is wrong.

Besides, morbidity may be high, some type B reactions have really high morbidity rates, but really low prevalence and therefore mortality. Which in fact makes this adverse effects not that well studied as the common side effects. So, to reformulate the sentece I would say: "Type B reactions have the following characteristics: They are usually unpredictable, might not be picked up by toxicological screening, not necessarily dose-related, incidence and mortality low but morbidity is usually high" Macama93 (talk) 11:23 29 Nov 2017 (UTC)

Vowel "length"
I changed the text only slightly to make it more clear that by "long" vowel, the article meant the amount of time that it is articulated rather than it being a long vowel as in Bay, bee, buy, and boo. The "ae" in cab is, afterall, considered a short vowel. Please excuse the intrusion. I was looking for something else and the phrase jumped out at me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RichardBeckwith (talk • contribs) 22:10, 6 March 2019 (UTC)

Summary is grossly false and in-adequate
From what the article !! tells, the term idiosyncrasy has several !! meanings, and means by far much more than just what the summary !! tells. Steue (talk) 19:52, 11 June 2022 (UTC)