Talk:haupt-

RFD discussion: March–April 2017

The following information passed a request for deletion (permalink).

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.

---

haupt-

Not a prefix; information should be merged into Haupt. At Wiktionary:Tea room/2017/March#haupt-, User:Angr and User:Korn have both voiced their support for deletion. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 16:31, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

• Indeed; delete. —Aɴɢʀ (talk) 16:37, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
• Keep: This only works via Haupt containing the following definition lines:

  • main (in compounds, see haupt-)
  • chief or leader of a unit of men (in compounds, see haupt-)

  Thus, the combining form use (haupt-) is semantically distinct from the separate noun uses, especially via the "main" sense. --Dan Polansky (talk) 16:41, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

  One work that agrees with this view is A Student Grammar of German by Paul Stocker, 2012[1]. This work is just a hint; I do not intend to present the author as ultimate authority on the matter. --Dan Polansky (talk) 16:47, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Keep, I think. De.Wikt and the Duden both consider this a prefix, and Michael Lohde, in Wortbildung des modernen Deutschen: ein Lehr- und Übungsbuch (2006, →ISBN, §3.3.3.2.3, Präfix haupt-, says "haupt- hat zwar seinen Ursprung in dem freien Grundmorphem Haupt (Kopf, leitende Person), ist aber im Laufe der Zeit zu einem eigenständigen Präfix geworden." Extending the Scope of Construction Grammar (2014, →ISBN explains that it went from being a prefixoid to being a full prefix as the ability to use Haupt as a free word in the relevant sense declined. Are there references which argue it is not a prefix? - -sche (discuss) 20:33, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Keep for the reasons Dan gave. Yes, it's derived from the noun Haupt, but these senses only occur when it's combined with another word, so listing them on the noun page feels a little cheaty. Consider that, if the reasons for deleting are considered valid, then all prefixes that have a corresponding independent word would have to be deleted, because they could all be treated as specialised "in compounds" senses. —CodeCat 20:49, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Keep after original hesitation. I kinda had the same thoughts as CodeCat. Kolmiel (talk) 06:37, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

• RFD kept. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 22:32, 28 April 2017 (UTC)