Talk:riven

No separate heading needed for "adjective"

The uses shown under adjective are completely covered by the fact that it is the past participle of to rive and, thus, superfluous. Should they not be combined into the verb heading? 124.169.115.69 13:40, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't think so. It meets some of the tests for "adjectivity":

1. One can say "become riven", "feel riven", "seem riven".
2. Though it is not common, one can say "very riven".
3. Though it is not common, one can say "(be) more riven than".

What other adjectivity tests does it fail?

Many past participles would fail these tests, even "failed", I think. (*"become failed", *"very failed", *"be more failed than"). DCDuring TALK 22:27, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Folk etymology

How often is riven mistakenly interpreted as driven? Seems "driven to distraction" is the folk etymology of "riven by distraction" ( this phrase in a SMH article of 4th Feb. 2012 ). SignedJohnsonL623 23:32, 21 February 2012 (UTC) Maybe they could have a 'See also' ,riven under the driven Wikionary entry? SignedJohnsonL623 23:32, 21 February 2012 (UTC)