The result was Merge and Redirect to Schadenfreude. Having two articles on effectively the same subject is content forking; the normal English word is clearly schadenfreude and there does not appear to be any difference between the meanings. Therefore a mention of this word in the article Schadenfreude is reasonable and sufficient. Some information is already there; editors may wish to add more, although respecting the fact that this should always be a minor section (in the manner of WP:WEIGHT). Black Kite 11:39, 18 May 2008 (UTC) reply
{{
R from merge}}
, which I believe is required under
GDFL since some new content has been merged there. Its meaning overlaps so closely with schadenfreude that they are synonyms, and it would be a violation of policy
Wikipedia:Content forking to retain a separate article. Article content about the emotion should be merged there. Article content that is merely about etymology may find a good home on
Wiktionary, but does
not belong here. -
Fayenatic
(talk) 21:58, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
reply(...) English speakers have been loath to recognise Schadenfreude as a fact of their lives. In the English language, we’ve taken so many other German words on board – words like winter, and summer, and swimmer, and apple and angst, kindergarten what-have-you. I find it very interesting that we have tried to keep the word Schadenfreude out of the English language, when it is so vital to human experience.
It must be said, though, that Portmann in his book always uses schadenfreude as a German word, that is to say capitalized and italicized. Then, the word that appears in English since the nineteenth century was not fully naturalized yet in 1999. Perhaps this is another reason why Evrik and others are still trying to replace it (1,5 million Google results) with the supposedly more English word epicaricacy (7 tousands Google results). However, since 1999 an important trend has gained momentum. Robert Matuozzi was expressing this trend in his 2001 review of Portmann's book:Aristotle ties pleasure in the misfortune of others to spite (he specifically decries Schadenfreude, N.E. 2.6.18).
A pervasive social and psychological feature of modern times, Schadenfreude has recently migrated from the German language to American popular culture, with the word and the dynamic occasionally cropping up in movies and music, folklore, and to a lesser extent in newspapers and magazines, either explicitly or in cleverly contrived subtexts.
-- Robert Daoust ( talk) 18:12, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Summary of comments
-
Sur de Filadelfia (
talk •
contribs) 01:26, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
reply
P.S. In the time I took to write this, Evrik retired. |
The result was Merge and Redirect to Schadenfreude. Having two articles on effectively the same subject is content forking; the normal English word is clearly schadenfreude and there does not appear to be any difference between the meanings. Therefore a mention of this word in the article Schadenfreude is reasonable and sufficient. Some information is already there; editors may wish to add more, although respecting the fact that this should always be a minor section (in the manner of WP:WEIGHT). Black Kite 11:39, 18 May 2008 (UTC) reply
{{
R from merge}}
, which I believe is required under
GDFL since some new content has been merged there. Its meaning overlaps so closely with schadenfreude that they are synonyms, and it would be a violation of policy
Wikipedia:Content forking to retain a separate article. Article content about the emotion should be merged there. Article content that is merely about etymology may find a good home on
Wiktionary, but does
not belong here. -
Fayenatic
(talk) 21:58, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
reply(...) English speakers have been loath to recognise Schadenfreude as a fact of their lives. In the English language, we’ve taken so many other German words on board – words like winter, and summer, and swimmer, and apple and angst, kindergarten what-have-you. I find it very interesting that we have tried to keep the word Schadenfreude out of the English language, when it is so vital to human experience.
It must be said, though, that Portmann in his book always uses schadenfreude as a German word, that is to say capitalized and italicized. Then, the word that appears in English since the nineteenth century was not fully naturalized yet in 1999. Perhaps this is another reason why Evrik and others are still trying to replace it (1,5 million Google results) with the supposedly more English word epicaricacy (7 tousands Google results). However, since 1999 an important trend has gained momentum. Robert Matuozzi was expressing this trend in his 2001 review of Portmann's book:Aristotle ties pleasure in the misfortune of others to spite (he specifically decries Schadenfreude, N.E. 2.6.18).
A pervasive social and psychological feature of modern times, Schadenfreude has recently migrated from the German language to American popular culture, with the word and the dynamic occasionally cropping up in movies and music, folklore, and to a lesser extent in newspapers and magazines, either explicitly or in cleverly contrived subtexts.
-- Robert Daoust ( talk) 18:12, 15 May 2008 (UTC) reply
Summary of comments
-
Sur de Filadelfia (
talk •
contribs) 01:26, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
reply
P.S. In the time I took to write this, Evrik retired. |