FANDOM


Forums: Index > Wiki discussion > Allusions vs. Idioms
It has recently been brought to my attention while on the Allusions page, that there is subjective differentiation between Idioms and Allusions. That an Idiom is not supposed to be included as an allusion. I disagree, I believe that it is perfectly reasonable, if not better that Idioms are included in the Allusions article for the expansion of backround knowledge. I base the definition of an allusion as the main support. That an allusion is a figure of speech that makes a reference to, or representation of, people, places, events, literary work, myths, or works of art, either directly or by implication, although you could use the looser definition of an allusion being a passing or casual or even incidental mention of something. However, I think that since Idioms are technically a literary work, they are subject to direct refernece and they are purposefully referenced.

Another point an the matter is that even some of the episode's names directly reference Idioms:

This said I think that it can be safely confirmed that Idiom can be included as an Allusion in the show. Verruck 01:37, April 4, 2012 (UTC)Verruck

While I agree that idioms are good to include, the idioms you listed are allusions to idioms, and not straight idioms in themselves. With the exception of "Over a Barrel" and "Read it and Weep," which are the actual idioms. Seeing as those two are straight idioms, and not a reference or play on an idiom, I don't think they should be included on the List of Allusions page. The correct place for that seems to be on the episode pages for those episodes, as it clearly says "The idiom "over a barrel" means being in a helpless position where others are in control." on the Over a Barrel page. Also, remember to sign your posts in the forums. -- Foodbandlt 01:23, April 4, 2012 (UTC)
The epsiode names were direct references, not the straight idioms themselves, with the exception of Over a barrel and Read it and weep, but yeah, They could be included with episode titles, but I'm also talking about the Idioms said/referenced in the dialect of the episodes, not just the titles. But yes, I can see them on the specific episode pages, but also on the Allusions page, as they are references to outside literature. Verruck 01:37, April 4, 2012 (UTC)Verruck
If you feel that they should be pointed out, then there's really no reason to not point them out. Although, the dictionary definition of Allusion is "to contain a casual or indirect reference," and those idioms that we've named as exceptions are a very direct reference to that exact idiom. If that idiom contains a literary reference, then you could just link the idiom on the episode page to that said idiom on Wikipedia. The titles with plays on the wording of the idioms are indirect, as it's not the exact idiom, and therefore belong on the allusion page in my opinion. Can you point out an allusion or idiom used in the dialogue in an episode please? I personally haven't been paying attention enough to notice one. Again, just my opinion. -- Foodbandlt 01:49, April 4, 2012 (UTC)
In "Suited For Success" during the first fashon show with the 'perfect' dresses, Hoity Toity comments that the dresses "look like an amatureish mish-mash of everything but the kitchen sink" the idiom is "everything but the kitchen sink" and means a lot of different things, most of which are unnessesary. Verruck 02:10, April 4, 2012 (UTC) Verruck
That would indeed be a casual reference to an idiom, in which case I think you could stick it on the Allisions page. If all references to idoms are like that in dialogue then I see no reason why you shouldn't include them on the Allusions page. -- Foodbandlt 02:17, April 4, 2012 (UTC)
I agree. This is a direct idiom, not a play on words like the above titles. EvergreenFir 03:22, April 4, 2012 (UTC)
Well, I think if it references something, whether directly, or indirectly, it should be considered an allusion (at least, in this wiki's sense of the word). So, those episodes titles that are allusions to idioms should definitely be included, especially since they (quite obviously) don't fall under broad similarity. As for the direct idioms... I guess those could be included too, but are they really allusions if they're the direct thing? -- This is Jonny Manz, signing off! 01:55, April 4, 2012 (UTC)
Great point, but I think even if it is a direct idiom it should be made know that it is an idiom, and what the idiom means, so people know about it Verruck 02:14, April 4, 2012 (UTC)Verruck
Tiny nitpicky note: All's Well That Ends Well is the name of a Shakespearean play, and therefore is not an idiom, but an allusion. Plumander 02:49, April 4, 2012 (UTC) Plumander
I know, but there's an idiom too, but i'm glad you know that its a play aswell Verruck 02:58, April 4, 2012 (UTC)Verruck
Perhaps we should make an Idioms page, filled with idioms used on the show, to better fit this. It would definitely make the Allusions page much more organized. -- Foodbandlt 02:18, April 4, 2012 (UTC)
Agreed, we should have an idioms page, please remember, not all users will have the knowledge nor the capacity to tell the difference, children and pre-teens that visit the wiki will not tell what's an idiom and what's an allusion, so if we make a section that addresses this issue, then we should have said page  OC.gifForce talk CM.png 02:33, April 4, 2012 (UTC)
Great, i'll gather the information, and start the page tomorrow Verruck 02:36, April 4, 2012 (UTC)Verruck
Wait until tomorrow to make the page for further discussion here, Verruck, in case someone wants to voice their opinion differently, and possibly a better solution. -- Foodbandlt 02:39, April 4, 2012 (UTC)
Alrighty, I notice the wiki runs on a different time zone than I do, so on wiki time, a new day for me begins at 8pm, but I can hold it off for tomorrow, the day after tomorrow if need be. As per your request, I shall obstain from the new page till at least tomorrow. Verruck 02:46, April 4, 2012 (UTC)Verruck
You can however work on it in your sandbox though, User:Verruck/Sandbox. Try to use the Allusions page as a template, for consistency's sake. Just adapt it to Idioms instead. -- Foodbandlt 02:49, April 4, 2012 (UTC)

For reference, this was started at User_talk:EvergreenFir#Idiom_on_Allusion_Page. My personal opinion is that if it's not an allusion or play on words, it does not belong on the page. This wiki is not a compilation of English idioms. If someone does not understand it, they can go elsewhere. There are too many idioms (most go unnoticed) used put them on the wiki. In sum, slippery slope and not related to the show. EvergreenFir 03:22, April 4, 2012 (UTC)

Final discussion

If it is agreed that this page be made, I would say rather than re-explaining an idiom that is already explained in detail elsewhere, that we link to the idiom on Wikipedia. Maybe explain how the idiom fits in context in the show, but I see no point in explaining an idiom that is explained in-depth elsewhere. -- Foodbandlt 03:36, April 4, 2012 (UTC)

You can't close a discussion after two hours. That's absurd. You had a total of three four participants. If you had a wide concensus then maybe you could close the discussion, but yourself and two three other people does not justify closing the discussion after such a short period of time. –Throwawaytv 08:00, April 4, 2012 (UTC)
Sorry about that.  Food 25px-Surprise.png  09:31, April 4, 2012 (UTC)

Continuing the discussion

The list of allusions is not really limited to allusions: "The allusions, references, similarities, homages, and other items on this list...". Regardless, the page contains many fuzzy similarities, which are either inherently fuzzy ("Rover speaks like Gollum", "Daisy says, 'By... by... THEM!', possibly a reference to the classic sci-fi film Them!", etc) or are just worded fuzzy ("The musical score as the cart rolls uncontrollably downhill mimics the score of the film Speed"). I think all allusions, references, similarities, homages, and so on should be welcome on the page, provided they are actually specific and identifying enough. That said, the wiki should not be a dictionary and if an idiom is used outright you could probably remove it move the information to the episode's article. –Throwawaytv 09:09, April 4, 2012 (UTC)

Symbol support vote Support for Throwawaytv's comment. EvergreenFir 16:18, April 4, 2012 (UTC)
Symbol support vote Support as well for Throwawaytv  OC.gifForce talk CM.png 16:32, April 4, 2012 (UTC)
After giving it some thought, I concurr with you about including idioms in the episode article. I do this on the grounds that even though they can be direct and technically allusions, that they are not major enough of a reference to be categorized with the allusions; rather they would serve a better purpose in the episode article as backround content because of its locality and usage in the episode. Verruck 19:25, April 4, 2012 (UTC)
Agreed.  Food 25px-Surprise.png  01:43, April 5, 2012 (UTC)
I'll wait awhile longer before I move ahead with adding the content, see if more people agree and if anyone else had an opinion to voice —Preceding unsigned comment added by Verruck (talkcontribs)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.