Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

8
  • Ok, I see this and I am upvoting it. Because: il n'y pas de calque. Commented Aug 17, 2025 at 16:31
  • Savante analyse, merci ! Commented Aug 17, 2025 at 16:35
  • @Lambie A newspaper's opinion and a comment expanding on what would constitute at this point an anglicism don't supersede the Dictionnaire historique de la langue française or other established lexicographic sources. It is initially a calque. Just as you are not bound to my criteria, we are not bound by your seal of approval and inaccurate statements. Commented Aug 17, 2025 at 16:49
  • @Lambie Today it is. Negocier un virage was a calque, 100 years ago; it is fully substantiated. Therefore your statement that it is not is inaccurate, this is not a personal remark, it is fact. See community wiki, which settles it. The JdM echoes the sentiment it is no longer perceived as such, nothing more and expands on another anglicism, using courbe for curve. Commented Aug 17, 2025 at 17:12
  • 1
    @Lambie Suit yourself. This negocier in négocier un virage comes from English. The DHLF, Vitrine and the TLFi all concur. The rest is irrelevant FUD. Thank you. Commented Aug 17, 2025 at 17:58