Talk:L'esprit de l'escalier

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"esprit de l'escalier" is described in Paradoxe sur le comédien, but the phrase itself isn't there. "escalier" only occurs once in the phrase "au bas de l’escalier". However, I don't know of any other source for "esprit de l'escalier". --Kylenano 08:13, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] esprit d'escalier

The saying is actually "l'esprit d'escalier", and not "de l'escalier".

I thought so, but second-guessed myself because my French is rusty. Feeeshboy 07:05, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Now I'm not so sure. A google search reveals more hits for "... de l'escalier" than for "... d'escalier." I guess it's fine as is. Feeeshboy 03:36, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
Actually in French the saying is definitely "l'esprit d'escalier" and not "de l'escalier".
NO

I confirmed that in French the saying is definitely "l'esprit d'escalier" and not "de l'escalier".
In french " l' " stands for " le " or " la " when it's followed by a word starting with a vowel.
In french " de le " doesn't exists. It's contracted into " de " only for male genre words.
Same thing for " de l' " when the following word starts with a vowel and is male genre, it's contracted into " d' ".
I understand that English speaking people might missuse the french expression, anyway I think Wikipedia should try to correct this missuse. 12:57, 18 October 2006 (UTC)VID

I am french, both sayings are unknowns to me, but where "l'esprit d'escalier" make escalier an epithet (thinking like a staircase ?) the only far fetched meaning could be deducive mind which is "esprit de deduction", whereas "l'esprit de l'escalier" as "the staircase's spirit" make l'escalier an independent entity who "whistle blow" the "proper, defending answer", even in vieux français with esprit as wit it reads as the wit found on the staircase.

  • It has to be L'esprit d'escalier. Can anybody ask an admin to move the page? I'm too tired right now... Henning Blatt 22:53, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
    • After reading the reasoning behind this, my rudimentary french education agrees with L'esprit d'escalier. It makes more grammatical sense too. --69.156.91.158 04:18, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
      • Pretty sure it's "L'esprit de l'escalier." That seems to be what the native French speaker above is advocating. And I'm not sure about this, but it seems like I remember that de le usually becomes du, but you don't use d' for du, only de. Or something to that effect. -- 66.135.149.195 23:50, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
"Esprit d'escalier" and "esprit de l'escalier" are both grammatical in French. The first means "staircase wit" and the second means "wit of the staircase". Both forms appear to occur in French with the required meaning. "Esprit d'escalier" strikes me as better, however. Difficult to say why
The grammatical difference between the two forms is that in "esprit de l'escalier" the word "escalier" is preceded by the definite article; in "esprit d'escalier", it is not. The first expression feels similar to an English compound noun, the second to an English noun phrase.
The page should be moved to "esprit d'escalier", removing the definite article not only from "escalier", but also from "esprit" (for independent reasons).

--Gheuf 06:14, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I would suggest that perhaps it doesn't matter what would be best according to French grammar, as the phrase is no longer used in French. What's more important is the way it's most commonly used in English. Grammatically correct or not, that's the phrase being referred to. Feeeshboy 06:21, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
But it is! I grew up in France and used "l'esprit d'escalier" since a young age. However I agree that it is more often used in this form in English.Thermaland 09:49, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 2007-02-7 Automated pywikipediabot message

This page has been transwikied to Wiktionary.
The article has content that is useful at Wiktionary. Therefore the article can be found at either here or here (logs 1 logs 2.)

Note: This means that the article has been copied to the Wiktionary Transwiki namespace for evaluation and formatting. It does not mean that the article is in the Wiktionary main namespace, or that it has been removed from Wikipedia's. Furthermore, the Wiktionarians might delete the article from Wiktionary if they do not find it to be appropriate for the Wiktionary.

Removing this tag will usually trigger CopyToWiktionaryBot to re-transwiki the entry. This article should have been removed from Category:Copy to Wiktionary and should not be re-added there.

--CopyToWiktionaryBot 06:47, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Feeeshboy, your comment is indented as a reply to mine, but it is difficult to see the connection with what I wrote. You write that "esprit d'escalier" is not used in French and that it doesn't matter whether either expression is grammatical in French; I write that "esprit d'escalier" IS still used in France and that BOTH expressions are grammatical. Did you mean to reply to someone else?--Gheuf 15:44, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Relevancy of treppenwitz.com

Doesn't this blog link fail both the relevance, and notability guidelines of WP:EL? Just because it has the same name as the subject… --Adoniscik (talk) 14:13, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I believe so. If the blog merits its own article, then it someone ought to write one, but the body of this article is not the place for "other uses." If there is no specific reason we should connect the blog with the term other than the name, then this info should be in a disambig, and not in the article. Feeeshboy (talk) 02:18, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
While the blog in question is linked from several hundred other blogs/web sites as well as a few main stream media sources (The Jerusalem Post being arguably the most prominent), treppenwitz.com is certainly not as well known or referenced as instapundit or similar 1st tier blogs. However, the stated intent of the author of treppenwitz.com (on his 'about me' page) was to use the site to record the insights that occurred to him 'after the fact' once they were really no longer timely or relevant. This delayed insight is the reason for the choice of the blog's name. Having said that, given that Google and several of the other top search engines identify this blog as the most linked and referenced use of the word treppenwitz, it does, IMHO have sufficient relevance to be cited on the page dealing with the word, albeit lower on the page. It should also be noted that no adjectives or superlatives (e.g. popular, widely read, etc.) have been used to describe the blog or its author as such would certainly be irrelevant to the meaning of the word. johnnybeeline (talk) 08:46, 13 March 2008 (UTC)