Jump to content

Talk:Chaff

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Split of grain husks from radar countermeasure

[edit]
The countermeasure has its own article and half of this one. I removed the split and added merge tags. Hopefully someone knowledgeable can move the information over, add a see reference to the top of this page, and maybe give the other a different title. -Acjelen 06:50, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion was about a split of chaff, the husks of grain, from chaff (radar countermeasure), strips of metal used to confuse radar (see this earlier version of the article). --Richard New Forest (talk) 11:37, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge of Chaff and Bran

[edit]

I'm not sure which discussion thread the above were replies to, or how to find it, but it's making me rethink my merge tag. Instead of reverting my merge tag, I'll wait until an actual discussion develops here. I can draw a distinction between the chaff that is threshed and winnowed, and the bran that is milled off before grinding into flour, but I think the distinction is better drawn in a single article about both, and that the two are more likely to remain confused by people who read only one article about either of them. --arkuat (talk) 07:05, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No merge. They are quite different things. Chaff is the scales that protect the grain, while bran is part of the grain. For example, wholemeal flour has no chaff but it does contain the bran. --Richard New Forest (talk) 18:46, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
We need a diagram for each page, which would greatly help to clarify each subject, they are not related except that some cereal crops have both bran and chaff as byproducts of harvesting and processing. Chaff in botany has no context with bran at all, with bran a part of grass seeds and chaff a part of the flower of some plants in Asteraceae, or sunflowers. Hardyplants (talk) 04:55, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No further discussion, so I've removed merge tag. Richard New Forest (talk) 08:35, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation

[edit]

"to rhyme with half"? Really? Not in my dialect (even ignoring the 'l' in half). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thirteenangrymen (talk • contribs) 20:06, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not clear what your dialect is, Thirteenangrymen. (Do you really pronounce the "l" in "half"?) The point is that chaff's properly pronounced with a long "a", which in my dialect (RP, more or less) rhymes it with "half", not "gaff". Having said that, many people nowadays know the word only from reading it, so it's very widely pronounced now with a short "a" (and at some point this may become "correct", like "waistcoat" now very rarely being said "weskit"). Perhaps a short "a" is a dialect form too, though I've never heard a farming type use a short "a". Do you rhyme it with "gaff", or how do you say it? No reason why we can't have an alternative pronunciation, if we can find a ref. Richard New Forest (talk) 22:11, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that it might rhyme with half in RP, but not in Northern England where it more commonly rhymes with gaff. Lots of websites mention this pronunciation, and it is not just a recent variant. Dbfirs 23:28, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Being a southerner I really don't know what the traditional pronunciation of chaff would be in Northern English – if it's like "laugh" it would indeed rhyme with "gaff". Pronunciation on web pages is unlikely to be much guide though – we would need a more authoritative source, such as a dialect dictionary. I also don't know about other dialects, such as American, Scottish or Australian.
Notwithstanding all that, perhaps the most pragmatic way of dealing with it here is to just give the two alternatives without further comment: "Chaff (/tʃɑːf/ or /tʃæf/) is the inedible...". Then it doesn't really matter which is "correct". Richard New Forest (talk) 18:18, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that sounds fair. I'm not an expert on pronunciation, but could we include tʃăf which looks like the way I've always heard it pronounced? If you think this looks wrong in southern England, I'll be happy to omit it. Dbfirs 08:24, 24 January 2009 (UTC) (Sorry, not IPA) Dbfirs 08:28, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Warfare

[edit]

Why is there a random paragraph about the warfare definition of it? Surely it should just have the disambiguation link and nothing else? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.169.52.102 (talk) 16:16, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, there is a separate article for that: I've deleted the material. Richard New Forest (talk) 18:07, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's still a big incongruous title saying "War". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikething (talk • contribs) 00:35, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Contradiction

[edit]

The introduction of this article begins by describing chaff as "inedible", then in the following sentence explains that "In agriculture chaff is used as livestock fodder". I submit that the word "inedible" should be removed, or changed in some way to explain that it is not fit for human consumption. NinjaKid (talk) 21:33, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quite right, inedible to humans but not to livestock. Would you like to correct the para? This is the encyclopaedia anyone can edit... Richard New Forest (talk) 07:38, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another meaning

[edit]

Could another meaning be included here, eg: "To make fun of in a good-natured way; tease. v.intr." "To engage in playful or good-natured teasing, banter. n." "See Synonyms at banter." "See http://www.thefreedictionary.com/chaff" I'm sorry, I don't have the confidence to do it myself. Dawright12 (talk) 10:23, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the suggestion, but that meaning is more appropriate to a dictionary (and is in fact already included at Wiktionary's Chaff page). This article links to Chaff (disambiguation), and that article has a link to the dictionary meanings. It might be appropriate to link directly to the dictionary from this article. Plantdrew (talk) 18:11, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chaff. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:10, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chaff&oldid=1200764347"