Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language

Welcome to the language section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

• Computing
• Entertainment
• Humanities
• Language
• Mathematics
• Science
• Miscellaneous
• Archives

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

   

How can I get my question answered?

• Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
• Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
• Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
• Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
• Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
• Note:
  • We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
  • We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
  • We don't do your homework for you, though we'll help you past the stuck point.
  • We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

• The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.

See also:

• Teahouse
• Help desk
• Village pump
• Help manual

June 2

Usage of synonyms

In some languages the context governs the usage of certain synonyms, e.g. in English, the words answer, reply and response are used in different contexts, while in Russian only one word, ответ (otvet), is generally used, regardless of context (be it an answer to the question, e-mail reply or military response). Is this context-dependent trend a known thing in linguistics and does it have a name? 212.180.235.46 (talk) 13:08, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

One term for it could be "the richness of English". Note the different origins for each of the words you listed.[1][2][3] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:17, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Polysemy (and monosemy) are certainly known phenomena. (And, Bugs, English, in all its richness, doesn't distinguish between "knowing" by acquaintance v "knowing" by description on a single-word level, for example, unlike many other languages. Though context makes it clear, of course). ---Sluzzelin talk 13:24, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

There are likewise English terms for which a translator to Russian has to choose between several Russian terms that are not fully interchangeable but whose appropriateness depends on the context. For example, sometimes cousin can be translated as двоюродный брат, but only if denoting the son of your aunt or uncle. And гулять means to walk, but can only be used for a leisurely stroll. The terms of a language correspond to regions in the semantic space of meanings, and the regions for two different languages generally do not correspond perfectly to each other.  --Lambiam 19:35, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

As a translator from English, I can confirm that in some contexts, English is a very rich language where several terms can be translated into the same term in the target language. However, in other contexts, it is the other way around, where one term in English can give me a headache (and hours of work) trying to figure out which term is the most appropriate translation. The 'richness' of languages is not an easy thing to measure. --T*U (talk) 19:32, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

Translation from Latin

Can someone translate the text at this bizarre depiction of the Americas? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personification_of_the_Americas#/media/File:America,_from_the_Four_Continents_MET_DP861355.jpg I've tried running it through Google Translate, but the results are half sensible and half jibberish. Iapetus (talk) 15:02, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Not quite sure, but I'd go for:

Illa quidem nostris dudum non cognita terris,
Facta brevì auriferis latè celeberrima venis,
Visceribus scelerata suis humana recondens
Viscera feralem prætendit AMERICA clavam

That land, America, unknown to us until recently,
but soon made famous far and wide for its gold-bearing veins,
hiding in its entrails the hideous entrails of men(?),
presents its deadly club.

Does that make sense? Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:22, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

It's a bit of a riddle, but scelerata can modify AMERICA. Supposedly, the entrails within entrails refer to the supposed cannibalism of the indigenous peoples, a culinary practice (depicted in the background) that in the eye of the author of the text defiles America.  --Lambiam 18:36, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

L&S write that sceleratus is used in particular as an adjective "denoting places where crimes had been committed or criminals punished".^[4]  --Lambiam 19:08, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Cyrillic letter Ge when italicized

Cyrllic variants and cursive forms

When italicized, how did the Cyrillic letter Ge get a strange shape?? Georgia guy (talk) 20:10, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Гг/Гг? I guess this has to do with russian cursive and linking adjacent letters. It may also depend on the used font. Personuser (talk) 20:30, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

And then there's Cyrillic cursive, which can be even stranger. Mathglot (talk) 09:11, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

And then there's this article about an even stranger script that you should read before answering. Cyrillic cursive currently redirects to Russian cursive, this seems historically justified, but could be handled better. If you find Cyrillic cursive strange you probably never saw Glagolitic cursive (or probably a lot of other ones). The script has some known issues addressed in the article. The fact that being familiar with hand writing makes me feel old is deeply disappoining. Personuser (talk) 01:48, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

June 3

Origin of the distinction between "poisonous" and "venomous"?

In technical usage, "venomous" and "poisonous" are considered distinct: the former describing animals that inject a toxin by bite or sting, the latter describing things that are harmful when consumed (and possibly also by contact/absorption). The definitions are distinct: it is considered technically incorrect to describe a snake as "poisonous" (unless it is harmful when eaten). Can anyone tell me when this distinction in use was first made? Its not a distinction that is usually made in informal speech (people have been talking about "poisonous snakes" at least as far back as Shakespeare - who also talked about "venomous toads"). More significantly, it doesn't seem to match the definitions of "venom" and "poison", which treat the former as a category of the latter, rather than two distinct things. It also doesn't appear to be a result of etymology - poison and venom both appear to derive from words referring to ingested poisons. Iapetus (talk) 09:20, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

The linked etymologies above suggest the distinction existed since the very beginning, when those words emerged. The word "poison" emerged c. 1200 to mean deadly potion, that is orally ingested toxin, while "venom" appeared in the same 13th century to indicate "poison secreted by some animals and transferred by biting", while "the meaning "bitter, virulent feeling or language" is first recorded c. 1300". Shakespeare already used the latter meaning. Brandmeister^talk 10:22, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

June 4

Words ending in -eng

How come -ang, -ing, -ong, and -ung are common endings of one-syllable words in English but -eng is rare?? Georgia guy (talk) 01:38, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Why not? --184.145.50.201 (talk) 04:07, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

This could be helpful, most entries seem unusual. E should be otherwise the most common letter in English (oftn mute). Not sure how much the linked site can be trusted for this kind of things, but assuming it's true this may have more to do with spelling than phonetics and making a clear distinction between the two is surely useful. Personuser (talk) 05:12, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

The participle/gerund ending -ing makes this a favourite, but even with monosyllabic words the difference is already pronounced. Pronunciation should in all cases be /-ɛŋ/ versus /-ɪŋ/. Wiktionary lists only four monosyllabic -eng words: cheng (alternative spelling of sheng, a loanword from Mandarin), kreng, meng and sheng. In contrast, 28 monosyllabic -ing words are listed: bing, bring, ching, cling, ding, fling, ging, hing, ing, jing, king, ling, ming, ping, ring, sing, sling, spring, sting, string, swing, thing, thring, ting, whing, wing, wring, zing.  --Lambiam 10:52, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Also bling. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:55, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

/usr/share/dict/words on my computer also has beng, teng, dreng, steng, spreng, streng for whatever that's worth. I have no idea what any of these mean. —Tamfang (talk) 01:55, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

/e/ raised to /i/ before nasals in late Proto-Germanic, and as a result, you won't find any terms inherited from Proto-Germanic with -eng. Here's a rule from Zukoff (2017), p. 134:

• /e/ > [i] /_N{C,#}

Orcaguy | Write me | Mon œuvre 17:06, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

But words ending in em or en are quite common. Georgia guy (talk) 17:29, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Send and bend seem both to come from Proto-Germanic /a/. -enk# also has a similar rarity, probably this isn't even limited to one-syllable words or stressed syllables. Given how many loan worlds exist in English and what the vocalism has gone through, I would search for something more recent (nasals are well known troublemakers). In some similar worlds velars would undergo palatalisation (e.g. bench), not sure if this would always be the case. Personuser (talk) 21:24, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

June 5

Japanese sandal terms

• 
  The caption, and the museum sign in the image, call these Wiktionary:わらじ "waraji". But other sources insist that thong-style straw sandals are ぞうり, zōri, and that if the straps are covered in cotton, as these appear to be, they are fuku-zōri.
• 
  "The hanao is the brown part" says Wiktionary:はなお. But other sources, including the zōri article and a publication of the V&A, suggest that the hanao is the white part
• 
  Fukagutsu: straw-woven, but not zōri
• 
  Titled as zōri, and used as such on ja Wikipedia (you can see the separate stiched-on sole, which may be identifying)
• 
  Pictoral instructions on how to make zōri (similar to waraji) in a Japanese living-history museum. Sign says they are zori (first three characters). Obviously no separate outsole is included.

May I ask what exactly the defining distinction(s) between waraji and zōri would be? What is a hanao: short tween-toe loop, long vamp loop, or both? Are there terms for each of these loops, or other parts of the waraji? I've re-written the waraji article (reviews welcome), and it would be useful to know. Thanks! HLHJ (talk) 20:35, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

The Japanese Wikipedia appears to use zōri in a more generic sense of a sandal with straps, while waraji is for footwear made of rice straw, possibly but not necessarily of a sandal type. The footwear in this image is described as 草鞋草履 (waraji zōri), "straw sandal". Hana+o literally means "nose strap", being the foremost of several straps. Also according to the Japanese Wikipedia, the hanao in a narrow sense is the short brown string between two toes, but in a broader sense refers to the whole thong ensemble, now even also used for Western-style sandals with a transverse strap. The semantic relationship between the terms hanao in the broader sense and zōri is not clear to me, but I have the impression that Japanese-style hanao in the broader sense of footwear are of the clog type, with two transverse ridges under a flat board. Caveat: my ability to understand Japanese is rather limited. --Lambiam 21:49, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, Lambian. It seems fairly clear that clog-like geta also have hanao. If "hanao" has both a narrow and broad sense, then all the sources are reasonable (but Wiktionary might want to report on both senses). If "quickly made of plain rice straw, no outsole" overrides "thong sandal", and quick, plain-rice-straw thong sandals are waraji rather than zori, I should state that in the article. But "waraji zori" suggests that they are independent variables. So some sandals would be both? HLHJ (talk) 22:23, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Can you read this sign? (the big one near the center, lowermost in the image)

Found another source, a museum shot with a sign titled "Waraji and zōri". They don't seem to expect visitors to know the kanji. Can anyone read this sign? It's a bit blurry. HLHJ (talk) 23:38, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Better source

OK, I seem to belatedly have found a solid-looking source for this. "Waraji sandals are made of woven straw. Long straw straps attached to the front pass through loops on the sides and heel, and are tied around the ankle to fasten the sole to the foot...The straw zori is an improved version of the waraji, and is said to be the ancestor of the beach sandal now worn around the world. It has a thong and an oval sole, both made of woven straw. The big and second toes grip the shaft of the thong."

The more-reliable sources, Japanese and Brit, seem to go with this strap-type distinction. However, starting in the Edo there has also been a distinction in materials, as waraji became rare and stayed with the trad materials while zōri innovated wildly (from source). They are now made of elastomers, vinyl, plastics, etc.. So I think some people now call any straw sandal "waraji", and any sandal "zōri", but the experts don't. Just for certainty, I've only used illustrations of zōri as zōri if the uploader called them zōri and they have a thong, and accordingly for waraji. I hope this will keep me from excessively stupid error. HLHJ (talk) 02:34, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Transliterations. "Wara" (藁（わら） literally means "straw". I even knew that; "wara-zōri" is a term for a straw slip-on. Zōri (草履（ぞうり）) literally means "grass-footwear", though obviously that is not the modern sense. So slip-on straw sandals are literally waraji, though this may not reflect usage. This could explain some of the commons uploads and the museum sign. HLHJ (talk)

References

What does "shut up, Beavis" mean?

Context: In Wikipedia:Why Wikipedia is not so great, the following quote appears: "hence articles like fuck which are essentially dictionary^{shut up, Beavis} articles". I'm particularly confused by the fact that this links to throat-clear; Beavis definitely exists and there are passages online about telling him to shut up, but I don't see the connection. Could someone explain what it means in context? (I think this might be an obscure cultural reference, but I wouldn't know about it.) Duckmather (talk) 21:13, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

Dictionary starts with dick, the sort of thing that would set Beavis off. DuncanHill (talk) 21:45, 5 June 2021 (UTC)

"Throat-clear" might also allude to how those two boneheads sound when they're snickering over something they see as provocative. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:40, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

It was added here by User:Brogo13 who was subsequently banned as a sockpuppet. So in this context it probably means Brogo13 was thinking "heh heh, dick" like Beavis would, and then Butt-Head would tell him to shut up. Adam Bishop (talk) 14:21, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply! (Also, I can't unsee it now.) I feel much clearer about what it means in context. Duckmather (talk) 16:45, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

June 6

Etymology of moin moin

Apparently moin moin is a Nigerian dish. However, "moin moin" is literally used as a greeting in some German dialects. What is the etymology of moin moin (the dish)? Does it come from the greeting? And if so, why? JIP | Talk 08:45, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Here's someone claiming it's of Yoruba origin (which seems otherwise credible). Here's an old English-Yoruba dictionary. Personuser (talk) 09:53, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

This may be a folk etymology, but many people who use "moin moin" as a greeting claim it come from the same root as "morning"; the etymology section of that article has more details and controversy, but that seems the most likely origin. Certainly "Morgen", short for "Guten Morgen" is a common casual greeting in Germany, along with assorted dialect variants. The spelling of the Nigerian term may be the same, but I'd suspect the pronunciation would be different. The Europeans grabbing stuff in Nigeria were also mostly Portuguese and Brits, not generally Germans, though admittedly northern Germany has always produced sailors, who went (and go) everywhere on ships under assorted flags. HLHJ (talk) 13:32, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

The name for the dish is mentioned as a loanword of Yoruba origin in some more reliable sources [5][6], they don't give a more detailed etymology and this wouldn't rule out a "double borrowing" (which would be even less probable, at least for a German origin). Alternative spellings/names include "mai mai", "moyin moyin", "moyen moyen",... (these can be very misleading without some more context). It is a quite popular dish and seems to bring up local rivalities, which would make folk etymologies even more likely. An example would be mo eyin "stick to teeth" (the link I found is blacklisted, so this should probably be taken with even more caution, I couldn't find anything similar in reliable sources). For the greeting there is a long, but not so helpful discussion at [7]. The German article may have some more details and additional sources, for those who can read them. Personuser (talk) 22:16, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

How do you pronounce the greeting? Temerarius (talk) 22:53, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

I don't speak German natively, but I have learned it to a very good degree. As far as I understand, the greeting "moin moin" is pretty much literally pronounced as it is written, as is the case in most (but not nearly all) words in German. As far as I understand, "moin" is pronounced to rhyme with "loin" in English (discounting for minor variations in the vowels). JIP | Talk 00:18, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Wiktionary:moin has some IPA transcriptions and an audio sample (keep in mind that the page includes unrelated words in other languages, and probably doesn't cover all the local variations and related or possibly related expressions in other languages, specially for such a common/colloquial word, left alone how the word was pronounced by nord German sailors more that one century ago or similar, which seems to be, using an euphemism, "challenging" to determine even for worlds with a clearer etymology). Personuser (talk) 00:58, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Make no mistake about it

I'm under impression that "Make no mistake about it" is used most frequently in American English, being a favorite phrase among US officials more than anywhere else. Is the phrase indeed more popular in the US? 212.180.235.46 (talk) 20:54, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

BrEng speaker here. The phrase is in common use in the UK, but normally just as "make no mistake", i.e. without the "about it". --Viennese Waltz 21:11, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

I think its common use among politicians is similar to "let's be clear": it always prefaces a huge lie that they want to perpetrate on the media and the people. Elizium23 (talk) 11:49, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

According to the Corpus of Global Web-Based English, "make no mistake" appears 1289 times in US sources and 921 times in GB sources, while "make no mistake about it" appears 226 times in US sources and 119 times in GB sources. The total number of words from the two countries is similar (386,809,355 from US and 387,615,074 from GB). CodeTalker (talk) 19:01, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Apparently Nixon liked to use it (see this thread at Stack Exchange, also tracing it back to 18th century James Ussher in a technichally non-imperative (though subjunctive) form, and to 19th century John Poole (in its imperative form, though I actually think that example could also be about advising someone not to mess up a future action he is to perform). ---Sluzzelin talk 19:36, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

June 7

What does "my not so" mean?

In Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2, Dumbledore says to Harry Potter:

Dumbledore: I've always prized myself on my ability to turn a phrase. Words are, in my not so humble opinion...our most inexhaustible source of magic...capable of both inflicting injury and remedying it.

What does "my not so" mean? Rizosome (talk) 07:12, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

It is in two parts, "my" and "not so". Dumbledore has an opinion, which he thinks is not so humble. JIP | Talk 07:15, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Some writers (or style guides) would hyphenate this, as "my not-so-humble opinion", which makes the sense clearer. It's an example of a compound modifier. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 09:10, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

See also in my humble opinion. Alansplodge (talk) 11:14, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

... which has the initialism IMHO. The Urban Dictionary even claims there's one that's not so humble - IMNSHO - though I've never seen it used. Clarityfiend (talk) 11:20, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

I have seen IMNSHO used. --Khajidha (talk) 11:42, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

I have seen both IMHO and IMNSHO used quite a lot. JIP | Talk 12:42, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

My recollection from the 90s is that IMHO was most prevalent, with IMO being a minority player. IMNSHO was an obviously humorous extension. Matt Deres (talk) 18:56, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Pluralised groups in Irish English

Does Irish English follow the British English pattern of pluralizing groups: such as "the clan were living in Dublin" vs. "the clan was living in Dublin"? Are there exceptions to this rule where the verb might sometimes be singular instead? Elizium23 (talk) 12:03, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

I don't know about Irish English specifically, but both British English and American English have both "formal agreement" and "notional agreement" -- they just distribute them a little differently. The Wikipedia article is Synesis (a word which I'm not sure I've ever heard before, and which I doubt is in common use among linguists). AnonMoos (talk) 14:20, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Pancake sentence points to Zeugma and syllepsis- --Error (talk) 00:03, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

"Irish English's writing standards align with British rather than American English" according to our Hiberno-English article. Alansplodge (talk) 11:08, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Can someone here please translate the legend in this map from Spanish to English?

Here is the map itself:

A map of the First Indochina War, in Spanish.

68.228.73.154 (talk) 19:42, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

1. "French control until 1954"
2. "Viet Minh control:"
3. "through 1947"
4. "through 1950"
5. "beginning in 1954"
6. "French Indochina"
7. "Internal borders" Elizium23 (talk) 19:46, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Is the translation for the map legend the exact same for the German version of this map?

A map of the First Indochina War, in German.

68.228.73.154 (talk) 20:42, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Yes, pretty much so. JIP | Talk 21:51, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

An independent translation of the German:

1. under French control until 1954
2. under the control of the Viet Minh
3. –since the end of 1947
4. –since the end of 1950
5. –beginning of 1954
6. French Indochina
7. Borders within Indochina

I think the Spanish lines 3 & 4 also mean "since the end of 1947|1950". And where the Spanish legend has "1947–1954", the German is more verbose: "Course from 1947 to 1954".  --Lambiam 22:09, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

June 8

ΗΑΓΙΑ ΕΥΔΟΚΗΑ

Constantinople icon

The attached Byzantine stonecraft represents Aelia Eudocia, saint and empress. What peeves me is the Greek spelling of her name in the mosaic. I don't really know Greek, but I read it as ΗΑΓΙΑ ΕΥΔΟΚΗΑ. However it seems very irregular to me as Η is representing both /h/ and /i/ in the same phrase. Is that normal and I am missing basic notions of Greek alphabet? Is it a transitional spelling? Is it because Eudocia was both a Christian saint and a Homeric erudite? --Error (talk) 00:18, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

The first Η, could be the article, the latin H in the file name would represent the Rough breathing, which isn't marked in the mosaic. I'm not that familiar with Greek from that period or the use of articles to be sure. This mosaic seems to confirm my suspects, not sure of its dating, but icons weres probably quite conservative. Personuser (talk) 01:01, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Saint Panteleimon, Nicosia was started in 1993, if I understand the Google translation of bg:Свети Пантелеймон (Никозия). (It makes me wonder whether the mosaic is allowed to be in Commmons.)

I didn't know of it as an article (wikt:Η). It makes sense, though.

--Error (talk) 08:22, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

I guess the self proclaimed copyright owner is the one who took the picture, not sure how this works for mosaics. Your dating is some centuries more accurate than my supposition (at least the infobox is pretty clear to me) and it seems I managed to choose probably the worst possible image for comparision; the explanation is otherwise more solid the more I look at it ("the Saint Eudocia", in English you wouldn't use the article, but seems used even in modern Greek). Personuser (talk) 09:08, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

A couple of letters are paired. Does that indicate a diphthong? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:58, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

I don't think so. ΓΙ becomes /j/, ΕΥ becomes (in this context) /ev/, and ΗΑ is /ia/.

Another example is this icon of Saint Philothei of Athens. This use of the definite article is perfectly common in Greek. For a male saint the article is (in Ancient Greek) ὁ, as a capital letter without spiritus Ο, as seen (with spiritus) on icons for the saints Eutychius and Leonidas. The file on Wikimedia Commons should be renamed to "Agia Eudokia.jpg".  --Lambiam 10:16, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

So it is an article. Thanks everybody. --Error (talk) 10:53, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

What's missing phrase after "I am"?

In Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2, Harry speaks to his son:

Harry: Albus Severus Potter...you were named after two headmasters of Hogwarts. One of them was Slytherin... and he was the bravest man I've ever known.

Albus: But just say that I am.

Harry: Then Slytherin House will have gained a wonderful young wizard. But, listen, if it really means that much to you, you can choose Gryffindor.

What's missing phrase after "I am"? Rizosome (talk) 11:36, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

I haven't read the book, but from context it appears that Albus is saying "But just say that I am the bravest man you've ever known". This follows logically from Harry's line. I could be wrong though. JIP | Talk 12:06, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Albus was actually wondering what will happen if he's selected to go to Slytherin House, because it still has a bad reputation, so he's really asking "but what if I am put in Slytherin" despite what Harry said about Slytherins. (Personally I think if a magic hat sorts out all of the evil people for you, it seems like it would be easy to immediately solve all their problems, but oh well.) Adam Bishop (talk) 12:21, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Adam Bishop, I think the concept of good vs. evil and Slytherin vs. Gryffindor is far more nuanced than you give it credit for. Perhaps Slytherin has a "bad reputation" among some... but the sorting hat certainly isn't "sorting out all of the evil people". That's not the point of the four Houses. Elizium23 (talk) 14:25, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

They should execute everyone sorted into Slytherin, just to be safe. Adam Bishop (talk) 14:40, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Agree with Adam Bishop. This is made clear by what Harry says next: "Slytherin House will have gained a wonderful young wizard" if Albus is sorted into it. --Khajidha (talk) 14:16, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

In fact, this snippet of dialogue is immediately preceded by young Albus, about to take the Hogwarts Express for the first time, anxiously questioning: "Dad, what if I am put in Slytherin?". Decades earlier, the Sorting Hat had been inclined to sort Harry into Slytherin, but was swayed by his ardent wish to be put in Gryffindor.  --Lambiam 18:49, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

It appears I was completely wrong. As I said, I hadn't read the book, so the only context I had was what was written in this question. JIP | Talk 09:37, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

June 9

It's all Greek to me

Hi all, I was randomly reading Rhodes#Hellenistic age, where this sentence occurs:

To this end they employed as leverage their economy and their excellent navy, which was manned by proverbially the finest sailors in the Mediterranean world: "If we have ten Rhodians, we have ten ships."

I have tracked this down to Pseudo-Diogenian, Ancient Greek: Ημέίς δέχα Ρόδιοι, δέχα νηές: επι τον αλαζονευομένον, in

• von Leutsch, E. L.; Schneidewin, F. G. (1839). Corpus paroemiographorum Graecorum, Vol. I. 'Diogeniani', Century V, 18 (in Ancient Greek and Latin). Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. p. 254.

Could someone please check my transcription for mistakes, and possibly make a literal translation? Cheers, >MinorProphet (talk) 03:50, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

There are some flaws (χ/κ and diacritics), this is my attempt (based only on the linked edition): Ancient Greek: Ἡμεῖς δέκα Ῥόδιοι, δέκα νῆες: ἐπὶ τῶν ἀλαζονευομένων. A painfully litteral translation would be "To us ten Rodians, ten ships: by those who brag." I would still wait for a second opinion. It would also make sense to better check if there is a less fragmented source for this phrase. By the way, does anybody know of a relatively painless way to type Greek diacritics (I can switch to modern Greek keyboard, but that doesn't seem to help a lot)? Personuser (talk) 05:24, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Just below the wikitext edit window there is a dropdown menu with choices Insert / Wiki markup / Symbols / Latin / Greek / ... After selecting Greek, this section expands to a Greek smorgasbord menu, and you can insert ᾧ or whatever diacritically challenged letter with just a single point and click.  --Lambiam 11:29, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the hint and the correction (I guess my Greek is more rusty than I thought). I also realized only later that the second part was the title/source. Personuser (talk) 14:56, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Ἡμεῖς is in the nominative case: "We [are] ten Rhodians, [we are] ten ships".  --Lambiam 11:43, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your helpful and learned replies. In addition, there are a number of refs in the notes on p. 254, which appear to confirm the quote and the Rhodians' nautical ability etc.: but I can't identify the second and third. Would anyone be able to help, please, just for my curiosity?

Apost. IX, 85. Arsen. 276. Adagium ex Hom. il. II, 653 sq. natum esse male cum Erasmo Schottus opinatur: ex Rhodiorum ingenio repetendum potius videtur: v. O. Muelleri Dorr. II, 413: adde, quod Rhodi machinarum bellicarum et armorium artificium egregie exercebatur: Diod. XX, 84. Strab. XIV, 2, 5 p. 65. Meursius de Rhodo I, c. 17 Opp. Omn. T. III, 725: succurrit denique explicationi nostrae aliud dictum proverbiale, quod a Rhodio gubernatore, ut narratur, exiit: etc. MinorProphet (talk) 14:38, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

References

Colonial fort quote

Does the following quote by former Mogadishu governor Caroselli say that the colonial era forts undermentioned are Dhulbahante forts: "i Dulbohanta nella maggior parte si sono arresi agli inglesi c han loro consegnato ventisette garese case ricolme di fucili, munizioni e danaro" ? Heesxiisolehh (talk) 11:26, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

This is a quote from his book Ferro e Fuoco in Somalia. I did not find an accessible version, but it seems that there are typos in the Italian text. I think c han should be c'han, and I have no idea what garese are; perhaps a local name for a (type of?) house. There is an Italian word garrese, but that does not make sense in the context. The quote says that the Dulbohanta (people) for the larger part have surrendered and have handed over twenty-seven garese houses. It does not refer to forts, unless the garese are fortified houses. "Garisa" is the name of a village in Somaliland.  --Lambiam 12:36, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

"garesa" (plural "garese") must be a type of fortification in that region, see Treccani's search links for "garesa" and "garese". ---Sluzzelin talk 12:44, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

That strange "c" is really a defective "e", meaning "and" in English. "Garese" is indeed the plural of "garesa", meaning "fort". The "garese case" part doesn't sound quite right in Italian. It would make sense if it was: "han loro consegnato ventisette garese, case ricolme di fucili, munizioni e danaro" = They have handed out to them twentyseven 'garese', houses full of rifles, ammunitions and money". Or even if it was "case-garese" = "houses-forts". Here you can see the text in Google Books: https://books.google.it/books?newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&id=n2wMAQAAIAAJ&dq=arresi+agli+inglesi+c+han+loro+consegnato+ventisette+garese&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=%22ventisette+garese%22 --95.246.53.249 (talk) 14:54, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

So if per @Sluzzelin: "garese" is the plural of "garesa" meaning fort, the full translation would become both house and fort, as in "house-fort", as follows: "the Dhulbahante have handed out to them twenty seven 'house-forts' full of rifles, ammunitions and money", correct? Heesxiisolehh (talk) 16:50, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

The text linked by the IP has some other oddities ("garese case) ricolme" and later "armti" instead of "armati"). I think the most probable meaning is either "forts, houses,etc..." or the house part clarifying what is a garesa ("forts (houses full of guns...)"). "Garesa" is described as a "forte" or even "castello" in Treccani (not quite a house), so I would propend for the first one. Garese being the plural of garesa and "c" being "e" is otherwise quite clear. If the money and ammunitions are different items in the list or something the houses were full of is also somewhat ambiguos due to the odd puctuation.Personuser (talk) 17:55, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

There may be an opening parenthesis missing; perhaps the text was ... garese (case) ricolme di ....  --Lambiam 20:07, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

I found a pdf of the cited book by Caroselli. It states they got permission from Naples University L'Orientale, which arguably may have better copyright practices than Google, anyway should be good for checking translations. Page 272 (as reported by Sayid Maxamed Cabdulle Xasan?), in the end part. Here's my reading: "i Dulbohanta nella maggior parte si sono arresi agli inglesi e han loro consegnato ventisette garese (case) ricolme di fucili, munizioni e danaro". So: "... handed out to them twentyseven 'garesas' (houses) full of rifles, ammunitions and money". "Garesa" seems a pretty specific/unusual term even in Italian; they seem to have a defensive purpose (and probably a local/Somalian connotation), but translating them directly as "forts" may not be the best choise. It seems Lambiam was right, I missed the comment before answering, probably there's also some OCR going on. This way is also clear the money was in the garese/garesas (not sure what's more appropriate in English) and not an additional item. Personuser (talk) 21:07, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

This is etymological speculation on my part, but perhaps there is some distant relation to the English (from French) "garrison". {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195) 2.122.0.58 (talk) 23:37, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Tribal signalling?

Is there a term for when people use pejorative language about someone else, but where they are, perhaps unintentionally or subconsciously, giving out information about their own identity (tribe). For example, when used pejoratively, describing someone or some people as "woke" or a "social justice warrior" or a "gammon" or a "wingnut". This signals not only that the other person or people are not members of my tribe, but also to listeners/readers who agree with the statement that they are members of my tribe. It goes further than an insult such as describing someone as "stupid" or "crazy" or "foolish". It isn't anything new: we've been doing it with pejorative racial terms which are far more obviously tribal in nature. -- Colin°^Talk 13:56, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Shibboleth is the first term I think of.. 70.67.193.176 (talk) 17:22, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Somewhat analogous to Tell (poker) in the language realm. I'm not sure there's any specific linguistic term for this, but according to our "Cant" article, "The term argot is also used to refer to the informal specialized vocabulary from a particular field of study, occupation, or hobby"... -- AnonMoos (talk) 18:41, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

The term "dog whistle" is used, particularly in the United States, to describe a related concept where the language used is superficially innocuous, but has an "in-group" meaning which may be pejorative about the in-group's opponents or targets. The article's See also section may give you some other leads. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.122.0.58 (talk) 23:30, 9 June 2021 (UTC)