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

February 24

Greek Terminology

Hi I have a question I came across Sigma Kappa Chi and the at the end __/ but that has a striaght line not slanted at the end I am thinking inverted gamma?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.220.9.61 (talk) 15:09, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

If this was on the web, could you please provide a link? -- Flyguy649 ^talk 15:18, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

For the sake of clarity, are you saying you saw the Greek letters sigma, kappa and chi followed by a symbol that looked like _| resembling an inverted upper-case gamma? Σ Κ Χ _| 86.176.48.127 (talk) 15:49, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

(_-|~33|< 1337? (greek 'leet?) --Polysylabic Pseudonym (talk) 07:25, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Vedda language

I expanded this article, I am not a trainned linguist. I would like some linguitss to take a look at it. Thanks Taprobanus (talk) 15:24, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Please post this request at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Languages, which is the appropriate venue for discussing collaboration on language articles. +Angr 15:54, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

"A Future Fair for All"

Isn't the new UK Labour slogan slightly strange? Wouldn't "A Future - Fair for All" or "A Fair Future for All" be better? --Non Zero-sum Ed (talk) 15:59, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

"A Future Fair for All" sounds more poetic to my Canadian ears, but I agree your suggestions seem clearer. Or maybe they are proposing that everyone can attend a carnival -- Flyguy649 ^talk 16:23, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

If only... :) - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 16:28, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

It's odd that they'd choose half a quote from a Firesign Theatre album. --LarryMac | Talk 16:26, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict)x2 I think your second suggestion is grammatically what they mean. I would then suggest they went with "a future fair for all" for stylistic reasons, given the commonness of the "* for all" mantra. - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 16:37, 24 February 2010 (UTC) (should be 16:28, sorry.)

On a further point, it's not new. It was used by Brown in 2003, which is mentioned here along with a point of view on the word choice. - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 19:07, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Fair can be a post-positive adjective, and Fair for All can be an adjectival phrase. -- Wavelength (talk) 16:56, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

At least they didn't say free for all.  :) Woogee (talk) 19:01, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

There is nothing wrong with the slogan — grammatically. It is on a par with All Creatures Great and Small: the predicative adjective is used when the relative pronoun and the copula (which plus are/is) are left out. Obviously, it might be objected that the sentence is homonymic, should readers be inclined to interpret fair as a noun. In spoken English, the homonymy disappears as sentence stress overrules the differences. Bessel Dekker (talk) 19:11, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

I suspect that the choice was made, at least in part, for rhythmic reasons—the plain iambic trimeter of "a future fair for all" sounds better than the stumbling "a fair future for all". Deor (talk) 19:13, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree. Bessel Dekker (talk) 19:55, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

The Australian national anthem is Advance Australia Fair. -- Wavelength (talk) 19:58, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

"A future fair for all" and "A fair future for all" have slightly different meanings, too. The former is talking about a single future that is fair for everyone. The latter could mean that or it could mean a different future for each person that is fair for them. In practice, there isn't much difference between the two, of course. --Tango (talk) 21:57, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Cangjie decomposition

Why does 肉 decompose as OBO rather than BOO? I understand the rule to be, go from the outer to the inner and the top to the bottom, but the B-component is outside (and above) the two O-components, isn't it? Or is the little flick on the top part of the O-element? I would appreciate help. Thanks! --Quentin Smith 19:19, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

肉 is 內 with an extra 人, basically, as far as decomposition is concerned. 內 has the radical 入 (OH) which has the same shape as 人 (O). 內 's Cangjie code is OB as the radical takes precedent. So logically 肉 would be OBO. --Kvasir (talk) 21:43, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

dash, hyphen or space?`

Resolved

 – ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 20:38, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Should the term provincially maintained have a hyphen or ndash between the words in the following sentence? Provincial Highway 3 is a provincially maintained highway in the Canadian province of Ontario.

Cheers - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 20:13, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

I would use a space. It certainly shouldn't be a dash. A dash is used to separate clauses in a sentence; a hyphen is used to join two words together. --Tango (talk) 20:22, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) No, the usual rule (as given in the Chicago Manual of Style and elsewhere) is that a modifier consisting of an adverb ending in -ly plus a participle requires no punctuation, so "provincially maintained highway" is OK as it stands. Deor (talk) 20:24, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Cool, I figured it may have been the opposite ("-ly" requiring a hyphen), but it's good to know I've been doing the right thing. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 20:38, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Non-ly adverbs are a different matter. Most style guides recommend a hyphen in expressions like "best-attested reading" so that the reader doesn't think that best is an adjective modifying attested reading rather than an adverb modifying attested. When the adverb ends in -ly, there's (usually) no chance of misreading, so no need for the hyphen. Deor (talk) 21:16, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Is there a word for an admiral's hat?

In olden times, admirals wore a distinctive hat, such as the one worn by Lord Nelson in File:HoratioNelson1.jpg.

Is there a word for this kind of hat, besides "admiral's hat"?

Thanks, --ESP (talk) 23:36, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

I believe that particular hat is a bicorne (or perhaps a tricorne), though its use was not limited to admirals or navy personnel. If not, there is a list of hats where one might find a more accurate or specific term, though the descriptions there are rather meagre. Intelligentsium 23:47, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Cocked hat[1] is the term you're looking for. A name probably used to good effect in a Carry On Film. Alansplodge (talk) 09:36, 25 February 2010 (UTC) I found this picture of King George VI wearing one in 1937[2]. Alansplodge (talk) 11:17, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks all! Bicorne and "Cocked Hat" seem right on the money! --24.203.218.162 (talk) 16:17, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

February 25

indulgent

I've been listening to Simon Cowell on Idols for years, and he often describes performances/performers as indulgent. I know the meaning of the word - "to gratify the wishes of others" - but what does Simon mean? Is he referring to the singer playing to the judges or the audience? Is he referring to them singing a 'safe' song? Or is there some deeper meaning that I seem to be missing? Sandman30s (talk) 12:50, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Are you a personal friend of Mr. Cowell? First name terms? 84.13.26.33 (talk) 00:23, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

. . .or is Simon Cowell using English in an idiosyncratic way that makes his meaning hard to understand. 86.4.186.107 (talk) 12:56, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps he's using it to mean "self-indulgent"? (I've never seen any of his shows, so I don't know the contexts where he uses it.) +Angr 13:01, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Unlike Angr, I have occasionally seen his shows, may God forgive me. And Angr is bang on in his guess: Cowell does indeed say indulgent when he actually means self-indulgent, one of his many, many irritating mannerisms. Maid Marion (talk) 14:17, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

'indulgent is sometimes used to mean 'emotionally indulgent' - like a mother who coddles a spoiled, bratty child. He might be implying that someone ruins the music by allowing too much expressiveness - closer in that sense to 'effulgent'. --Ludwigs2 14:56, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Usage changes, and this seems like a reasonable adjustment of usage to me. The meaning is relatively clear (OP notwithstanding); he means self-indulgent. Just as "Irregardless" is a perfectly cromulent (if irritating) word.Aaronite (talk) 19:46, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

If it irritates, then it's obviously not "perfectly" anything - except irritating. It's not in any dictionary I'm aware of. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 20:11, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

If it irritates, perhaps it is perfectly irritating. Nonetheless, Merriam-Webster sees fit to put it in their online dictionary - http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/irregardless --LarryMac | Talk 20:54, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Mm, I did say it was perfectly irritating. M-W put it in only to shoot it down in flames - "nonstandard"; "still a long way from general acceptance". It's an example of a "word" not to use. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 21:01, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the answers. Cromulent? I had to look that up... a slang word for "acceptable" - interesting, even if it was a little unnecessary. It's fine to say "perfectly fine". Sandman30s (talk) 07:00, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

"It's a perfectly cromulent word" is a quote from the Simpsons, where the speaker was referring to the word embiggen. Since embiggen is also "not a real word" (at least, it wasn't until that episode aired), calling a word "perfectly cromulent" is an ironic way of seeming to say it's perfectly fine while tacitly acknowledging that, like embiggen, it's nothing of the sort. And cromulent itself is, of course, a perfectly cromulent word. (See Lisa the Iconoclast#Embiggen and cromulent.) If Aaronite had said "it's a perfectly fine word", that irony, and indeed the full range of connotation, would have been lost. +Angr 08:40, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

harbour-bar

In this sentence from Treasure Island -- "Underneath there was an old boat-cloak whitened with sea-salt on many a harbour-bar" -- does bar mean anything other than the counter in a pub? Many thanks for help. --Omidinist (talk) 15:37, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Sandbar. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 15:42, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

I hope Tennyson wasn't talking about leaving the pub! :-) [3] Alansplodge (talk) 15:57, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Tennyson is talking metaphorically about death (crossing the bar) and meeting God ("the Pilot"). ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:15, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

I know - it was a joke - hence the smiley face Alansplodge (talk) 18:20, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

This definitely has nothing to do with pubs. Many harbors have a bar of sand, gravel, or some other kind of sediment that partly block access to the sea and help to protect the harbor from large waves and swells. The town of Bar Harbor was named for such a harbor bar. Marco polo (talk) 16:58, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

There's a drinking song from the early 1900s that has several double-meaning terms. It's called "I've Been Floating Down the Old Green River" (Green River was a whisky brand) and one of the lines is "I got stuck on a bar". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:20, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Green River is also a soft drink developed before Prohibition. Rmhermen (talk) 04:19, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Standard american english

I would like to know the defintion of Standard American English. I have looked online and never seem to find a direct answer and also when to use it?? I did find out that it is using manners and being polite when writing or talking to others but want to know more!! Thank you 72.173.248.35 (talk) 19:14, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

No, it has nothing specifically to do with being polite or using manners. People who are being very impolite and ill-mannered can be using Standard American English. This is covered in Wikipedia at General American. Check it out and come back if you have any more questions. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 20:55, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Actually, Standard American English isn't necessarily synonymous with GA. GA is about pronunciation while Standard English is about grammar. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi]} 23:59, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

I did wonder about that, but then Standard American English redirects to the link I provided. Maybe that should be reconsidered. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 00:15, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

"Standard American English" is the version of American English that is taught in schools and used in most written publications. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 00:37, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, "Standard American English" is primarily a form of the written language. Basically, it avoids slang, follows rules of prescriptive grammar (a few of which differ from those of British English), and uses American English spelling. You can be impolite using Standard American English (SAE), though profanities would not be standard. It works to your advantage to use SAE for formal, business, and professional communication in the United States. It probably works to your disadvantage when talking to friends. Marco polo (talk) 01:53, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Just an observation: The WP article Standard Written English is one of the most unfocused grab-bags I've seen here (other than lists of the "in popular culture" type). Deor (talk) 02:21, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Why do women say girlfriend?

Men never say boyfriend, and it's usually not needed in the conversation, as in, "my girlfriends and me went and saw 27 dresses." I doubt any guys would be involved, but even if they were, so what? Aaronite (talk) 19:41, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

I wonder about the same thing too. Men never say: "I went with a bunch of boyfriends to see the football game." Substituting with "guy friends" is more plausible but it's still rarely heard. --Kvasir (talk) 20:59, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

A man's "boyfriend" has a homosexual connotation, while a woman's "girlfriend" doesn't. Men have "buddies" or "chums"; it strikes me that I can't think of a female equivalent off the top of my head. Go figure. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:07, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Well, that i know, even bromance relationships can't escape rumours. I think the question here is why women feel they need to specify the gender of their friends. --Kvasir (talk) 22:36, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

In England, men have "mates" rather than "buddies". (Does anyone now have "chums"?) Ghmyrtle (talk) 23:09, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Not that I've heard of for a very long time, and then only in a certain social register. Any male who refers to his "chums" these days would be speaking intentionally jocularly, or would be considered some kind of time traveller from the 1910s. Or would be that nerdy obese kid with the high-pitched voice from The Simpsons. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 23:37, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

You mean Martin Prince? I don't think he's supposed to be obese; all the boys in the Simpsons are kind of thick around the middle, but Martin is no fatter than Bart or Milhouse. Üter is the obese one. +Angr 23:49, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, Martin. I retract my outrageous slur against him. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 00:13, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Language is weird. There isn't necessarily a reason for it, it just happens. --Tango (talk) 22:12, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Is this an English language issue or an Anglo-American cultural issue?

Women talk of their "girlfriends" while men don't say "boyfriends"/"menfriends"

Women clubbing go to the toilet in pairs/groups which men don't

Women much more often hold hands/embrace/kiss their "girlfriends" than men (except on the sports field)

So broadly, women are less insistent than men on separating their "friend" behaviour from their "couple" behaviour. Sussexonian (talk) 22:31, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't know it happens in other languages. It's not heard in Chinese, for example, where "boyfriend" and "girlfriend" carry rommantic connotations. So the expression used in the OP isn't a cultural thing. I'm not sure it's in other English dialects either.

But yeah, women go to toilets together across many cultures. --Kvasir (talk) 22:36, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

German does the same thing as English here, with the added difficulty that there are no words for "girlfriend" and "boyfriend" distinct from the words for "friend (female)" and "friend (masculine/generic)". If you use the words "Freundin" (feminine) and "Freund" (masculine) with a possessive pronoun or a noun in the genitive, they'll be interpreted as "girlfriend" and "boyfriend": "meine Freundin" = "my girlfriend", "Petras Freund" = "Petra's boyfriend", "die Freundin von meinem Onkel" = "my uncle's girlfriend". If you want to avoid romantic implications, you have to use paraphrases like "a friend of mine" or synonyms like "buddy, pal" or even "colleague". However, as in English, women can say "meine Freundin" to refer to a good female friend without any romantic implications, but a man would never refer to a male friend as "mein Freund" unless he was nonheterosexual and actually referring to his (romantic-relationship) boyfriend. +Angr 22:56, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Women going to the toilet with friends, and men not has a perfectly rational explanation. Men's toilets rarely do, but women's toilets often have queues. It's nice to have a friend to talk to while waiting for the loo. --Polysylabic Pseudonym (talk) 06:22, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

In this specific situation, I'd say that specifying girlfriends here is making it clear that it wasn't a date with a boy. If she just said "I went to the movies with a friend," the implication is that it was a 'special friend'. If a man said the same thing, for some reason (convention, probably) it doesn't have that implication. Steewi (talk) 23:55, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

The words manfriend and womanfriend are more accurate in reference to adults. -- Wavelength (talk) 00:35, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

When a woman says "girlfriend(s)", typically she's referring to female friends that are especially close, kinda like sisters. The long-time WGN radio mid-morning "Kathy and Judy Show" was called by the name they called themselves, "The Girlfriends".[4] When either a man or woman says "boyfriend", it implies a dating relationship. Friend, pal, buddy/bud, chum/chummer - all can be used for same-sex or opposite sex in a platonic sense, and can also be used derisively for someone who is not at all a friend. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:28, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Mosophiles

What is Mosophiles?174.3.99.176 (talk) 21:21, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

The word gets very few google hits, and those it does get seem mostly to refer to microorganisms or snails. In the context you linked to, the only thing I can think of is that it's a sarcastic reference to Jews, suggesting that they love Moses rather than Jesus, but I have absolutely no idea if that's right. +Angr 21:34, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

I think it's a typo for "Moscophiles". See the first sentence of Ukrainian Russophiles, as well as the section Russophiles, Moscophiles or Russians?. Deor (talk) 21:38, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

That sounds way more plausible than my suggestion. +Angr 22:58, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Schmazi ?

In his song Werner von Braun, Tom Lehrer says :

Call him a Nazi, he won't even frown

"Ha, Nazi schmazi," says Wernher von Braun

What does "schmazi" mean ?

Thanks in advance !

Remi Mathis (talk) 21:25, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

See shm-reduplication. Its Yiddish origins make it particularly ironic in this conext. +Angr 21:27, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! It's the kind of expression which is hard to understand (and find on the Internet) when you're not an English-speaker native...

Remi Mathis (talk) 21:37, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

I wonder where the "schm-" comes from. The only online source for our article, the Zuckermann paper, only mentions in passing that it "is traceable back to Yiddish", but doesn't give any example, nor an explanation how it got into Yiddish in the first place. — Sebastian 22:32, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Reduplication#English says that it began in New York City. -- Wavelength (talk) 22:45, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

It's probably borrowed from words like schmuck and schmutz and schmaltz; words starting in schm are rarely about nice, pleasant things in Yiddish. it might be that there's a common 'schm' root word that means something like 'oily' or 'greasy'. --Ludwigs2 23:11, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Well, "schmuck" originally meant "jewel", as Schmuck in German still does, and "schmaltz" does refer to grease. But I think it's just coincidence, from an etymological point of view, that these words begin with "schm-". I don't know whether shm-reduplication occurs within Yiddish itself, or only in English (originally English in contact with Yiddish). +Angr 23:30, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Leo Rosten's The Joys of Yiddish, which unfortunately is no longer in print, also unfortunately gives no conclusive etymology. He does note that a number of disparaging terms in Yiddish start with the "sh"/"sch" sound, and refers to this kind of reduplicative usage as "Yinglish", meaning it's a bit of both. In addition to the ones listed above, using the spelling Rosten prefers, there is also "shikker" (drunk/drunkard), "shiksa" (non-Jewish or non-pious woman), "shlemiel" (clumsy fool), "shlep" (to drag), "shlimazl" (born loser), "shlock" (cheaply made), "shlub" (inept, clumsy), "shlump" (slovenly or unpleasant), "shmatte" (shoddy), "shmeer" (bribe, among other things), "shmegegge" ("cross between a shlemiel and a shlemazl"), "shmendrick" (henpecked man), "shnorrer" (freeloader, moocher), "shtup" (screw), "shtuss" (nonsense, commotion), "shvitzer" (braggart). Replacing the rhyming part with the "sch" sound disparages the first part. The one I've probably heard most often is "fancy-shmancy". An example given in the book, which coincidentally was the title of one of Fran Drescher's books, is "cancer-s(c)hmancer", a much worse case than "virus-shmirus". Putting down a civic leader: "Mayor-shmayor". He gives a few more examples like that. Lehrer of course was being ironic, as Angr notes - it's highly unlikely a Nazi would use a Yiddish expression. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:54, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I would certainly not consider "fancy schmancy" to be derogatory -- that might be a unique counterexample. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 01:00, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

"Fancy-shmancy" is a way of saying something is way too fancy or high-falutin'.[5] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:01, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Probably only loosely related to Lehrer's source of inspiration (though who knows, and this makes the line even more biting and funny to me :-): In German the verb "schmatzen" means to make a smacking sound with one's lips, particularly while kissing or eating. "Schmatz!" is comic book onomatopoeia for that same sound, and "Schmatzi" looks like a likely cutesy handle of endearment, like Mausi or Froschi, or Schatzi without the letter "m". Schmatzi wouldn't quite rhyme with Nazi though. ---Sluzzelin talk 01:16, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

It would, actually. Presumably the right way to say "Nazi" is "NAH-zee". However, in the USA at least, it's typically pronounced "NOT-see". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:19, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I guess what I meant is that, in German, "Schmatzi" would be pronounced with a shorter "a" than "Nazi". ---Sluzzelin talk 01:25, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I heard someone use "shvitzer" to mean a person who sweats a lot Rimush (talk) 15:19, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

That's what it means literally. Yiddish takes a lot of words from Hebrew, German, Russian and even English, and puts their own twist on them. As with the well-known "schmuck", which actually means "ornament" or "jewel" (as in "family jewels"?) and its G-rated euphemisms such as "schmo". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:55, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

(OR here) The Polish equivalent is a sr-reduplication where the sr- or sra- prefix is obviously taken from the verb srać, "to shit". It's more offensive and less common than the shm-reduplication in English, but I suppose there must have been some linguistic exchange between Polish and Yiddish speakers here, although I can't tell who borrowed from whom. — Kpalion^(talk) 16:32, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Maybe the sch... comes from the German Scheiss? (Does Yiddisch have this word?) 195.35.160.133 (talk) 12:36, 2 March 2010 (UTC) Martin.

February 26

Scottish_Café

What is the etymology of Scottish?174.3.99.176 (talk) 00:26, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

"Scot/Scottish" comes from the Latin "Scoti", which was the Romans' term for the peoples who called themselves the Gaels. "Scotia" thus means "Scotland", and the Canadian province called "Nova Scotia" means "New Scotland". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:12, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Baseball Bugs is right about that. The -ish in Scottish of course does not come from Gaelic or Latin but is an English (Germanic) ending meaning something like "belonging to". The root, Scot, is from the Latin Scoti. As you will see if you go to the article that BB linked, we really don't know the etymology of that Latin name. Marco polo (talk) 01:18, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes. In effect, these words are mixed metaphors: "Scotland" and "Scottish" combine Latin prefixes with Germanic suffixes. To make it pure Latin, it should probably be "Scotia" and "Scotus". The English suffix "-ish" and presumably the German suffix "-isch" come from the Anglo-Saxon "-isc". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:56, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

German -isch is from Anglo-Saxon? Cognate, shurely. -- the Great Gavini 06:51, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

But this is in Ukraine.174.3.99.176 (talk) 03:16, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, and Harry's New York Bar is in Paris and the Russian Tea Room is in New York City. Deor (talk) 03:27, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

So was this cafe founded by a Scot?174.3.99.176 (talk) 03:55, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I googled ["scottish cafe" poland] and got many sites basicially repeating the same info as the wikipedia article. Hard telling who stole from who. But nothing indicating the origins of the cafe itself. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:28, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I couldn't find anything about the origin of the café's name in online Polish sources either. I found one article devoted entirely to pre-war Leopolitan cafés, but all its author says about the name of Kawiarnia Szkocka is that he doesn't know where its came from, but it was only one of many joints in Lwów with "international" names like Roma, Palermo or Wiedeńska (Viennese Café). It's possible that it was founded by a Scottish immigrant, but even more likely that it was set up by a Polish enthusiast of Scotch whisky. — Kpalion^(talk) 08:09, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Ossolineum

What is the etymology of "Ossolineum"?174.3.99.176 (talk) 00:43, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

You were just editing that article! It's for some guy named Ossolinksi or some such. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:03, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

If you're curious about the suffix, presumably this name is a variant on Mausoleum. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:04, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Or Museum. Marco polo (talk) 01:20, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Yep. I was trying to locate the meaning of that "-eum" suffix, and I couldn't find anything, but I assume it means "place" or "repository" or something like that. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:40, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

What both mausoleum and museum have in common (with Ossolineum), is the -eum ending, a Latinized form of the Greek -είον suffix, a suffix indicating an institution. Marco polo (talk) 01:46, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Possibly also Colosseum. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:00, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

That Ossolinski guy had a diacritic. Far fetch to the nominal name.174.3.99.176 (talk) 03:18, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Yeh, there was a mark over one of the letters. I don't get the "far fetch" part of your comment. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:22, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

What I mean it's a far jump from the nominal name.174.3.99.176 (talk) 00:10, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't get it either. It derives from Ossoliński plus the Latin suffix -eum, itself, as Marco wrote, of Greek origin. The resulting word is supposed to look Latin, so the diacritic got lost in the process (besides, in Polish you can't have an ń before a vowel; and the alternative, *Ossolinieum, probably just wouldn't sound right). The Ossoliński family got their name from the village of Ossolin plus the Polish adjectival suffix -ski. — Kpalion^(talk) 07:35, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Edit Summary Abbreviation

Does the abbreviation in this edit summary mean "common error"?174.3.99.176 (talk) 02:52, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

"ce" generally means copyediting. --71.111.229.19 (talk) 02:56, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

See WP:GLOSSARY. Deor (talk) 02:58, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia:Edit summary legend. --Kusunose 05:22, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Tonal language with guttural sounds?

Does Mandarin have any sounds that could be described as 'guttural'? I overheard someone speaking a language that was obviously tonal, but didn't really sound like what I associated with Chinese (sorry if guttural isn't a correct / precise term). 149.169.106.34 (talk) 04:04, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Mandarin has only one sound that could be described as "guttural" -- a very strong "h" sound. This sound is often as light as the h in English "helmet" or "heavy." In some speakers, however, the sound can be pronounced very strong, as in German/Scottish/Russian (i.e. "ch" in Bach or Loch, etc.) --71.111.229.19 (talk) 04:11, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Some people consider Korean "guttural", and it has some dialects (such as the Kyongsang dialect) that are tonal. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 04:21, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

A strong candidate would be the Vietnamese language, which has several velar and glottal consonants, as well as the creaky voice phenomenon as part of its tonal system. Marco polo (talk) 17:54, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Interesting--perhaps creaky voice could contribute to that perception? Never thought of it but it may be possible. In any case, I guess we assume the OP was overhearing persons of Asian descent? Otherwise perhaps the language in question could be African. . .--Dpr (talk) 18:07, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Many Chinese languages have the h sound (linguists consider them guttural) and all are tonal: Cantonese, Wu, Taiwanese etc. --Kvasir (talk) 19:25, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Some Chinese dialects have growled vowels (selected tonally), notably Zhenhai (near Ningbo), though this is becoming less common. Steewi (talk) 00:17, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

"Sans"

In American English writing, is the word "sans" italicized? I looked in my AP style-book, but I couldn't find anything. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.16.91.212 (talk) 04:37, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

It's listed as a regular word in my 1960 Webster's. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:21, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

And has been since at least the 14th century. 114.162.51.169 (talk) 06:35, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I've always known the word to be French, and convention is to italicized non-English words in written English. Capisce? DOR (HK) (talk) 08:25, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Not necessarily. Words that were borrowed a long time ago and have become relatively Anglicized are not always italicization, and in fact some people find italicization of such words annoying and some writing courses recommend against it. For instance, I get miffed when people italicize "i.e." and "e.g.", not to mention more everyday words like "rendez-vous". rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 16:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I usually follow a simpe rule of thumb to italicize those words which are still not Anglicized enough to pronounce them like English words and whose pronunciation is typically an attempt to imitate that in the original language. Therefore, I would not italicize "e.g.", "i.e." or "sans", but I would "rendez-vous" (still pronounced "randey voo" in English). — Kpalion^(talk) 17:15, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Not used so much in the USA anymore, but usually pronounced "RON-day-voo", as in Reagan, 1/7th of a week, and "voo". Except for Bugs Bunny, who pronounces it as it's spelled: "REN-deez-vooz". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:12, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

The italicization of i.e. and e.g. is often done to comply with specific requirements of legal style, at least in the US--see Bluebook.--Dpr (talk) 18:10, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Pronouncing them like English words: do you rhyme sans with "banns" or "dons", then? Marnanel (talk) 17:39, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Even if you rhyme it with "dons" (pronouncing it [sɑns]), that's still quite a ways from the French pronunciation [sɑ̃]. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 17:42, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

The French pronunciation is irrelevant, it's not a French word (it just happens to be spelt the same as its French translation). It entered English from Old French (at least according to wikt:sans). You should compare the English pronunciation to the Old French one, if you can find out what it was. --Tango (talk) 21:13, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Probably close to half the words in this section are from Latin via French, and we English speakers butcher all of them. No different with "sans". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:51, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

But who goes around regularly using the word "sans" when they mean "without"? You hear it very occasionally, but it's far from what I'd call a standard element of the English language: Words sans vowels? No, I didn't think so. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 20:45, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

It's peculiarity adds emphasis that would not exist if you simply used "without". Just because it is less common doesn't mean it isn't standard english. —Akrabbim^talk 20:50, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I really dispute that. If I started using 'sans' instead of 'without' around here, I have full confidence that it would be commented on, probably in quite negative terms. Outside of here, hardly anyone would even know what the *** I was talking about. My dictionary describes it as "Archaic or French". -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 23:14, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

While it does happen to appear in French, "archaic" is the more relevant description. Just because it is archaic doesn't mean it isn't part of English - your dictionary would probably either not include it or describe it as "obsolete" if it had ceased to be part of the language. --Tango (talk) 00:02, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Experience shows that we can have archaic and edit too. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:25, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

As Jaques says in his "All the world's a stage" speech: "Last scene of all, / That ends this strange eventful history, / Is second childishness and mere oblivion, / Sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everything." Deor (talk) 22:10, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Verily. But the use of a word by that English writer does not ipso facto make it an English word. He used all manner of foreign words in his writings, as have very many other English writers. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 23:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Be careful what doors you open: "Jamison, take a letter... To my lawyer, Hon. Charles H. Hungadunga, in care of Hungadunga, Hungadunga, Hungadunga, Hungadunga and MacCormick;, Gentleman-?-(harumph) In re yours of the fifth inst., yours to hand and beg to rep, [ that we have gone over the ground carefully and we seem to believe, i.e., to wit, e.g., in lieu, that despite all our precautionary measures which have been involved, we seem to believe that it is hardly necessary for us to proceed unless we receive an ipso facto that is not negligible at this moment - quotes, unquotes, in quotes ... That's three quotes? Add another quote and make it a gallon ... Hoping this finds you, I beg to remain, as of June 9th, cordially yours, regards." -- Groucho in Animal Crackers.start about 1:30 ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:52, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

I wasn't claming that my use of 'ipso facto' ipso facto makes either of those words English, either. I guess that's the point here. In some cases, the words we use have been borrowed from other languages and have become fully English words. But in other cases, they remain foreign words. What makes the difference? Prevalence of usage would have a lot to do with it, I'd say. 'Cafe' is now a fully English word; but 'sans' - uh huh. I seem to be out of kilter with lexicographers here, but I've always marched to a different drum. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 06:19, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

On only a slightly more serious note, I've usually seen "sans" used in a way to be cute, as with Leonard Maltin's Movie Guide, discussing Paradise: "Silly Blue Lagoon ripoff, with Willie Aames and Phoebe Cates discovering sex while stranded in the desert. Both, however, do look good sans clothes." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:06, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

The pairing "sans clothes" in particular is unusually common, more so than most other "sans X" phrases. It even has an entry on Urban Dictionary (although given the level to which UD has sunk in the past several years, that's saying much). I would imagine that, as you suggest, this is to take a comment that otherwise smacks of dirty old man ("without clothes!"), and reappropriate it into something witty and innocent. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 04:20, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, that seems to be the case. Another example of the use of "sans" is the typeface called "sans-serif", although I'm not sure a word like that is necessarily assumed to be pure English. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:09, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

archived

archiving troll magnet question
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
how do you call the inhabitants of the country Niger and the inhabitants of the country Nigeria? What is the difference between negro and nigger? Why are some of these words offensive and the others are not? --95.89.49.79 (talk) 06:26, 26 February 2010 (UTC) The article Nigger has plenty of information on this word. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 06:35, 26 February 2010 (UTC) 1) Nigerien (IPA /niːˈʒɛərɪən/ approx. "nee-ZHER-ee-an") for Niger, and Nigerian (IPA: /naɪˈdʒɪərɪən/ approx. "nye-JEER-ee-an") for Nigeria. For Q2-3 see respective articles, as Rjanag said. -- the Great Gavini 06:38, 26 February 2010 (UTC) (EC) People from Niger = Nigeriens (or Nigerois); the g is as in French, like z in azure. People from Nigeria = Nigerians. -- Flyguy649 talk 06:42, 26 February 2010 (UTC) See also List of adjectival and demonymic forms of place names. -- Wavelength (talk) 15:41, 26 February 2010 (UTC) Does that list tell you what you should call women from the island of Lesbos? Googlemeister (talk) 19:35, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Whatever happened to Wikipedia:Assume good faith? --Nricardo (talk) 01:16, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

What does this mean?

Mr. Manmohan Singh occupies a most grudged post in the world. He is the Prime Minister of India. India is a democracy.

Can somebody please explain the meaning of the first sentence of an editorial I quoted here?--Stylishwit (talk) 08:09, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

It's not correct English. You wouldn't ever use "grudged" in that context and the construction "a most x post in the world" doesn't make sense either. I think what the writer is saying is that it's a very difficult post in which the PM can be the subject of many grudges, i.e. can be widely disliked and blamed for everything, since India is the world's largest democracy. But if that is indeed the meaning, the sentence needs rewriting. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 10:02, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Could he have meant that it is an enviable post? Something that you grudge or begrudge is that which you prefer to keep for yourself, isn't it? --Stylishwit (talk) 15:50, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Freedictionary/The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, gives "grudged" as meaning the same as "begrudged", i.e. "resented for having" [6], example "grudged him his good ways with the children". --Normansmithy (talk) 16:39, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Btw, the editorial in question appeared here.--Stylishwit (talk) 16:26, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I wondered if it might be Indian English. I don't know whether it is normal in Indian English or not, but I think Richardrj is being incautious in his absolute statements, unless he is familiar with Indian English. --ColinFine (talk) 18:50, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

No, not in Indian English of which I am a user. --Stylishwit (talk) 05:53, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

However, journalistic language in almost any variety of English is sure to be more free-wheeling than daily parlance.--Dpr (talk) 13:33, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

The question finally boils down to whether the author conveys any sense that is unmistakable. Does he? I still cannot so much as say if he is speaking good or bad of the 'post'. Attributing journalistic language to this author is moot. His language is violently vituperative. Just look at the paragraph starting with "I am sorry, Prime Minister, I must call you a liar"here. --Stylishwit (talk) 18:43, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

German Streik and Streit

Are these two German words, meaning "strike" (in the industrial sense) and "dispute" respectively, etymologically related? It seems interesting that in English a strike is often referred to as an industrial dispute. Are the two German words similarly interchangeable? --Richardrj ^{talk email} 10:05, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Streik is just a loanword from English strike. Streit is etymologically unrelated to it. The English word strife is also unrelated despite its dispute-related meaning. +Angr 10:50, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

context is an indespensible deternimant of meaning in a text, justify this against cognitive and referential interpretation

context is an indespensible deternimant of meaning in a text, justify this against cognitive and referential interpretation —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.29.217.2 (talk) 16:12, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, the Reference Desk will not do your homework for you. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 16:14, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I did a Google search for the heading of this section. Google corrected the spelling to "context is an indispensable determinant of meaning in a text, justify this against cognitive and referential interpretation", and it found 154,000 search results, but not with that exact string of words. -- Wavelength (talk) 16:25, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

A "Carnac" idea:

--Deternimant.

--What does de NCAA call de "March Madness"?

←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:48, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Empty Set

What does ∅ mean in Continuous casting?174.3.99.176 (talk) 19:57, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

That symbol doesn't seems to appear in that linked article. Where did you see it used? You might be better off on the Science desk. --Tango (talk) 20:02, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

It appears in the image caption. It means diameter. ---Sluzzelin talk 20:24, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Diameter#Diameter symbol says "The symbol or variable for diameter is similar in size and design to ø, the Latin small letter o with stroke." -- Wavelength (talk) 21:04, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

In case anyone was wondering about this question's title: ∅ redirects to empty set. The section Wavelength quoted has now been linked to the top of that article. ---Sluzzelin talk 22:32, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I didn't know the two symbcls were typographically distinct. Ø (disambiguation) has yet more similar looking ones. ---Sluzzelin talk 22:52, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Question about Death Comes as The End

Who are the characters in death comes as the end?

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Esetak (talk • contribs) 20:17, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

(changed title to something meaningful). Please refer to our cleverly named article Death Comes as the End and come back if you have additional questions. --LarryMac | Talk 20:48, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Main diff

Whas main diff tween frogs and toads? It said on tv there was no diff? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.76.231.32 (talk) 21:20, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Our toad article talks about this right at the top of the article. (Curiously, its information seems to differ a bit from the information at the top of the frog article.) Comet Tuttle (talk) 21:37, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

frogs taste better, but are harder to catch. --Ludwigs2 00:02, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Well the main difference is their appearance. I think I saw the tv documentary you are referring to. What was meant is that there is no formal distinction; the words frog and toad are not scientific terms. As those articles note, the difference is, for the most part, a somewhat subjective one.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 06:55, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

[The following was written a couple of days ago, before this question was temporarily deleted.]

You might also like to know that a number of species, genera, or families within the Order Anura whose common names include 'toad' might more properly be considered frogs. (There may be instances of the opposite case, though I can't cite one).

If you inspect the List of Anuran families, and further click and inspect the suborders and families listed in it, you will see how names including 'frog' or 'toad' are mixed without strict regard to taxonomy, all 3 sub-orders including both 'frogs' and 'toads': of the Order's 29(?) families, only Family Bufonidae or "True toads" consists entirely of "toad" species.

Of course, Anuran taxonomy is not yet settled: there is probably no obvious single physical or behavioural characteristic that infallibly distinguishes all 'frogs' from all 'toads', further research will doubtless cause further rearrangements, and new species are being discovered all the time. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 18:38, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Demonyms

This may be a stupid question, but I was wondering whether there are any rules for forming city demonyms in English. The article on demonyms simply describes and lists common adjectives derived from city names and the ways in which they were formed, but it doesn't say anything about ways of forming new ones. For instance, I was wondering whether Zagrebian could be used for a native of Zagreb, and even though it sounds clumsy wiktionary says it's ok (though I doubt I'll every use it). But what about cities such Split, Rijeka or Osijek or Dubrovnik? (In the cases of Zagreb and Osijek German demonyms Agramer and Esseker are sometimes used in Croatia, but they are considered somewhat archaic). Are people from Dubrovnik Dubrovnikians or Dubrovnikers (or perhaps Ragusans as it used to be called Ragusa)? So are there any rules that one could use when one would want to use demonyms for places without an existing historical demonym in English? Or is the whole idea irrelevant as demonyms themselves seem to be getting less and less popular, as it seems (at least to my non-native ears) that in English they carry a connotation which is more than merely being from a certain place, but rather identifying with it? Which then brings us back to the beginning because if this is true, then demonyms are necessary to convey the idea and are not merely just another way of saying that a certain person is from a certain place? Which then could mean that they in fact are irrelevant because if there is no cultural experience to draw from in the English language world, than any reference to it is itself irrelevant (for example New Yorker carries a certain connotation which is probably somewhat different than merely person from New York City, while on the other hand a Washingtonian (assuming that is an existing word) doesn't mean much more other than designating somebody's origin, which makes the word unnecessary)? I don't know if this makes any sense, I need someone to clarify this. Any thoughts? Timbouctou (talk) 22:45, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

As should be clear from that article, there is absolutely no consistency about how demonyms are formed. If you don't know the appropriate demonym for a particular place, it is probably best to avoid using one. --Tango (talk) 00:06, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

This is a timely reminder that my question @ Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2009 September 23#Melbourne > Melburnian remains unanswered. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 00:45, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

In that discussion, you mentioned your interest in knowing when Melburnian was first used and by whom, for which I recommend

Google News Archive Search for help in approaching the answers. -- Wavelength (talk) 02:07, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't think that's a stupid question at all. It's just that it doesn't have a straight-forward answer. Consider "Liverpudlian" - that just plain makes no goddamn linguistic sense at all. I would in your place, when speaking English, avoid demonyms stemming from history if English history books have not recorded them extensively - hence, Agramer or Ragusan doesn't sound acceptable to me in English even if I personally know where they come from (no less than Laibacher sounds acceptable to me in English for my own birthplace in my own similarly Austrian influenced country, or Oberburger for my own village I grew up in.) Rather than looking for historical demonyms, you should look for what sounds most natural in English, IMO. In most cases that's "-ian", "-an" or "-er", as far as I can tell. TomorrowTime (talk) 04:13, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

I think the answer is that there is no straightforward answer. What are the inhabitants of Birmingham called? Well it's not "Birminghamians" or "Birminghamers" - it's "Brummies"! The inhabitants of Newcastle upon Tyne are called "Geordies". There is no real name for the inhabitants of Leeds, unless it's "Loiners": "Leodensians" refers to alumni of the grammar school. And who decided that the inhabitants of Glasgow should be "Glaswegians"? --TammyMoet (talk) 09:37, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

"Glasgow" apparently means "green field", implying the best growing land on an estate. Citizens of Galway are Galwegians. Citizens of Norway are Norwegians. (The "weg" suffix is the Anglo-Saxon root for the English "way", which remains "Weg" in German.) So one would think Glasgow should have been "Glasway", but no. However, "Glasgow" comes from some typically unpronounceable Celtic word, so all bets are off. The Newcastle article explains theories about "Geordies", which has nothing to do with the word "Newcastle". Sorta like calling Americans "Yanks". The original name of Leeds was "Loidis", not too far removed from "Loiners", which is probably a better choice than "Loiderers". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:31, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Tim, I concur with TomorrowTime—it's not a stupid question. The simple answer, though, is there is no reliable rule. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 05:47, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

"Capitalization"

Is it:

He complimented Van Heflin for "Stealing every scene he was is in". or

He complimented Van Heflin for "stealing every scene he was is in".

when the quote is from the beginning of a sentence? Clarityfiend (talk) 22:38, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

In my opinion, it would be the latter, because the quote is not a full quote and is incorporated into the sentence. It should be capitalized if you refer to the words of the quote itself rather than to the meaning of the quote. Intelligentsium 22:43, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I prefer the second, but when in doubt you can always do "[s]tealing every scene he was in" to remove ambiguity. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 23:53, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

The latter, almost certainly. It wouldn't have been capitalised in the original unless it was a rather strange sentence structure. --Tango (talk) 00:10, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Huh? The sentence began "Stealing every scene he is [sic] in, Heflin won the Supporting Actor Oscar ... " Clarityfiend (talk) 02:23, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Ok, so it was a strange sentence structure. A more conventional structure would be either "By stealing..., Helfin..." or "Helfin... by stealing...". --Tango (talk) 04:32, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

It's not that strange...it's a nominative absolute, or at least it's trying to be. Adam Bishop (talk) 11:47, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

((edit conflict)) On Wikipedia, it loses the capital, as stated explicitly in WP:MOSQUOTE. Elsewhere the style rules could be different. I would not use a capital myself. --ColinFine (talk) 00:12, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Retaining the capital is definitely wrong. Putting the lowercased "s" in square brackets is somewhat formal and I'd mostly expect to see it in academic writing. --Anonymous, 05:58 UTC, February 27, 2010.

Okay, Das Kapital ist kaput. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

February 27

Mother Hubbard dress

What is the etymology of Mother Hubbard dress?174.3.99.176 (talk) 00:14, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Most likely from the nursery rhyme Old Mother Hubbard, or more specifically, from the illustrations used in printed versions of the rhyme. --LarryMac | Talk 00:53, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Old Mother Hubbard / Went to the cupboard / To get her poor daughter a dress / When she got there / The cupboard was bare / And so was her daughter, I guess. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:23, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

German vocabulary in Quantum Physics

Does anyone know the German word for "step potential" Step potential ? (If you also had a source I would be overjoyed) 99.11.160.111 (talk) 09:05, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

This page uses Stufenpotential in its abstract and step potential in its list of keywords, so I assume they're referring to the same thing. +Angr 09:37, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

THANKS! Fits like a glove. ;-) 99.11.160.111 (talk) 12:21, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

How many words does French have?

While watching the famous UK TV show QI last night, a statistic popped out that I have not heard since school and which I have been trying to prove ever since. It was said that French has around a quarter of the words that English does. How can we go about substantiating such a claim?

As a linguist, I am aware of a few basic principles, such as the fact that it depends on what you actually classify as "a word", and that the field of Science adds thousands if not more words to the lexicon, or that made-up words pose a problem to answering the question. But I am still convinced that in spite of these things English still has a much richer variety. I can think of a few reasons for this:

1) English is spoken by more people and has a plethora of countries from which to draw on, as opposed to French which, although its language is spoken in 30-40 countries, is not the lingua franca of more than a handful.

2) English has been around longer. In 1880 only 20% of people in France could speak something resembling what we now call French, with the rest speaking not just different dialects but totally different languages (Basque, Occitan, Breton etc). And before that Latin was the top dog and the main predecessor to this elite form of French. In England, some form of "English" has been around for centuries, drawing over time upon other languages, notably from its vast colonies, presumably allowing more time to create a richer and much more complex vocabulary and more oddities, particularly in terms of pronunciation.

3) English has undergone no formal process of standardisation, à la Académie française, essentially giving it more free reign for the language to take its own course and develop more sporadically, governed almost arbitrarily by the actual usage instead of what an elite body tried to prescribe. (On a side note, French people to this day seem to have much more concrete a notion of what is and isn't le mot juste or le bon francais than English people).

4) English in many respects has drawn upon French for centuries since the Norman Invasions and integrated a huge proportion of French words into its lexicon, the roots of which most people would now be unlikely to recognise. If I have understood it correctly, this has created a kind of system where many words (I would love to know in what fields particularly if anyone can shed light on the subject) that still have an obvious non-French root still have a French equivalent that has been incorporated into English, giving rise to a massive body of concepts that can be described by at least two words ( (illness and malady, boredom and ennui, for example). Tiny nuances between such words can be used to convey certain things that French could not. In the case of the two above examples, merely using the words in their French form implies a certain sense of linguistic nous, with the French versions sounding more educated and of higher class, which could be used simply to demonstrate one's knowledge or could be employed for humourous effect.

5) English slang appears to be more flexible and ever-changing. Not that the use of verlan and les emprunts, to name but two, has not enrichened or developed the French language, but it just seems that we are constantly inventing new words. A higher proportion of movies, music, celebrities, websites and press organisations across the English speaking world may have something to do with this, but it also seems to be a willingness on our part to keep doing this and also that our language simply allows more flexibility us to invent our own words on the fly. Consider adding simple suffixes to normal words, then consider that everyone would understand the sentences that follow (mostly used for comic effect again):

-age: I'm starving, let's get some foodage and then do a bit more workage on our website.

-ish:  He was being a bit cockish and childrenish the other night.

-y:  All the furniture he had in that bloody room, it made me feel so wardrobey by the time I left.

These are just some of the examples I can think of, but what I am looking for are (dis)confirmations and some concrete evdience of what I am talking about, especially numbers:

How many words does the average educated French or English person know? What proof can we find that English has more words?

Also, please reply directly to any of the points I make in the five paragraphs and name and shame me if I have got something utterly wrong.

Many thanks, Lucas 83 12:08, 27 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lukerees83 (talk • contribs)

Have you had a poke around on [7]? --TammyMoet (talk) 13:28, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure about the last example; I am at a loss to understand the meaning of the word "wardrobey". The intuitive translation "of or like a wardrobe [press]" makes no sense. Intelligentsium 21:25, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

@Luke: I believe there were several published studies, probably a few decades ago, arguing that English has a larger lexicon than not just French, but just about every other language as well. I don't remember the names offhand, but I think the issue was brought up in Peter Trudgill's introductory sociolinguistics book. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 22:51, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Counting lemmas is one thing, but French conjugation involves more different words than English conjugation does.

-- Wavelength (talk) 02:09, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

For the purposes of determining the size of a language's lexicon, I don't know of anyone who counts differently-inflected verbs as different words. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 02:20, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Though the same applies to words like cock-ish and children-ish above. I think much of the richness of English comes not from some list of existing words but rather from the acceptability of such creative word invention and quasi-idiom invention on the fly; other languages have similar devices, but they are often less acceptable - for social reasons, I guess. The argument that English has been around longer doesn't hold; both languages have existed and developed for a very long time, and French has had more continuity (in English, much of the original Anglo-Saxon word stock has been lost and replaced by French words); the use of English in other countries than England and Scotland is relatively recent in this millennium, and its use as a lingua franca is even more recent. As for the number of words in English, I suspect it has something to do with the habit of assimilating just about any obscure French or Latin sesquipedalian word formation into the lexicon - even though few people know them or understand them. If one takes the really frequent, familiar words used by the average person, I don't think English will be that different from most other languages.--91.148.159.4 (talk) 22:55, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Shocked, dumbfounded, perplexed, stupified, open-mouthed, "huh?"

I had a business letter from someone in local government, replying to a complaint I'd made. Upon reading it I was amazed, shocked, dumbfounded, perplexed, stupified, open-mouthed, to read that they had done the thing I had complained about because although they had a particular goal in mind which I actually agree with, what they had done to achieve that goal will I'm sure have the opposite effect.

Has anyone else had the feeling where in a dispute someone says something that they genuinely believe about the situation that is so wrong that you are shocked into open-mouthed silence because your brain is preoccupied with going through the ramifications and many implications about the other person's thinking that this wrong belief has? It would not be merely a simple factual error, but things like for example logical flaws, unconcious contradictions, novel beliefs, or unexpected embeded assumptions about social rules and rights, that the other party has. Does this have a name? Are there other examples I could read about? Has anyone done any analysis of this?

But my main question is, what would be the best words I could use to describe this succinctly in a reply to the official, and without being rude?

I have had to delay my reply because I've got to clear time to concentrate and try to elucidate and unpick the officials beliefs and assumptions and show him that these are mistaken. But that's another issue. Thanks. 78.149.201.215 (talk) 15:36, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

the best term for what you're feeling is probably culture shock, though taken in a far looser than the given definition of the term. The other phrase you could apply would be 'righteous indignation'. The reason there is no adequate psychological term for the feeling is that it is basically shock at how offensively stupid people can be, but liberal society has (historically) precluded any argument that starts from the presumption that your opponent is offensively stupid. I'd just forget trying to express the feeling, and focus on explaining the illogic of the position. --Ludwigs2 16:00, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Having worked for a long time in UK local government, (1) nothing surprises me, and (2) starting a reply by stating how shocked etc etc you are probably isn't going to achieve your desired result. I suggest you should start by explaining that you have a common goal, and then explain why you think the person's actions will have the opposite effect from achieving that goal. You don't say whether the response was from an officer or an elected councillor. (I assume from your contributions elsewhere that you are in the UK.) If it was from an officer, there is always a more senior officer to whom you could express your concerns. Or, you could complain via your councillor. Or, if the councillor is the problem, you could complain to their party leader, or to the authority's chief executive. Or, in the last resort, to the Local Government Ombudsman. Good luck. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:17, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

I have only enough time to refer you to Deborah Tannen. -- Wavelength (talk) 16:22, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

'Slack-jawed with stupefaction' is a handy phrase. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 20:35, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Dumbstruck. (I'm also fond of the word "gobsmacked", but I'm not sure it carries the right

meaning.) +Angr 20:46, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

"Gobsmacked" would seem to me to lean toward the "Slack-jawed with stupefaction" side of the feeling, but be more or less in line with "dumbstruck" (though less formal). I made a very cursory browse through a few online dictionaries, and the two words' definitions seem basically aligned. I'd go with "dumbstruck" in a letter; "gobsmacked" seems to me more suited to spoken English, unless you can manage something exceptionally pointed to follow it with. "does not compute" would be along the same lines, I suppose. "Smoke is coming out of my ears," is a possibility, although that one can mean just plain angry, too.

In terms of the feeling, "double bind" and "cognitive dissonance" both come to mind, but they're not perfect matches. "Analysis paralysis" doesn't really cut it, but that led to Anti-pattern, which has a metric boatload of terms within the article, and its own category, but having a software design provenance, that gets pretty hackish. Some jerk on the Internet (talk) 23:17, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Car or automobile

"Automobile" is American English. Are there any rules or reasons in the US for choosing between saying or writing "car" or "automobile"? Thanks. 89.243.151.239 (talk) 19:28, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

It's very formal. In most normal situations you would say "car" (just like in normal situations you say "buy" instead of "purchase"; they mean the same thing, but I would never tell my buddy "I'm gonna go purchase some new shoes"). rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 23:21, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

The term "car" has been around for a very long time, and refers to any vehicle "moved on wheels", be it under its own power or hauled. That includes the automobile, railroad cars, and even the cab of an airship. The word is related to "cart", "carriage", "carry", "cargo" and "chariot". An "automobile" is a narrower term, meaning something that is "self-moving", i.e. its means of propulsion is self-contained. All that as per my 1960 Webster's. In modern times, "car" is probably heard most often in reference to an automobile. "Auto", when used by itself, is typically short for "automobile", although it seems to be heard less often nowadays than "car". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:54, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

You might refer to your ride as an automobile if it cost you more than $250,000. Woogee (talk) 07:22, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Pee or Wee

How come girls have a wee while boys do a pee? Kittybrewster ☎ 21:08, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

My mother wees when alone, but pees in company. I urinate. Assuming this is personal experience, wherabouts are you? That'll make a huge difference, I bet. 90.195.179.84 (talk) 21:15, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

UK. Kittybrewster ☎ 21:24, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Your mother pees in company? Ew. Everyone in my family delicately "has to go to the bathroom" with no specification as to what they have to do there. At any rate, I have definitely heard girls/women from outside my family say they have to pee. I haven't heard "wee" in the sense of urine/urinate often enough to judge. +Angr 21:25, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

When I was a small boy (in Canada, but we had recently moved from Britain) the word used with me was "wee", but after that I pretty much never heard it again; it became "go to the bathroom". I always assumed that "wee" was a second-order euphemism ("piss" as a rendering of the sound, "pee" for its first letter, "wee" to rhyme with that) and was considered an extra-inoffensive term suitable for use with small children. I don't associate either one with one or the other sex. --Anonymous, 22:50 UTC, February 27, 2010.

Maybe, men pee, women wee, British children go wee wee and French children do (fait) pee pee while old men just decorate the floor? - Kittybrewster ☎ 23:08, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

And what was the little piggy doing going wee, wee, wee all the way home? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.76.146.245 (talk) 18:42, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

(American English here) I've never heard anyone use "wee" seriously. I agree with Angr and Anon that "go to the bathroom" is most common around here (people I know who were educated with more British English often say "go to the toilet", which I never liked--too gross). Interestingly, when people do say "pee" instead of "go to the bathroom", in my experience it's girls--specifically, I have the impression that my past girlfriends have tended to say "pee", I don't think platonic friends have. As for men, it's "go to the bathroom" when in civilized company, and "take a piss" or something along those lines when with other guys (that is to say, uncivilized company). rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 23:20, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm always amused (doesn't take much) when Americans "go to the bathroom" in a room that doesn't contain a bath. Alansplodge (talk) 23:50, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

True...some people do say "go to the restroom" if it's not a real bathroom, but personally I find that terribly jilted. Then of course there are great variants like "go to the little boys' room"... rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 23:52, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Here abouts for location we use the term "Head", and for the biological function it's referred to as "Drain the main vein".A Glass Bubble (talk) 00:22, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Then there's the Cheech and Chong recorded bit where they're junior high school students, and Chong keeps saying, "I gotta go to the can, man." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 08:10, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

I'd spend a penny to be rid of this thread. (Oops. It comes up red. Somebody better write the article.) PhGustaf (talk) 08:31, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Reference! 86.177.121.239 (talk) 21:05, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Several years ago I was eating breakfast in the cafe of a rather expensive hotel in Seville, Spain, when a large, boisterous group of Americans (sounding like they came from Texas or someplace close) came in, sat down, ate, made a great deal of noise, then got ready to leave. All but one headed off to the exit of the restaurant, but one woman went towards the hotel lobby. When her party told he she was going the wrong direction, she yelled across the width of the entire cafe, "Y'all go on without me, I gotta go pee." I tried very hard to crawl under my table. Woogee (talk) 07:25, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

That's technically known as "TMI". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 08:07, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Doesn't anyone else "take a leak", or is that Australian English only? 220.101.28.25 (talk) 17:52, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

We do that in the US, too. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 17:55, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Hence The Galloping Gourmet's recurring joke, "...and now I take a leek..." also the title of a cookbook by Maxine Saltonstall.[8] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:47, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Some Italian Part 2

Hi again. Just reading through a book on Italian verbs, I'm a little confused by the following.

"Verbs ending in -iare omit the i ending of the 2nd person singular of the present tense if the t is not in the accented syllable. Examples: (studiare) studi, not studii and (avviare) avvi, not avvii."

I don't understand the difference. Standard rule of Italian is, I believe, that the second last syllable is stressed, which in both cases would be the 'i' of the stem of the verb. Or is avviare stressed elsewhere? Or is my whole understanding of the above flawed? Thanks. 131.111.247.136 (talk) 21:37, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

This is a very technical question. As far as I know (and I'm a native speaker) it's: studiare > studi, avviare > avvii. I don't think avvi is an Italian word.--151.51.1.230 (talk) 01:11, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Italian Verbs - Coniugazione verbo avviare says "tu avvii". -- Wavelength (talk) 02:53, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Terminology

There's

• parallel slalom
• giant parallel slalom
• parallel giant slalom
• giant slalom
• parallel slalom

What do all these words mean?174.3.99.176 (talk) 23:02, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Slalom skiing, Giant slalom skiing and Super Giant Slalom skiing might be informative. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 22:56, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

What about parallel?174.3.99.176 (talk) 23:14, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

This means that two competitors simultaneously race on two courses which are adjacent and identically flagged. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 00:24, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Further they race twice, once on each course with the lowest total time winning the heat. -- Flyguy649 ^talk 04:24, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

What's the point? Why don't they just race one at a time if the course is identical, and do away with the other course.174.3.99.176 (talk) 00:30, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Variety. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:45, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Possibly TV ratings? If the particular event is popular & looks exciting on TV. --220.101.28.25 (talk) 11:08, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Connected with that: More events = more medals to hand out. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:27, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

I would say another reason. The courses just can't be exactly identical, and a win in such a competition is a question of hundredths of a second. --62.204.152.181 (talk) 19:27, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

I mean the difference between a win and a loss may be just a few hundredths of a second. --62.204.152.181 (talk) 19:29, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

What's a tassie?

The opera The Silver Tassie is not about a Tasmanian with grey hair. Not at all. It's set in Britain and the “tassie” is apparently a sports trophy, of all things. Does this term refer to a specific type of trophy? The closest thing I can see on wiktionary is: A cup or goblet for drinking wine.

When I search for “tassie” here, apart from what I already knew, I get James Tassie and William Tassie, Scottish gem engravers, uncle and nephew. Did they lend their name to these decorative objects? -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 23:28, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

The original story of The Silver Tassie was written by Sean O'Casey, who was Irish (not British!), and the "goblet" definition for a type of trophy seems appropriate (presumably, a Cup without handles). Dictionary.com gives its etymology as relating to the French tasse, Italian tazza, and Arabic tassah (basin) - which also seems plausible. Ghmyrtle (talk) 00:03, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Robert Burns's "My Bonie Mary" (1788) starts out with:

"Go, fetch to me a pint o' wine,

And fill it in a silver tassie;

That I may drink before I go,

A service to my bonie lassie."[9]

When performed as a song, the poem is often referred to as "Silver Tassie". John Jamieson's Etymological Dictionary of the Scottish Language groups "tassie" together with "tais", "tas", "tasse", all meaning "A bowl, or cup", and gives the same etymology Ghmyrtle gave.[10] ---Sluzzelin talk 10:59, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

My 1960 Webster's merely says, "Chiefly Scotland - a small cup." No specific etymology. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:44, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, all. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 07:05, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

See also wiktionary:tassie.—msh210℠ 18:28, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, but please re-read my question. That was the 1st place I looked. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 07:09, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

February 28

English equivalent for the German expression "Sympathieträger"

Greetings! I am looking for the "best" English equivalent for the German expression "Sympathieträger" (lit. carrier of sympathy).
It plays an important role in advertising: Using the halo-effect a "vendor" (company, political party, non-profit organization, religious organization) uses the positive feelings which the public (or a special target group) has towards a person (Tiger Woods), group (Jamaika bob sleigh team), animal ([Free] Willy, Hoover the Seal...), a cartoon character (Smokey t. B.) a "thing" (Tin Lizzy, Love Bug) etc. to promote a product / concept / philosophy.
The term is also used in literature and film and there the acting of the Sympathieträger does not always have to be "politically/morally correct". It is the whole picture that counts (Huckleberry Finn, Dr. House, Dexter, etc.). Any help is appreciated! 213.169.161.126 (talk) 12:17, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't think there is an equivalent, and the best fit will depend on context. Collins has "popular figure". So does dict.cc, along with "sympathetic figure". Beolingus mentions "appealing figure" and "crowd-pleaser" too. My fat PONS has nothing :-(. Animal Sympathieträger are sometimes called flagship species. Is "everybody's darling" frequently used in English? (It is actually used in German). ---Sluzzelin talk 12:39, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

I know: One for All is a pretty strange concept, especially if it's used for soccer players, retired actresses, gay comedians, politicians, polar bear babies and the Pillsbury Dough Boy. I will look through the terms you have mentioned above and see whether one or several fit to the different types of Sympathieträger we have identified. 213.169.161.126 (talk) 15:34, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

"Icon" comes to mind. Endorsements by celebrities go way back. Ty Cobb used to appear in Coca-Cola ads, and he was the most famous ballplayer in the land. Left out of those ads for some reason was the fact he owned stock in the company. But he was just one of many who endorsed products and services. Obviously whales don't know they're being used to endorse anything. But they do have iconic status. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:05, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Mascot? Woogee (talk) 19:59, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Poster child? Tevildo (talk) 22:21, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Poster Child probably comes the closest of the ideas so far. It kind of conveys the same meaning - a prominent figure with some problem, in the form of a child which would tend to generates sympathy. The one problem is that the term is often used sarcastically. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:23, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

English into IPA transcription?

Does anybody know of a web site that transforms your English input (if there are other languages available, even better) into General American's IPA? --Belchman (talk) 16:43, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

The closest thing I know of is Dictionary.com, where words are given in both phonetic respelling and IPA. When you look up a word, the phonetic respelling is given as default, but you can click on "Show IPA". +Angr 16:48, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Do you want the dialect of English to be chosen by the website or by the visitor to the website? -- Wavelength (talk) 16:18, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

It's not IPA, but I run a website which will transform English input in the conventional alphabet into the Shavian alphabet, and handles homonym resolution reasonably well. I think it would be a fairly simple matter to write a mapping from the Shavian alphabet to General American IPA. You can download the database here. Let me know whether this is any help. Marnanel (talk) 16:44, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

I should have said: unlike the other options mentioned here, this works on entire phrases, not word by word. That's how the homonym resolution is possible. Marnanel (talk) 18:50, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikimedia Foundation's own dictionary site, Wiktionary, does this for many words; and you can add {{rfp|IPA for General American}} to any entry to request that the pronunciation be added.—msh210℠ 18:19, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

English to Latin

How would the word 'strum' be translated into Latin? I've seen it as 'pulsatus' but is there a more specific way when referring to an instrument? Thanks 87.111.102.76 (talk) 17:37, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

That verb is used for playing stringed instruments. "Pulsatus" is the past participle, from puslo, pulsare. Adam Bishop (talk) 01:18, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

affect/effect

Wouldn't it make sense to spell "affect" and "effect" the same way? The reason I feel that they should be spelled the same is because I don't think any confusion would result from spelling them alike. It seems to me that one always knows from context what meaning is intended and thus no purpose seems to be served by maintaining two different spellings. Bus stop (talk) 18:02, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

We'd lose some potential uses. If I had "I effected the change", I can say for certain that I caused it. In this new system, however, the meaning would be considerable more ambiguous. Similarly, the use of "affect" as a noun would be completely undermined. Admittedly, those are both fairly rare cases, but in any case I can't imagine such a change ever occurring. - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 18:07, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Languages don't always do what makes sense. If we relied on context alone we would not need most of the trappings that language has picked up over the centuries. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 18:08, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Even if it were decided to make the move to one or the other, I don't know how we would decide which one to choose. Bus stop (talk) 18:18, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Consider "The storm effected the demolition of the church" vs. "The storm affected the demolition of the church". You are unambiguously churchless with the former, but the latter could just mean there's a bunch of demolition experts stranded at the airport because the runway is closed. Karenjc 18:19, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Hmm... maybe you're right. I think I stand corrected. Bus stop (talk) 18:22, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

And my personal effects are very different from my personal affects....--Shantavira|^{feed me} 18:59, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

I guess I'm still not sure, though, if it's worth the bother. The alternative is for the users of the language to construct their sentences to avoid the greater potential for ambiguity that would result from using only one spelling for all possible meanings of affect and effect. Those are great examples, but doesn't one have to try pretty hard to come up with good examples? Bus stop (talk) 19:17, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Of course, all the above proves is that we'd have to work a bit harder to effect the change in the English language. But we all know that the harder it is to do, the vastly less likely it is to happen. People's inertia would not be overcome, I think. - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 19:24, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Bus stop, once we oopened that flood gate, we'd then have to sanction the interchangeable use of 'their', 'there' and 'they're'; and 'your', 'you're' and 'yore'. Et al. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 19:48, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

If it were a really necessary distinction, wouldn't we pronounce them differently? — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi]} 05:42, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

The noun affect is pronounced differently. Whether the verbs "affect" and "effect" are pronounced differently would need some acoustic analysis, personally I think they sound the same. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 05:44, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

They are often pronounced very similarly, and seems to me I read awhile back that the confusion about these two words goes back centuries, even millennia. This came up in a chat with a Spanish-speaking colleague recently, in reference to afectivo (affectionate, loving) vs. efectivo (effective, true... and also "cash" for some reason). This goes back to Latin. I'm not totally sure, but I think there's a good chance that confusion over these words led to the fall of the Roman Empire. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:22, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

They are pronounced differently by careful speakers of UK English, but I agree that the confusion is widespread, even amongst well-educated people. (I stress and lengthen the initial "e" in the verb to effect to draw attention to the distinction, but this is probably non-standard.) Dbfirs 12:56, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

black rat snake, Elaphe obsoleta

What does the Latin word Obsoleta mean? Does it mean "obsolete"? I know Elaphe means "deerskin". I am doing a life history on the Black Rate Snake for my herpetology class and I was wanting to put it's Latin binomial into context. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 21:16, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

I think in this context it means "common" or "ordinary". +Angr 21:21, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

The OED gives this as its third meaning for 'Obsolete': " 3. Biol. Indistinct; not clearly or sharply marked; hardly perceptible. Also: very imperfectly developed; rudimentary, vestigial, almost or entirely absent". Of course this is defining an English word, not a Latin one; but if biologists were using "obsolete" in this sense in English, it may well be that they used the Latin equivalent in the same way, or thought that the Latin word had that meaning. --ColinFine (talk) 22:46, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

ColinFine is correct. According to Stearn's Botanical Latin, the meanings of obsoletus in scientific usage are "rudimentary, suppressed, scarcely apparent". Deor (talk) 01:27, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

It may be worth mentioning that in 2008 a couple of guys named Collins and Taggart renamed this critter Scotophis obsoletus (see the last item on this page). With absolutely no evidence at all, I'll suggest that the resurrected generic name pretty obviously means "dark snake", derived from Greek skotos ("darkness") and ophis ("snake"). Deor (talk) 18:34, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Zircons

What is the etymology of zircon?174.3.99.176 (talk) 22:35, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

From German Zirkon or French zircone < Arabic زرقون (zarqūn) ‘cinnabar, bright red’. (From Wiktionary: [11]) --151.51.1.230 (talk) 22:39, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Adalbert of Prague

Looking at the article Adalbert of Prague, my attention was caught by the strangeness of its equivalents in some slavic languages. I'm curious about the translation of the name "Adalbert" in the following languages:

• Czech: Vojtěch
• Kashubian: Wòjcech
• Polish: Wojciech
• Slovak: Vojtech

To me, these names have absolutely nothing in common to the name Adalbert. Are they really the same exact name ( like George(en)=Jerzy(pl)=Jiří(cz)=Juraj(sk) ) or are something else, like a slavic rendition or a different name with a similar meaning (something like Theophilos=Amadeus=Gottlieb) or something else?--151.51.1.230 (talk) 22:53, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

The Czech article says that his name (apparently birth name) was Vojtěch, and his confirmation name was Adalbert. It says that in "foreign countries", he is better known under his confirmation name.--91.148.159.4 (talk) 23:04, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

(after edit conflict) The question is also more or less answered under Wojciech. (See also wikt:Adalbert for that name's etymology). ---Sluzzelin talk 23:06, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

March 1

Gaba, the company

What is gaba?

What is team pursuit (in regards to ice)?

What is isIs there single pursuit, in regards to ice? Not the biking.174.3.99.176 (talk) 00:04, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

1. , A company offering tuition on speaking the English language, as the website you linked to explained..
2. , See Long track speed skating#Team Pursuit
3. , See Long track speed skating. Nanonic (talk) 00:19, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

How is this different from relay?174.3.99.176 (talk) 04:59, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

In a relay, competing teams each start one runner, who tags or passes an object to a teammate, who then continues the race, and so on until one runner reaches the finish line. There is at any time only one "live" runner per team. In team pursuit, a group of teammates start together and can help eachother in reaching the finish line as fast as possible; usually, more than one of the teammates has to cross the finish line for the race to be considered complete. --207.236.147.118 (talk) 18:44, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

How do they help each other?174.3.99.176 (talk) 05:55, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Usually by taking it in turns to take the lead, which is more taxing than skating behind someone because of the slipstream effect. --TammyMoet (talk) 11:27, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Any Kurdish speakers here?

A website I follow has recently been hacked by Kurdish hackers, and they left some Kurdish on the site. This is the message they left:

Kuşlar gibi uçmasını, balıklar gibi yüzmesini öğrendik Ancak bu arada çok basit bir sanatı unuttuk; kardeş olarak yaşamayı.

Greetz to all kurdish hackers

BU STE KURT HALKI VEDE ABDULLAH OCALAN UZERINDEKI TECRIT,IMHA VEDE INKAR POLITIKALARINA KARSI MISILLEME OLARAK VURULMUSTUR!!!!!15 ŞUBAT KOMPLOSUNU KINIYORUZ!!!!1

Ey kendini dünyaya bedel sanan mahluklar Ey kendi kanindaki kanin asil ve özel olduğunu düsünen zavalilar Ey çaresizlikten saga sola saldiran kuduz it Ey 2 gramlik beyninizin yüzünden günde trafik kazasinda 50 ölen insan kilikli nesneler Ey sarhosken anesiyle yatan yüce millet Ey iki bardak alkol aldiktan sonra dünyayi fetheden çakal ordusu. SıZ KıM OLUYORSUNUZDA KÜRDÜ YOK ETMEYE ÇALIsIYORSUNUZ, AKITTIGINIZ KANLARDA BOGULACAKSINIZ!

Now, I'm just curious as to what all of that means. It's not life-and-death to me, so I don't think I'll be bothering any Kurdish speakers on Wikipedia directly, but if anyone who can speak Kurdish happens to be seeing this, I'd appreciate a quick and dirty break down of the message. I don't expect it to be much more than your run-of-the-mill script kiddie boasts, anyway.TomorrowTime (talk) 00:26, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Are you sure that's Kurdish? I have a Kurdish friend I could send this to, but to be honest it really looks like Turkish, or at least something Turkic, to me. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 00:47, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

It's definitely Turkish (-lar plurals, dotless I's, etc). If you Google the first sentence it is attributed to Martin Luther King, but I'm not sure why ("Kuşlar gibi uçmasını, balıklar gibi yüzmesini" means "birds like to fly, fish like to swim"). Abdullah Ocalan is Kurdish, of course, but it's not actually in Kurdish. It's probably just gibberish or nonsense. Adam Bishop (talk) 01:15, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Hm, I was just assuming it was Kurdish because of the greetz quip in English in the middle and because there was a Kurdish flag as well. And there was indeed a picture I later found was of Ocalan. Oh well. TomorrowTime (talk) 06:16, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Actually, the quote must be "We have learned to fly the air like birds and swim the sea like fish, but we have not yet learned the simple art of living together as brothers" (my knowledge of Turkish is, apparently, exceptionally poor!). I'll leave the rest alone :) Adam Bishop (talk) 07:55, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Japanese

What's the Japanese word for pearl? --70.250.214.164 (talk) 02:12, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

According to Wiktionary, 真珠, shinju. [12]. Tevildo (talk) 02:17, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Which pearl are you referring to? There are at least four nouns and three verbs, each with a variety of meanings. 114.162.51.169 (talk) 02:37, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

I mean as in a pearl, the shiny sphere formed by a mollusk around a grain of sand or dirt. --70.250.214.164 (talk) 02:40, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Then this has already been answered: 真珠. 114.162.51.169 (talk) 02:55, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

PS, next time you can use Wiktionary -- it has translations for most common words...there' a "Translations" bar beneath the English definition of the entry (for English-language entries) --14:16, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

And in some cases, including this one, if you look up the Wikipedia entry (here, Pearl), you can look at the "in other languages" column, where you might find the corresponding article in the target language's Wikipedia (here, ja:真珠). Doesn't always work, but it often does. +Angr 14:31, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Lokavibhaga

Where online can I find an English translation of Lokavibhaga? --70.250.214.164 (talk) 02:24, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

This question sounds familiar somehow. Have you looked in the ref desk archives? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:41, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

It doesn't come up when entered in the Ref Desk archive search. But I'm not finding it either in any of my usual places to look for online books. Only a Hindi translation comes up: [13]. Anyone else? This might be a case where a library is your best bet? Best, WikiJedits (talk) 18:28, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

I did a fairly extensive search of libraries and did not find an English translation. I don't think an English translation exists. It's apparently available only in Sanskrit and Hindi. Marco polo (talk) 18:57, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Ctrl+F

What is a ramp roller (ramp roller skate)?174.3.99.176 (talk) 06:44, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Why did you head this question "Ctrl+F"? -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 07:03, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

It seems to be a skate specifically set up to do tricks on a ramp like a half-pipe. Dismas|^(talk) 08:33, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Aggressive Roller Skating

What is aggressive roller skating? Not sure if it is similar to aggressive inline skating, which would be doing tricks on a skateboard, but minus the skateboard and plus the inline skates.174.3.99.176 (talk) 07:56, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

This is the language reference desk. For questions about sports, you're probably better served by the entertainment reference desk. +Angr 10:11, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Lingua franca of 10th century Al-Andalus?

What was the lingua franca of 10th century Al-Andalus? Was it Andalusian Arabic? I'm wondering how the Ghubār Numerals would have been pronounced back then. Where can I look up how to pronounce zero to nine in this language? --Sonjaaa (talk) 23:16, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Classical Arabic was the standard written language; for the standard classical Arabic forms, see Arabic_grammar#Cardinal_numerals. I would tend to doubt whether more than a few specialized scholars (who are unlikely to be hanging around Wikipedia) would be able to reconstruct with a good probability of correctness what the Andalusian Arabic forms would have been. AnonMoos (talk) 23:38, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

March 2

Native American accent

That's a lot of languages.

Is there a name for the accent of English sometimes spoken by Native Americans? I realize it may be an artificial stereotype...I'm thinking of the Simpsons, for example, where whoever does the voices for Natives and Canadians uses the same accent. But there is some reality to it. Maybe it's limited to an older generation so they may have learned English as a second language, and I guess then it would depend on their first language. I don't see anything about it on Wikipedia and I'm not really sure what to look for. Adam Bishop (talk) 00:34, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

As a layman, I didn't find it at North American English regional phonology or the related articles. That article doesn't seem to discuss cultural variants at all other than one link to African American Vernacular English. Anyway, again as a layman, I would venture to point at the attached graphic, and claim that there are probably many accents of English spoken by Native Americans, as influenced by the dozens of Indigenous languages of the Americas. Comet Tuttle (talk) 01:30, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Recently, on a speaker-phone, I overheard a Native American woman from New Mexico or Arizona. I assumed she was a Caucasian from Wisconsin before being corrected. So maybe North Central American English will provide leads. 63.17.46.84 (talk) 03:01, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

By "stereotype" do you mean Hollywood Indian-speak like "How (greeting)", "heap big", "many moons", etc.? Outside of that, I'm not sure that there's any strong popular conception among inhabitants of the U.S. as to how Indians would be expected to talk... AnonMoos (talk) 10:41, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

There does seem to be a variety of dialects. William Leap, who has written several books on the topic, calls these dialects "American Indian English"[14] Walt Wolfram and Natalie Schilling-Estes, in their American English: dialects and variation talk about the "broad spectrum of variation in Native American English"[15].

"among Native American groups there are distinct varieties of English, each with phonology, syntax, and discourse features specific to it. For example, a feature of Indian English from the Northern Ute Reservation is devoicing of Vowels in certain positions (Leap 1992, 144); features of Lumbee Indians of North Carolina, are finite be, as in These girls in the picture be(s) my sisters, distinct from the habitual be of AAVE; relic be forms rather than have in constructions such as I'm been to the store (for I've been to the store); and regularized were rather than was, as in I weren't there, she weren't there (Wolfram/Schilling-Estes 1998, 115, 182)," (Dittmar et al, Sociolinguistics /Soziolinguistik. An International Handbook of the Science of Language and Society, de Gruyter, 2006 [16])

Though I'm not a native speaker, I too had noticed this in movies and television. Graham Greene (a Canadian actor :-) often does this, e.g., and like 63.17, some aspects always sounded North Central American English to me, particularly the monophthongs. ---Sluzzelin talk 11:09, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

The stereotype accent is apparent in the episode "Red Man's Greed" of South Park, too. If you can find videos of Floyd Red Crow Westerman speaking on YouTube you'll hear a good example of it. I don't know whether there's a specific name for the accent though. In some ways it reminds me of the accent of Hispanics in South Texas - which is not a stereotypical Mexican accent by a long shot. +Angr 11:17, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, Graham Greene and Red Crow are also good examples. That's why I was wondering if it was something to do with an older generation; younger people, say Adam Beach or the guy who replaced Red Crow in the Lakota commercials, don't seem to talk the same way. The reason I was asking was that I was listening to Gwich'in legends on CBC radio, and the narrators all had the distinctive accent. Adam Bishop (talk) 19:54, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

French Translation

1523-1531 : en 1523, la succession de Suzanne de Bourbon, morte sans laisser d'enfants, fut contestée par Louise de Savoie, duchesse d'Angoulême, mère du roi de France François Ier, comme lui revenant en tant que plus proche héritière de la défunte. Elle gagna son procès, qui fit entrer le connétable de Bourbon dans le camp de Charles Quint. En 1531, le duché entra dans le domaine royal pour la première fois. 1544-1545 : Charles de France (1522-1545), alias Charles d'Angoulême Fils de France, duc d'Angoulême (1531-1540), duc d'Orléans (Charles II, 1536-1540), duché de Châtellerault (1540), comte de Clermont-en-Beauvaisis et de la Marche (1540), duc de Bourbon (Charles IV) (1544-1545) Fils du roi de France François Ier et de la duchesse de Bretagne Claude de France, petit-fils de Louise de Savoie. En 1544, le duché entra pour la première fois dans un apanage, mais le prince mourut peu après. À sa mort, le duché fit retour à la Couronne. 1566-1574 : Henri de France (1551-1589), duc d'Angoulême (1551-1574), duc d'Orléans (1560-1574), duc d'Anjou (1567-1573), duc de Bourbon (1566-1574) comte d'Auvergne (1569-1574), comte de Forez, d'Agen, de Rouergue (1566-1574). En 1566, pour la seconde et dernière fois, le duché de Bourbon constitua une partie d'un apanage, en l'occurrence celui du futur Henri III. À son accession au trône en 1574, le duché fit retour à la Couronne.

1523-1531 : In 1523, the succession of S de B, who died without issue, was contested by Louise de Savoie, duchesse d'Angoulême, the mother of Francois I, king of France. She argued that it reverted to her as closest relation of the deceased. She won the suit, with the result that the constable (this probably should be translated differently) of Bourbon joined the side of Charles Quint. In 1531 the duchy became part of the royal estate (not sure about this bit either) for the first time.

1544-1545 : Charles de France (...long list of french titles...). Son of François I, king of France, and the duchesse de Bretagne Claude de France, grandson of Louise de Savoie. In 1544 the duchy was granted (to him??) as a privilege for the first time, but the prince died soon after. On his death the duchy returned to the crown.

1566-1574 : Henri de France (...long list of titles...) in 1566, for the second and final time, the duchy of Bourbon was granted as a privilege, in this case to the future Henri III. On his accession to the throne in 1574 the duchy returned to the crown.

NB "apanage" probably has a sense I don't understand here, best to check with a native speaker Tinfoilcat (talk) 10:56, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Le duché de Bourbon fut octroyé en 1661 au Grand Condé. Son petit-fils Louis IV Henri de Bourbon-Condé (1692-1740), premier ministre de 1723 à 1726, puis son petit-fils Louis VI Henri de Bourbon-Condé (1756-1830), portèrent nommément le titre, à côté de celui de prince de Condé. Le titre de duc de Bourbon était en effet un titre d'attente de celui de Prince de Condé.

The duchy of Bourbon was granted to Louis, Prince of Condé in 1661. His grandson Louis IV Henri de Bourbon-Condé, prime minister from 1723 to 1726, then his grandson Louis VI Henri de Bourbon-Condé, used the title, as well as that of prince de Condé. The title of duc de Bourbon was really a preliminary to that of Prince de Condé. Tinfoilcat (talk) 11:00, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

1661-1686 : Louis de Bourbon dit le Grand Condé (1621-1686), premier prince du sang, connu d'abord sous le titre de duc d'Enghien, 4e prince de Condé, duc de Bourbon (1661), duc d'Enghien, duc de Montmorency, duc de Châteauroux, duc de Bellegarde, duc de Fronsac, gouverneur du Berry, comte de Sancerre (1646-1686), comte de Charolais (à partir de 1684), pair de France. 1667-1670, Henri de Bourbon-Condé, titré duc de Bourbon, né à Paris le 5 novembre 1667, mort le 5 juillet 1670, petit-fils du précédent. Il était le fils de Henri-Jules de Bourbon (1643-1709), premier prince du sang, prince de Condé (1686-1709), titulaire régulier du titre de duc de Bourbon (1686-1709) et fils du Grand Condé. 1670-1709 : Louis de Bourbon (1668-1710), prince du sang, duc de Bourbon, duc de Montmorency (1668-1689) puis duc d'Enghien (1689-1709), puis 6e prince de Condé, comte de Sancerre (1709-1710), comte de Charolais. N'ayant été prince de Condé que quelque mois, il est connu sous son titre de duc de Bourbon, qu'il porta quasi toute sa vie. Il était appelé à la Cour « monsieur le Duc », ayant perdu le « monsieur le Prince » au profit du premier prince du Sang, le duc de Chartres. 1709-1736 : Louis Henri de Bourbon (1692-1740), prince du sang, 7e prince de Condé (1710), Grand maître de France, duc de Bourbon, duc d'Enghien et duc de Guise, pair de France, duc de Bellegarde et comte de Sancerre. Fils du précédent. 1736-1772 : Louis-Joseph de Bourbon (1736-1818), prince du sang, Grand maître de France ; duc de Bourbon, duc d'Enghien puis 8e prince de Condé (1740), comte de Sancerre, comte de Charolais et Gien. Fils du précédent. 1756-1830 : Louis-Henri de Bourbon (1756-1830) prince du sang. Il fut le 9e duc d'Enghien (1756-1772), et duc de Bourbon (1772-1818) et enfin, à la mort de son père en 1818, le 9e – et dernier – prince de Condé. Ayant perdu son fils le duc d'Enghien en 1804, le titre régulier de duc de Bourbon s'éteignit avec lui. Il légua sa fortune, et ses châteaux de Chantilly et de Bourbon au jeune Henri d'Orléans (1822-1897), duc d'Aumale.

Please see Wikipedia:Translation for how to request translation of an entire article from a different-language Wikipedia. — Kpalion^(talk) 09:33, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

This passage actually contains mainly a relatively small vocabulary of genealogical/dynastic terms arranged in stereotyped phrases, so it should be relatively easy to translate most of it using a dictionary, if you know only a very little bit about French grammar... AnonMoos (talk) 10:30, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Cursing

Are they any languages that don't have swear words? --124.254.77.148 (talk) 09:01, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

I've heard that claim made of Japanese, but I can't confirm it. Allegedly, the strongest insult in the language is baka, roughly "fool" or "idiot", and the strongest thing you can say when you're angry is "I don't like it!" But maybe someone here who actually knows Japanese (KageTora?) can confirm or deny. +Angr 09:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Kuso ("shit") is a Japanese swear word. decltype (talk) 10:44, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

First we would have to define 'swearword'. There are plenty of words or phrases in many languages which are used as curses and so on, yet may sound comical in other languages. 'Baka' is used as a swearword in exactly the same way as 'stupid' is used in English. If you want to get really rough, you could call someone 'masukakiyarou' ('wanker'), but I've only ever seen this once and that was in the Japanese translation of Bravo Two Zero where the word was used quite often in the English version. There are plenty of other words one could use, though, so it's not true that Japanese doesn't have them. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 13:25, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

I'd agree heavily with KageTora's initial assertion -- what is a swearword? Certainly there are words that would get you thrown out of a 3rd grade class and they'd mark you down for 'swearing'...but that would likely include the terms erectile dysfunction, which is hardly a swear. I'd say it all began with blasphemy, and somehow has trickled down to include the sexual, even though the latter has nothing to do with swearing (i.e. using God's name in vain) or cursing God (blaspheming/heresy). DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 13:43, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

A language without taboo words would be like a language without colour words - you can imagine it existing as a artificial construct, but not as a working language. In contexts where the usual taboo words are censored - in broadcasting or publishing, for example - then other words become co-opted to serve as taboo words in their place - see smeg for a well-known example. We have articles on Esperanto profanity and profanity in American Sign Language. Gandalf61 (talk) 14:02, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

And in my programming class you could have been thrown out of the classroom for using "inappropriate" words like goto and label. — Kpalion^(talk) 15:29, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Just a minor clarification (and not to undermine Gandalf's point), there are languages without color words (or, at least, very few of them). See Linguistic relativity and the color naming debate. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi]} 19:53, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

What's the word for this identification scheme?

You start at entry 1, and entry 1 asks you a question and gives you two options. If the first option matches the thing you're trying to identify, you get directed to some entry (say entry 4). If the second option matches, you get directed to some other entry (say entry 2). I think the word might start with "di-".

Example: I'm trying to identify a bird. Entry 1 asks me what color it's beak is: yellow or some other color? The bird's beak is some other color, and next to some other color it says "go to entry 2", so I do. When I get there I get asked whether the bird has webbed feet. The bird does have webbed feet and I get directed to entry 7. Repeat until finally I'm told what bird I'm looking at. --71.198.7.102 (talk) 10:48, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

An identification key. Alansplodge (talk) 11:19, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Particularly, a dichotomous single access key. ---Sluzzelin talk 11:20, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

You might also be interested in flowchart. 195.35.160.133 (talk) 12:52, 2 March 2010 (UTC) Martin.

"S" sound between S and SH used by some English speakers

I've wondered about this for a while. Some speakers in English (and other languages; I've heard it in Greek) use an S sound that is intermediate between [s] and [ʃ] -- an example is (the speech of) Bob Costas of NBC. I've gone and looked for this on IPA, S, and a couple of other articles, but didn't find anything. 1) What's this softening/changing of the S called, and 2) is there an IPA symbol for it? Cheers, -- Flyguy649 ^talk 15:30, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

"Costas" is a homophone of "cost us", either of which sounds like a normal "s" to me (i.e. like the leading "s" in "sounds", as opposed to the trailing "s", which is more like "z"). Can you give an example of an "s" that's not in that intermediate category you're describing? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:38, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

I think Flyguy is talking about the way Costas speaks, not the pronunciation of his name. -- Coneslayer (talk) 15:41, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, as Coneslayer said. -- Flyguy649 ^talk 15:47, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

I guess you might mean apical [s̺]. It's fairly common in languages like Greek, Finnish or Dutch which lack a phonological distinction between [s] and [ʃ].—Emil J. 15:42, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

A mild lateral lisp is also a possibility. Deor (talk) 15:55, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

(ec)OK, he's talking about Costas' own speech pattern. People have various ways of saying the "s". In general, it can sound like hissing snakes, which is why singers often try to nearly supress it, especially when in a choir. I've never noticed it in Costas, but we're both midwesterners, so maybe it's a midwestern thing. Or it could be a variant on a slight lisp. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:58, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

You can (hopefully) hear what I'm talking about in this video, in the words, "so" and "single" in the first 7 seconds. He uses a regular [s] at the end of "Olympics" at 10 seconds. For the record I speak with a central Canadian accent, having grown up in Toronto. I also learned Greek at a young age. I find I can often hear a lot of "flavours" of sounds that some others don't. -- Flyguy649 ^talk 16:10, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

It sound like a perfectly fine [s] to me (although perhaps I just lack the perceptual distinction that you have). Like EmilJ says, it might be a bit more apical than most people's, but still well within the range of a prototypical [s]. (A disclaimer, though: for the past couple hours I've been chopping [s]s off of syllables in Praat and listening to them over and over, so my judgment is not normal anymore.) rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 16:56, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

I've noticed this phenomenon myself. It seems that some people (Costas included) make their s's more postalveolar. The retraction symbol [s̠] can be used. Some speakers sound like they're using a retroflex fricative [ʂ], though there's articulatory variation in the latter symbol that includes sounds that may actually just be [s̠]. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi]} 19:48, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks to everyone for responding. -- Flyguy649 ^talk 17:13, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

If I understand what you're talking about, listen to some of the songs by Pink (singer). She has this pronunciation. It's especailly notable in "Please Don't Leave Me". Woogee (talk) 20:45, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

This issue sounds related to something that is important in Indic languages. The Devanagari alphabet includes three different s-like sounds (sibilants). They differ based on the position of the tongue. The "dental" s (स) is like English s. Another is a palatal (श), and the third is specifically a retroflex (ष). Most people can hear the difference between the first of these (स as in English "sin" or "sun") and the last two. The distintion between ष ("cerebral s" or "retroflex s", like English "shut" or or "shine" or "bush") and श ("palatal s", like English "sure", made in the palate) is more subtle but may be close to the sound you are trying to pin down. Buddhipriya (talk) 00:25, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

March 3

Pluralization

"The best guide clinically for the proper interproximal bony architecture seems to be the interproximal configuration of the cementoenamel junction of the adjacent teeth."

I recognize that the jargon may throw one off, but should either or both of the underlined nouns be pluralized, seeing how they are anatomical landmarks of the adjacent teeth. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 01:18, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Russian Rues

An earlier rune-like and possibly syllabic script was simultaneously discarded, and so thoroughly discouraged that today there are no uncontested specimens of it in existence.

What are the contested specimens?174.3.99.176 (talk) 01:43, 3 March 2010 (UTC)