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

April 13

es

What is veer?174.3.123.220 (talk) 08:01, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

What is "es"? -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 08:21, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Probably "edit summary"; that's where it says "NPOV veer". Why don't you ask the editor, User:Nmate, directly? Clarityfiend (talk) 10:08, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Correct English? "such nicer"

Is it correct to say: you have such nicer chairs than us. 188.174.4.248 (talk) 08:32, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

No, you would go "you have much nicer chairs than we do". --Richardrj ^{talk email} 08:34, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

... or "Your chairs are so much nicer than ours". Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:35, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Or, "You have such nice chairs; they're much nicer than ours". -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 08:37, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I'd have to say there is nothing incorrect about "such nicer" and it sounds fine to me although "much" is more common. It may, to many, sound a strange construction but I cannot think of any rule against it. meltBanana 12:09, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

meltBanana, is English the first language you ever talked fluently in? (I'm not asking if you're a 'native speaker', a different question). 84.153.214.140 (talk) 15:42, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

First and only language I can claim any fluency in, but apparently not quite enough. Lots of words could replace "nicer" in that sentence after either "such" or "much": "heavier, funkier, comfier, greener, prettier, smaller" etc. but "such nicer" does not work? I would guess it is because "such nice" is a semi-fossilised phrase and as such people can't read it properly when it is "such nicer" so it seems wrong. but then you probably shouldn't take grammar advice from me as I am a bit of a descriptivist grammar anarchist (aGrammachist?) meltBanana 21:53, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

"Such" means "(the) like" or "so" (with which it apparently has a common origin). The expression "and such" is equivalent to "and the like". It's used for equating rather than comparing in a superior way, as with "nicer". "Such nice" equates the subject with "nice". "Such nicer" doesn't really work. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:30, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Then why does 'so much nicer' work, BB? It's because it means 'nicer [to a certain as-yet-unspoken extent]', in the same way as 'such nicer' theoretically could. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 21:33, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

As a native English speaker, I think that such cannot be used with a comparative adjective. It is an adverb similar to very in this way. Marco polo (talk) 13:27, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

"You have such a nicer chair than me/I do" sounds fine to me, so why shouldn't "You have such nicer chairs than us/we do"? I'm a native speaker and this question has puddled me a little. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 21:13, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

It's odd. Going slowly through it, yes, it does sound wrong, but on the hand, it doesn't sound so wrong I wouldn't use or hear it in fluent informal speech. Not saying I eve have done, just that I doubt my ears would prick up if I did. - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 21:19, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't think that sentence works, but something like "You have such nicer chairs than us that I want to buy them." works. "Such" should generally be used in the form "such ___ that ___". It is common to say things like "You have such nice chairs." but "You have very nice chairs." is preferable. --Tango (talk) 22:37, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree that it works very well for me with "a nicer chair" (singular), but is odd in the plural form, for some reason. --Lgriot (talk) 23:50, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I went out for dinner last night and had a really excellent meal. It was such a good meal!

Could I have said "It was such a better meal"? Or "It was such a/the best meal"? I very much doubt it. I'm with Marco Polo here. This usage of 'such' requires the positive form of the adjective. It's an intensifier that implicitly puts this particular meal way ahead of many other, unspecified meals. It's way better than any of them, and may even be the best meal I ever had, but I still don't use 'better' or 'best' with 'such'. That's because, as others have said, 'such a <good meal>' is roughly equivalent to 'a very <good meal>', and we never say 'very better'. We do say 'the very best', but that doesn't mean we can say 'such a best' or 'such the best' or 'such best'. 'Such a <good meal>' is also roughly equivalent to 'an extremely <good meal>', and we never say either 'extremely better' or 'extremely best'.

Now, when we're comparing one thing with another and making a marked contrast, we can't use 'such' in the way some people are saying is ok to their native English ears. (I'm really surprised to hear this being defended, and while I accept there are many Englishes, I wouldn't have thought this was standard usage in any of them.) We have to use 'much' or 'so much'. Your chairs are (so) much better than ours, rather than Your chairs are such better than ours. So, to come full circle, You have such nicer chairs than us is not on, and not only for the inappropriate use of 'such'. You can't compare chairs with people, or pretend that 'we' are chairs, which is what this is saying. It has to be something like You have such nice chairs; they're (so) much nicer than ours. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 10:00, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I (native Brit Eng speaker) fully agree, and am equally bemused by some of the other comments here. "Such a nicer chair..." and "Such nicer chairs..." both seem, to me, unequivocally wrong. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:12, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I (native Am Eng speaker) fully agree too. "Such nicer chairs" is simply ungrammatical for me. +Angr 10:24, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

The singular version really sounds fine to me, but not the plural version, which sounds clumsy. The only example online that I could find was a question on Yahoo Answers (where someone asks why women have 'such nicer butts', so I decided not to use that to illustrate my case :) ). --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 10:46, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Wise move. The premise of the question is obviously false to begin with. +Angr 11:07, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

You don' realise what you're missing lol.--92.251.220.72 (talk) 17:41, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I have said the phrase to myself several times and I can't find anything wrong with it. Maybe there is some prescriptive grammar that says that "such" cannot be followed by a comparative, but I would have no difficulty understanding the phrase if someone said it, and it would not even occur to me that the phrase might not be correct. I'm a native AmE speaker.

There are some google hits for "such larger", "such greater", etc. Also, the replacement "much greater" obviously has a different meaning than "such greater", to my ear. — Carl (CBM · talk) 11:13, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Re Jack of Oz's comments about "such a better", that phrase is clearly fine, with seven million google hits. — Carl (CBM · talk) 11:14, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

such + comparative does seem to be used, at least marginally, in constructions like "Why does X have such Y-er Zs?" See "why do" "such bigger" and "why do" "such larger" for examples. (But note: there are lots of false positive hits there, and lots where the "why do" and "such X-er" are not contiguous.) rʨanaɢ (talk) 12:52, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Pooh, Google! What would they know! Any source that disagrees with me is obviously wrong, and can be haughtily and contemptuously dismissed.  :) -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 20:24, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Gender

What is the plural of brother?

"Brothers"; formerly also "brethren", now used only in religious contexts. Note that the difference between singular and plural is in grammatical number, not grammatical gender. — Kpalion^(talk) 09:08, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Note the "en" pluralization, suggstive of Germanic origins, as with "men", "women", "children". As per my Webster's: "Brother" is Bruder in modern German (although, curiously, the German plural appears to be Brüder rather than Bruderen), Old High German bruodor, Old English brothor, Latin frater, Greek phrater. Schwester for "sister", Old English sweostor, Old Norwegian systir, Latin soror, Sanskrit svasr. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:22, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Bugs, in "children", "brethren", and "oxen", the "en" operates as a suffix, but in "men" and "women" the "en" is part of the basic root (with umlaut modification). Historically, the English forms "children" and "brethren" are actually double plurals (which explains why you don't find any n consonant in the plural of German Bruder). AnonMoos (talk) 16:12, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Sehr gut. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:31, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Antonym

Can give be a antonym of get??? --Extra999 (Contact ^me + _contribs) 12:56, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I can't think of any examples in which it would be. The two words would seem to be more or less antonyms. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 13:01, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I had a difficult time comprehending this Q without quotation marks, so here it is, corrected:

Can "give" be a synonym an antonym of "get" ? StuRat (talk) 13:41, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

"Get" was sometimes used as a variation of the verb "beget", so a sentence along the lines of "I will get a child on Alice" (meaning "I will make Alice pregnant") was possible, and can be seen as close in meaning to "I will give Alice a child", though they have nuances of differing attitudes. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 13:55, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, we could say the same about the more common phrase "I will get Alice pregnant". I think what the OP is probably referring to is how we say 'get sbd. a present'. Here it doesn't mean 'give' per se, but more like 'fetch' or 'bring' I would say. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 14:26, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

In that example I would have said closer to "obtain", as a previous and distinct action from the subsequent giving, but see [1]. The 'working class' use of the verb get to construct a phrase describing almost any any action has I dimly recall been perjoratively remarked on, possibly by George Orwell (not apparently in the essay Politics and the English Language: in 1984?) or Anthony Burgess. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 15:30, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, antonyms. For comparison, I'm thinking of the FTP commands "GET" and "PUT". Opposite directions. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:46, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry friends, it was antonym. --Extra999 (Contact ^me + _contribs) 15:45, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, that changes the whole game. Yes, get and give are antonyms. As in "giving as good as you get", and so on. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:49, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Without checking the history, it looks to me like the original question was "Can give be a synonym of get". After a few answers were given, the word "synonym" was changed to "antonym", with nothing to show it had ever been different. Coming to this thread for the first time now, it's very difficult to follow what the heck's going on. Richardrj and StuRat look like they've lost most of their marbles, etc. Extra999, next time you change a question, please strike out the original words (like this) and insert the new words beside them. That way, newcomers will have a chance of comprehending the game without having to go through a befuddlement stage. Thanks. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 17:54, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

OK>

a real answer?

I bet you can find at least one game, normally played seated, where (at least by custom) you can give up by getting up. Then in fiction about the game: "The play caught Smith totally off guard. His response, the only possible one, was to [get/give] up, take leave politely, and walk briskly away from the indignity, and towards the bar." :). 84.153.214.140 (talk) 15:34, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

He meant to say "antonym" anyway. But "getting up" does not equate to "giving up". They are separate acts. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:49, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Baseball Bugs here--though you could craft a sentence where "getting up" and "giving up" were accomplished with one act, they are still distinct ideas and actions--one a physical act and the other a mental act, a decision. Nice try, though! Perhaps we could try to argue that "Give them hell!" and "Get a victory!" could be almost synonymous under the right circumstances? I'm really stretching things, here. Especially considering that even if those two phrases could be said to be synonymous, the two verbs are not functioning as independent units and therefore can't be meaningfully compared... Staplovich (talk) 21:33, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Japanese translation

Can someone please translate the text at the bottom of the following image http://park.geocities.jp/matukinrei/fhoto/km.JPG I am placing the link in this form because for some reason it doesn't work, at least on my browser, when I access it as a link, but does if it is copied and pasted into my address bar. If it would help you with the translation, the image depicts Masako Katsura, Kinrey Matsuyama and Vernon Greenleaf in or about 1951-1956.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:33, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

It says 'Kinrei Matsuyama (left) and Masako Katsura (right)'. It also includes their sports titles - '選手' - which just means 'player' and needn't be translated. Masako's name is written as 桂　マサ子, in answer to the question posted yesterday [EDIT] - and I see now that that was cleared up, too. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 16:11, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks KägeTorä. Now the question is, can I claim this as anonymous because there's no information on the photo, and thus that it is public domain after 50 years per Japanese copyright law, or do I need more than "the source provides no information on its provenance". Damn. (Not really asking; just talking to myself. I'll head over to media copyright questions for this).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:02, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

No worries. I wouldn't have a clue about that anyway - I'm just a lowly linguist :) Always best to be careful were you get pictures from, though, especially if you're making yogurt. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 21:41, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Japanese

Why was Porygon-Z's original Japanese name porigon zetto rather than porigon zii? --70.129.184.122 (talk) 20:38, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

(Porygon is the link, for editors who don't know what you're referring to.) Comet Tuttle (talk) 20:47, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

• I don't know if this helps, but the Japanese rendition of English zed is ゼッド (zeddo). --151.51.15.200 (talk) 20:55, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
• Its Japanese name, according to Bulbapedia, is ポリゴンZ and from [2] As with Porygon2, it is currently believed that Porygon-Z will not appear in the anime as a result of the Electric Soldier Porygon incident, except possibly as a brief cameo. It is currently the only Generation IV Pokémon that has not appeared in the movies or anime yet.
  So, the question is, just out of curiosity, where did you hear its name? --151.51.15.200 (talk) 21:03, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Google search of ポリゴン　ゼット (zetto) gives 67,400 ghits and　ポリゴン　ゼッド (zeddo) gives 216 (of which the first one is a question asking if it's 'zetto' or 'zeddo'). Japanese Wikipedia's article on Porygon-Z also gives it as 'zetto'. In Japanese, 'Z' can be either 'zeddo' or 'zetto' but is usually 'zetto' (as ALC says here - you hear 'zeddo' more in English Language Schools). Hope this helps. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 21:22, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

But where do either of those come from? Wouldn't a direct transcription of Z into katakana be zii? --70.129.184.122 (talk) 21:57, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Zed is the British/Canadian term for Z. Look here: [3]--151.51.15.200 (talk) 22:11, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

And ALC does give ジー but it really is not used much. The Japanese Wikipedia article on the letter 'z' says (at the bottom of that section) that the letter is mostly pronounced 'zetto' in Japan. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 22:17, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

It seems more likely to me that it came from Dutch, where apparently the name is "zet" (according to the Z article). The Dutch were among the first European countries to have extensive trade with Japan, and the only ones allowed in during most of the Edo period. Rckrone (talk) 22:23, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I've heard numerous hypotheses on the subject, and that was one of them. However, it strikes me as odd that only one letter would have a Dutch name, while the rest have English names. Another hypothesis I was told was that it was because the Latin name is 'zeta' (doesn't explain the change from 'zeta' to 'zetto' with elongated 't' + 'o', usually indicative of original final '-t'), and still other people have said it came from German. This is all just things I've heard, of course, and can't provide sources. The Japanese Wikipedia article for ゼット does say it's from Dutch, though. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 22:36, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

A little bit late here, but I wouldn't trust jaWiki on stuff like this, note the no sources. There is a relatively regular process in which voiced consonants de-voice after the sokuon in fast speech, and it is generally perceived as "hard to pronounce" most voiced consonants in that position. The jaWiki for "hot dog", often seen and heard pronounced as "hot dock", also lists German as the reason for this, with the only source being a link to a food menu. This is ridiculous though, because there are loads of words (googleable) that fall victim to the same process:

ブルドック bulldock ドックフード dock food ドックラン dock run プレーリードック prairie dock ソルティードック salty dock ドックレース dock race 人間ドッグ hilariously, human dog (the opposite effect here) ドッギング： dogging

And then there's "bed" becoming "bet", and "bag" turning into "back".

This page seems to believe they have been affected by the fact that Japanese historically was written without voicing marks, which may hint that voicing was ignored at the time, and still are (in certain environments) for many people. Why is dock so prominent and not back and bet? People might be overcorrecting themselves (when eventually writing the word down) thinking that "dog" is a silly name for a type of food, thus increasing the acceptability of both sounds, but that doesn't explain dock food.

Anyway, this is why it's called Porigon Zetto, though if they had thought really hard they would have called it Porigon Zeddo. As for why it's not called Porigon Zii, there are a few reasons. A) Zeddo is much more commonly used for Z, perhaps because of a perceived weakness in pronouncing N/American style "z" B) Zii is pronounced similar to "gee" (no IPA sorry), which is the same as a Japanese person would pronounce G, if you want to force correct pronunciation it has to be written as "zu" + small "i", thus borrowing the consonant initial from /zu/ (or /dzu/) with the vowel /i/, and this is a combination that many Japanese have trouble with, or find troublesome. I don't think I've ever heard a Japanese person pronounce Z in this way voluntarily.

219.102.220.42 (talk) 04:25, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

German exonims

Looking at the German Wikipedia, I noticed that a lot of Italian cities of Northern Italy have a German translation (dt. veraltet means ancient german name). Here are some examples:
Como > Chum, Sondrio > Sünders, Bergamo > Wälsch-Bergen, Milano > Mailand, Pavia > Pawei, Lodi > Lauden, Crema > Krem, Cremona > Kremun, Brescia > Wälsch-Brixen, Mantova > Mantua, Verona > Bern, Vicenza > Wiesentheim, Padova > Esten, Venezia > Venedig, Belluno > Beilun, Udine > Weiden, Lecco > Leck, Vigevano > Vigen, Feltre > Felters, Varese > Väris, Legnano > Ligni, Monza > Montsch, Bassano del Grappa > Bassan.
While it's normal to have German exonims for Trentino-Alto Adige/Südtirol or for main cities (Roma, Firenze, Napoli...), some of the towns I mentioned are pretty minor. How do you explain this? It is because Kingdom of Lombardy–Venetia, while almost entirely Italian-speaking, was part of the Austrian Empire? When were they instituited for the first time? And, if so, I would like to find a list of ancient German names of now-Italian cities. I'm seeking expecially for: Rovigo, Treviso, Schio, Conegliano, Magenta, Goito, Solferino, Chioggia and Concordia. --151.51.15.200 (talk) 20:52, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Not all of the towns in your second list will necessarily have their own German names. Even though the towns in your first list are relatively unimportant today, either 1) they were important towns or even independent city-states during the Middle Ages as part of the Holy Roman Empire, or 2) they are at the base of the Alps not far from German-speaking areas, for which they could have served as commercial entrepots. Some of the towns meet both criteria. Therefore, in medieval times, each of these towns probably had a German-speaking minority of soldiers and itinerant merchants. Most of the towns in your second list were too insignificant and/or too far from German-speaking areas in the Middle Ages for this to be true. Marco polo (talk) 00:13, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

The article "German exonyms" might be helpful. -- Wavelength (talk) 00:28, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Wow. That's a sentence I didn't expect to see. —Tamfang (talk) 21:27, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

[I am adding quotation marks to my comment of 00:28, for use–mention distinction. -- Wavelength (talk) 22:06, 14 April 2010 (UTC)]

The only town of the ones you asked about specifically where I have read a German exonym is "Tervis" for Treviso. For example on an old map by Sebastian Münster: "Von der Statt Treviso / oder Tervis" ("of the town Treviso / or Tervis"). 18th item, "EUI1273", on this site ---Sluzzelin talk 01:45, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Demolished building

Resolved

Why is it said that a demolished building was raised to the ground. Raised gives the impression of something going up not down. Thanks, Mo ainm~Talk 21:20, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

I think it's "razed" to the ground, not "raised". Although spelling it as "raised" probably happens from time to time. AlexiusHoratius 21:24, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

The etymology of "raze" - for which "rase" is (or was) an alternative spelling - is related to "abrasion" and "razor" and refers to scraping something back. "Raise" has quite a different origin, from Norse via Old English. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:35, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

This pair of words is a fine example of both the homophone and its subset, the heterograph. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 21:43, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

There was an editorial cartoon in the 1980's, depicting Ronald Reagan explaining that the "secret plan to raise taxes" which he was accused of having was actually a "secret plan to raze Texas" -- AnonMoos (talk) 07:53, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Great thanks for the replies had a feeling it wasn't spelt that way. Mo ainm~Talk 09:29, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Eye of the Tiger lyrics

What do they sing in the chorus? Various lyrics websites, e.g. this one or this one, give the lyrics as follows: It's the eye of the tiger, it's the thrill of the fight/Rising up to the challenge of our rival. However, Survivor do not pronounce the sounds of the phrase I underlined in the same way as they do elsewhere in the same lyrics. The /aɪ/ (/ʌi/?) diphthong that can be heard, say, in tiger or fight, or, where it's followed by /v/, alive or survivor, is definitely not what's in rival. The /v/ itself and with the other /v/'s in the text are not as like as two peas either. This website gives the lyrics in another way: Risin' up to the challenge if I rather. Is this meaningless? None of the numerous dictionaries I possess say rather can be a verb, neither does Wiktionary. Thanks. --Магьосник (talk) 23:54, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

From years of listening to this song I have always assumed it was "rival", and indeed I do not hear anything that would cause me to doubt my perception of that word. Singers are hardly consistent with the manner in which they sing, and they do take odd liberties with pronunciation -- as evidenced by the strange conversion of the "l"s in "challenge" to "r" sounds. However, I hear nothing out of the ordinary in Dave Bickler's pronunciation of "rival", and definitely nothing to suggest he wanted an "a" or "th" sound. Xenon54 / talk / 00:07, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I recall that "our rival(s)" appears on Karaoke machines. FWIW, /v/ and /ð/ are similar sounding, differing acoustically from each other only in their pitch. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi]} 01:38, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

In this youtube[4] I'm hearing "our rival" every time he says it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:52, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Anyway, most Americans pronounce "rather" with an [æ] vowel which is not too similar to a standard [ai] diphthong. AnonMoos (talk) 07:43, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Our article Eye of the Tiger includes a quote from one of the songwriters affirming that it's "rival" and was originally supposed to rhyme with "survival" until the text was changed, leaving it an assonance of "tiger". +Angr 10:32, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks everyone. Anyway, is a hypothetical *rising up to the challenge if I rather meaningless? --Магьосник (talk) 17:44, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Not necessarily meaningless, but definitely ungrammatical. "Rising up to the challenge if I'd rather" is at least grammatical, but not particularly meaningful. +Angr 18:07, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

The meaning, to me, would be that they may or may not make a real effort, which runs counter to the rest of the song, which states that they definitely will make the effort. StuRat (talk) 18:29, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

April 14

Is there a larger variation of the Sator Square?

The Sator Square is composed of 5x5 of chracters. Is there a larger English version of words that accomplish the same effect of making words up to down and left to right in each row in perhaps 6x6 or 7x7 characters? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.137.11.38 (talk) 12:42, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

The article on word square has a few examples under "Modern English squares", up to order eight:

B I T	C A R D	H E A R T	G A R T E R	B R A V A D O	L A T E R A L S
I C E	A R E A	E M B E R	A V E R S E	R E N A M E D	A X O N E M A L
T E N	R E A R	A B U S E	R E C I T E	A N A L O G Y	T O E P L A T E
	D A R T	R E S I N	T R I B A L	V A L U E R S	E N P L A N E D
		T R E N D	E S T A T E	A M O E B A S	R E L A N D E D
			R E E L E D	D E G R A D E	A M A N D I N E
				O D Y S S E Y	L A T E E N E R
					S L E D D E R S

---Sluzzelin talk 12:50, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

And if you read on, it then gives an order-9 square and discusses attempts at an order-10 square. --Anonymous, 21:41 UTC, April 14, 2010.

Here's one order-10 attempt I came across in my travels:

D I S C U S S I N G

I N C A N T A T O R

S C A R L A T I N A

C A R N I T I N E S

U N L I K E N E S S

S T A T E S W R E N

S A T I N W E A V E

I T I N E R A T E S

N O N E S E V E N T

G R A S S N E S T S

The square's creator, Ted Clarke of Cornwall, acknowledges he had to "stretch the boundaries of language a little" to accommodate a word such as "nonesevent", the meaning of which, he says, is an event occurring on the 9th day before the Ides (e.g. of March). But it's not found in any dictionary. Needless to say ... well, apparently there's some need to say it since I intend to do so very soon; right now, in fact ... the solution is not universally accepted as valid. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 11:22, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

If "nonesevent" (i.e. "nones event") has any meaning at all, it would presumably be "an event occurring on the Nones", which according to the Roman calendar is either the 5th or 7th day of the month (depending on the month). AnonMoos (talk) 15:10, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the correction, AnonMoos. I was relying on the 2005 newspaper article I got this from, which was about "the world's hardest puzzle". I should know by now not to trust journalists' explanations of technical issues. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 20:38, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

There's a crucial problem with the answers so far: the Sator Square is a palindrome:

S A T O R
A R E P O
T E N E T
O P E R A
R O T A S

- and none of the examples offered so far are. I haven't got a working English example that's even that large, but these should do for a start:

T E N
E Y E
N E T

P E T S
E M I T
T I M E
S T E P

AlexTiefling (talk) 11:38, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

long word

According to [5] "in long clothes" is a word. What does it mean?174.3.123.220 (talk) 14:25, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

It's not a word, it's a phrase used as a synonym for "beginning". I've never heard it myself, but I guess it means "wearing baby clothes", since those are often one piece, rather than separate pants and shirt. Adam Bishop (talk) 14:39, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

My SOED defines "long-clothes" as "the garments of a baby in arms". Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:40, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

In Victorian times, babies which were too young to move around much on their own were often dressed in long gowns (often going past the feet). Once they started crawling around a lot on their own, then they were dressed in shorter gowns which left the feet free. They wouldn't really be dressed in gender-specific clothing (clearly-differentiated boys' and girls' clothes) until they started walking and talking. AnonMoos (talk) 14:58, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

A traditional infant's christening gown is a semi-surviving example of "long clothes" in the sense above (though it's mentioned only somewhat briefly on the Wikipedia Baptismal clothing article). AnonMoos (talk) 15:04, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

The garb worn by the Popeye character called "Swee'Pea" is an example of one of those long gowns, which in the 1930s would still have been well-known. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:44, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

By the way, the word "shorten" is defined in the OED as having a meaning "To put a child into short clothes", with the quote "I have shortened our darling" ... AnonMoos (talk) 05:41, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

That colloquialism could be handed down from one generation to another, its users being "shortenin' bred". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:15, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Definition

What is "fatihah." [6]?174.3.123.220 (talk) 15:19, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Sura 1 of the Qur'an... AnonMoos (talk) 15:27, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

What is "le premier pas"? (same place)174.3.123.220 (talk) 15:20, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

French for "the first step". -- Flyguy649 ^talk 15:30, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

What is "narrow end of the wedge"? (same place)174.3.123.220 (talk) 15:23, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

It's the part of a wedge that is put into the crack, (ie. the narrowest point of the triangular wedge). It's the part that goes first. -- Flyguy649 ^talk 15:30, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Metaphorically, the "narrow end of the wedge" (or "thin end of the wedge") is something small that leads to greater consequences. For example, relaxing the rules about some minor point may be seen as the "thin end of the wedge" that will result in more relaxation of the rules in increasingly significant points. +Angr 15:45, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Coincidentally (just before this question was asked), I was visiting the Beat the Whites with the Red Wedge article... AnonMoos (talk) 15:51, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Sounds like the "slippery slope" argument, or, "if you give them an inch, they'll take a mile". StuRat (talk) 17:04, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

plural of word

Mrs is a singlar ,what should be its plural.also what is plural of Miss. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.154.110.243 (talk) 16:33, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Both of them are adjectives so they have no plural. However, if you treat them as nouns(which you shouldn't) I guess "misses" is a mass noun, while the plural of "miss" would be "misses".--92.251.220.72 (talk) 16:40, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

(e/c) Both are nouns. Miss is straightforward: the plural is Misses (as in John Singer Sargent's painting The Misses Vickers (see here). Mrs. is more difficult and rarely attempted as a plural, but the French Mesdames (plural of Madame; abbreviated to Mmes) has been used in English for the purpose - see Wiktionary. Karenjc 16:46, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Miss was widely used as a noun in the nineteenth century ("a young miss" etc), but a little less so in today's language. I think Mrs. is rarely used as a real noun (as opposed to an honorific title prefix), except in the fixed slang phrase "the Mrs". Historically, Mrs. was originally a contracted form of "Mistress", the feminine of "Mister"/"Master", but this doesn't help in trying to pluralize it, and the fact that it ends in a phonological [sɪz] sequence helps ensure that it doesn't have a real plural (the pronunciation [mɪsɪzɪz] would sound ridiculous...). AnonMoos (talk) 17:36, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

If you are trying to pluralize Mrs. in a sentence, recast the sentence so you don't need a plural form. If you're writing a letter, you can address it to "Mrs. Smith and Mrs. Jones", for example. The online Merriam-Webster's Learner's Dictionary suggests Mesdames, per Karnejc above.[7] -- Flyguy649 ^talk 17:47, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

But still, suppose a man has the habit of saying "the Mrs." for his wife. Now suppose he's been married several times. He's telling a story: "My first Mrs. said ABC, but my second Mrs. thought DEF, and my third Mrs.—" and at that point you interrupt and say "How many Mrs.es ([ˈmɪsɪzɪz]) have you had?" +Angr 18:05, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

We have narcissuses and censuses. -- Wavelength (talk) 19:25, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

The Daniel Jones pronunciation of "censuses" would be [sɛnsəsɪz], so it's not the same thing as [mɪsɪzɪz]. AnonMoos (talk) 22:30, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

And missuses.—msh210℠ 19:35, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually, AnonMoos misses (sorry) a point made by Flyguy below. the feminine of "Mister"/"Master", but this doesn't help in trying to pluralize it well it does help: an accepted plural of Mister is Messieurs, sometimes written "Messrs", which backs up the similarly-derived plural Mesdames mentioned. Sussexonian (talk) 20:30, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

The OED gives, for the plural, either Mrs. or Mesdames. This Canadian site also suggests Mmes. or Mms. (but I have never seen the latter). Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:49, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Or, in British English, any of those without the full-stop. Bazza (talk) 13:24, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Name of ideoligical conflict of the 20th century?

Is there a name for the huge conflict between capitalism and communism, democracy, dictatorship and naziism that took place throughout much of the 20th century?--92.251.220.72 (talk) 16:38, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I've heard "the battle of ideas" used. StuRat (talk) 16:58, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I think you've identified several distinct conflicts. I don't think that they all share a single name. Indeed, I don't think that there was a single conflict between democracy and dictatorship, nor was there a single ideology of dictatorship. There were many different ideologies and many different struggles against dictatorship in different times and places. Marco polo (talk) 19:19, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

"The short twentieth century", or "The Age of Extremes", covers the period. Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:39, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Marco polo that there are several distinct conflicts here, not all of which took place on a global scale. Of those that did, the conflict between capitalism and communism is known as the Cold War (though that term usually refers only to the period 1945 - 1989), and the conflict between Naziism and other forms of government is known as World War II. John M Baker (talk) 21:01, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Basically I am looking for terms that refer to the period 1914-1989, in the same way Age of enlightenment and Victorian era refer to their respective times. Thanks Ghmyrtle, but those words don't suit my conext.--92.251.220.72 (talk) 22:18, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Pretty much this same question came up on one of the ref desks just a few days ago. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:23, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Well if it did, I didn't ask it. What exactly are you suggesting?--92.251.252.11 (talk) 16:16, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

There might not really be a term for this yet, since we're sort of still living in it (and how do we know it really ended in 1989?). In a couple of hundred years it will all be clearer (after the long twenty-first century, no doubt). Aside from Ghmyrtle's link, there is also a long nineteenth century, and an overlapping "long eighteenth century" (1688-1848) and "short eighteenth century" (1715-1789) as our 18th century article notes. Adam Bishop (talk) 03:52, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

At least a few call the war/repression aspects of the 20th century the "hemoclysm"[8]... AnonMoos (talk) 05:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Though this term wouldn't capture all of the ideological and geopolitical conflicts involved, you could certainly refer to that period as the "Rise of the US" or the "Rise and Consolidation of US Hegemony" Staplovich (talk) 21:21, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

The more traditional term is American Century, but the United States was minimally involved in Europe between 1919-1942, and so did not really participate in many phases of such conflict... AnonMoos (talk) 21:29, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

AnonMoos is absolutely right; I've definitely heard the term "American Century" before; though, to my ears, it smacks of US nationalism. That is, I feel the term is generally used in a proud manner, and seems tied to the current neoconservative agenda to expand US influence throughout the world. I would also say that many non-US citizens who live in the Americas resent the term "America" being used synonymously with "the United States of America." So it might be better to avoid that term? Staplovich (talk) 21:37, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I feel American century demeans the efforts of the Allied forces, which, contrary to popular media, were a huge mix of nations.--92.251.168.135 (talk) 22:04, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

It's always kind of funny that people who live outside of North America don't want to offend (say) Canadians and avoid saying "Americans". But to me, "American" can only refer to the United States. I think I would rather be offended if you referred to all of us as "American". Adam Bishop (talk) 00:12, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Hawaiian diacritical use not explained

The Hawaiian language contains many diacritic's and they are not explained within the language diacritical's page. Going to the United States section does not list them either, even though Hawaii is a part of the US. If an expert could be found, would appreciate the addition of this information to your website. Thank you. MRoof (talk) 18:27, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Is Hawaiian language#Orthography (writing system) unsatisfactory? —Tamfang (talk) 18:32, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

In fact, Hawaiian has only one diacritic, the macron. The only other "funny character" it has is the okina ‹ʻ›, but that's not a diacritic because it doesn't modify other letters. +Angr 19:43, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Puzzling use of "people"

I don't really expect a clean-cut decision here, but I'm interested in other people's reactions. I ran across this quotation from Gordon Brown, in reference to his preparation for the televised debates: "The best teacher is the people of Britain." Intuitively, this sentence strikes me as very odd, even while my analytic brain insists that it's grammatically correct. Perhaps it's simply a matter of old-timeyness, since a phrase like "the people of Britain" would almost always be accorded a plural concord in contemporary speech. I am nevertheless aware that the word "people" may still take a singular concord, depending on the sense of the word intended. And it wouldn't have bothered me if Brown had said "The best teacher is the British people". Even "The British people is the best teacher" would have sounded less strange to my ears. Incidentally, I'm American. Does Brown's sentence sound awkward to British speakers? LANTZY^TALK 19:48, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

It doesn't sound very odd to my American ears. I can easily imagine an American politician saying "The best teacher is the people of America." Marco polo (talk) 20:33, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm also American, and it also sounds fine to me. It's even OK to say "a people", as in "The British are a people who talk funny". :-) StuRat (talk) 20:41, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

As a Brit it does sound odd to me - presumably the wording "The best teachers are the people of Britain" was not used for fear of offending real teachers. (I too can easily imagine an American politician saying "The best teacher is the people of America" - your last President committed far worse offences than that against the language.) Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:58, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

But Bush wasn't actually speaking English, was he ? :-) StuRat (talk) 14:06, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I believe it is meant to be read in the same way as if it said "the public" instead of "the people". I don't think this is the "'people' as a plural of 'person'" sense. --Anonymous, 21:48 UTC, April 14, 2010.

The speaker kind of painted himself into a corner verbally with that construct. However, it's worth noting that "people"/"populace" and "public" have similar derivations, the Latin populus and publicus respectively, which my Webster's says are "akin". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Anonymous. The meaning is not that individual people of Britain are each good teachers (as in "The best teachers are the people of Britain"), it's that collectively the people are a good teacher. The idea of course being that politicians should take their queues from the democratic will of the people, which is not to say that they should follow the opinion of any given random person on the street. Rckrone (talk) 06:58, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

That word ordering seems fine. "noun1 noun2" constructions are always replaceable with "noun2 of noun1"--92.251.220.72 (talk) 22:22, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Most of what Gordon Brown says sounds awkward to me. Alansplodge (talk) 00:16, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm reminded of what Lord Mancroft said: "Cricket - a game which the English, not being a spiritual people, have invented in order to give themselves some conception of eternity".  :) -- 202.142.129.66 (talk) 03:40, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

The Labour Party seems to be making awkward constructions a key part of its election strategy, starting with its bizarre slogan "a future fair for all". AndrewWTaylor (talk) 07:48, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

It would certainly be a roller coaster ride. Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

English plural says "people" can be a singular noun (see also Collective noun). In any case, it is permissible though sometimes awkward to link a singular and a plural noun by the copula "to be" (here "is") e.g. "a foot is twelve inches". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.41.72.25 (talk) 12:39, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

The subject of "is" is "teacher" (both singular); "people" (in any sense) is the complement. The alphabet is the ABCs; The ABCs are the alphabet.

-- Wavelength (talk) 14:12, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

List of Simplified Chinese Characters

Does there exist a list somewhere that lists all of the Chinese characters that have been simplified or a comprehensive list of all of the general simplification rules (ex: 門 ⇒ 门) as well as the unique simplifications? I've looked all over on the internet for some sort of a list that covers all of the simplification methods/all the characters that have been simplified but haven't been able to find one. Preferably, I'd like one that is available for free on the internet. -- Trevor K 20:00, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

It's linked from the Chinese version of the Simplified Chinese characters article: General Table of Simplied Characters. Click on 4, 5, and 6 for the three tables.

See also the proposed Common Chinese Characters Table, which is in the public consultation phase. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 22:53, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

The one I have is called a dictionary. DOR (HK) (talk) 07:58, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

April 15

Use of to

What's going on grammatically when someone says "I couldn't help but to dance", instead of "I couldn't help but dance"? 149.169.127.65 (talk) 04:08, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Variation in using a long infinitive where others would use a short infinitive. Doubt that there's any meaning difference. AnonMoos (talk) 05:04, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

It sounds "foreign" to me, but the long infinitive is almost as common as the short in a Google search. I would prefer to say "I couldn't help dancing". Perhaps there are regional preferences? Dbfirs 08:37, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

It's a fairly common American colloquialism, especially among the rural, although at this hour I'm having trouble coming up with any specific examples. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:00, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree that this is a common form in American English, and I think not just in rural areas. My sense is that the form without to is much more common in speech. I suspect that to is an attempt at a more "proper" form and therefore more likely to show up in writing (analogously to going to versus gonna). Marco polo (talk) 14:05, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Probably a mistaken attempt. Google Books has only three examples of "help but to dance", all in the last fifteen years, but over three hundred examples of "help but dance" spanning a long period. This suggests that the long infinitive is a regionalism used by mistake in formal English (since the examples are not direct speech). Dbfirs 20:29, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I think the addition of the 'to' may depend on what comes before that clause. I can't currently articulate any sort of rule here, but if I prefaced that clause with, "She looked so eager," I probably wouldn't follow it with, "I couldn't help but to dance"--I'd probably say, "I couldn't help but dance (with her)." On the other hand, I might certainly say, "The music was so wonderful, I couldn't help but to dance!" Staplovich (talk) 21:15, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Italian pronunciations

Resolved

 – rʨanaɢ (talk) 15:08, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

(In IPA if possible, please! And yes, I know some of these sentences are ungrammatical.)

• Gianni sua madre lo ha madre lo ha sempre apprezzato.
• Il tuo libro, lo ho comprato.
• NESSUNO ho visto.
• Ecco un uomo a cui IL PREMIO NOBEL dovrebbero dare.
• A chi il premio nobel dovrebbero dare?
• daranno
• Il libro, a Gianni, domani, glielo darò senz'altro.
• Credo che a Gianni, QUESTO, domani gli dovremmo dire.
• Penso, a Gianni, di dovergli parlare.

Grazie! rʨanaɢ (talk) 06:24, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

• dʒanni ˈsua ˈmadre 'lo a ˈmadre 'lo a ˈsɛmpre apprɛtˈtsato
• ˈil ˈtuo ˈlibro 'lo o komˈprato
• nesˈsuno o visto
• ˈɛkko un ˈwɔmo a ˈkui ˈil ˈprɛmjo noˈbɛl dovrebbero ˈdare (I'm not sure about dovrebbero)
• A 'ki il ˈprɛmjo noˈbɛl dovrebbero 'dare —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.51.15.200 (talk) 08:58, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
• ˈil ˈlibro a dʒanni do'mani ˈʎelo daˈrɔ 'sɛntsaltro
• 'kredo 'ke a dʒanni 'kwesto do'mani ʎli dovremmo 'dire (again, not sure about dovremmo)
• 'penso a dʒanni 'di doverʎli par'lare

If you need IPA for Italian words, you could use this link [9]
In correct Italian they would sound something like:

• Sua madre ha sempre apprezzato Gianni.
• Ho comprato il tuo libro.
• Non ho visto nessuno (OMG! Double negation!)
• Ecco un uomo a cui dovrebbero dare il premio Nobel.
• A chi dovrebbero dare il premio Nobel?
• Daranno :-)
• Domani darò senz'altro il libro a Gianni.
• Credo che domani dovremmo dire questo a Gianni.
• Penso di dover parlare a Gianni. (doverGLI is a repetition)

--151.51.15.200 (talk) 08:21, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, everyone. rʨanaɢ (talk) 15:08, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I think some of those stressed vowels (apprezzAto etc.) should be long, phonetically. Just something theoretical I read about Italian, I don't speak it.--91.148.159.4 (talk) 15:02, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Expeditious expeditions

The words 'expedite', 'expeditious' and 'expeditiously' all have to do with getting something done quickly. The noun 'expedition' can also be use in this sense – Sense 2: he presently exerted his utmost agility, and with surprizing expedition ascended the hill.

But the usual sense of 'expedition' is the one related to exploration. This type of expedition can’t be rushed, because by definition they don’t know in advance what they’re going to encounter out there. That is, expeditions are not normally carried out with expedition.

Do both senses of the word 'expedition' come from the same root expeditio, or does the second meaning, which was historically often about a journey on foot, have any connection with the root –ped? -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 09:48, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Apparently, both. That is, both senses come from expeditio, which derives from expedire, which in turn derives from ex and pedem, foot - originally referring to the sending out of an army on foot, lightly equipped and in haste. (I paraphrase from SOED). Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:20, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Even in Latin these words had a wide variety of meanings. It literally means "to free the feet", and could be used in the sense of setting something free, clearing a path through difficult terrain, or preparing anything in general. The verb was also an impersonal verb meaning "it is useful" and we have another English adjective from the same source - expedient. "Expeditio" originally meant a military campaign, and then anything that needed to be prepared or arranged, but at the same time "expeditus" could mean a soldier who could march quickly without too much armour or baggage, as Ghmyrtle said. Adam Bishop (talk) 12:54, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

See http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=expedite&searchmode=none. -- Wavelength (talk) 20:49, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Lovely. Some of these connections never occurred to me before. Thanks for the pedestrian information, everyone.  :) -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 21:27, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Spoken parenthesis in a language

Is there a language with the concept of a parenthesis in the spoken version? For example, a language where there's a formalised means of saying

half a kilogram of (apples and oranges)

or

"stupid westerners" is a prejudiced viewpoint

without relying on intonation or tempo, and without creating any ambiguity? --192.76.7.208 (talk) 13:28, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Do air quotes count? Vimescarrot (talk) 13:41, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

(ec) In English, I often hear the words "quote" and "unquote", as in "quote stupid westerners unquote is a prejudicial term". I also hear it used as "quote unquote stupid westerners is a prejudicial term", which obviously isn't as good, since it's unclear where the quotation ends. Then there's the technique of using the fingers to make "air quotes" while speaking. StuRat (talk) 13:43, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

"Half a kilogram of, for example, apples and oranges" is what the first one means. Both examples could be (and are) (para-)phrased in any language. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 14:19, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

It comes up in mathematics and computer languages, though I suppose based on your example you were thinking of contexts other than those. Speaking mathematically, one way to say x*(x+5) is "x times the quantity x plus 5". The words "the quantity" denote that something after it is in parentheses. It's not entirely unambiguous though since it's not always clear what ends the quantity that is in parenthesis. Thus it really only works with small expressions. Similarly parenthesis can be specified as "open parenthesis" and then "close parenthesis" when one wants to be more precise. (x+3(x-5)) can be read as open parenthesis x plus three times open parenthesis x minus 5 close parenthesis close parenthesis. Since this requires excellent memory and processing for anything but the smallest expressions, it usually requires writing the expression at the same time. The open and close parenthesis thing is actually pretty rare and more often people will specify a combination like x times the quantity x plus 5 in parenthesis or some other phrase such as "with parenthesis around the x plus five" if it is said after. - Taxman ^Talk 18:26, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I will use "paren" and "end paren" when conveying some written material over the phone, to someone who writes it down at the other end. StuRat (talk) 19:05, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Victor Borge made a valiant attempt to introduce Phonetic Punctuation, but it has not as yet been widely adopted. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 18:42, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Mark Antony

Why is he not solely referred to by his Latin name, Marcus Antonius, like other Romans ? StuRat (talk) 13:36, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

You mean like Pliny, Ovid, Horace, Tully (to us old-fashioned sorts), Livy, ... ? Seriously, though, I'm pretty sure that Shakespeare had something to do with it. Deor (talk) 13:44, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm not. Even Chaucer referred to Romans by their English names, and I bet he wasn't the first either. It used to be very common for people to have different names in different languages; nowadays the Pope is just about the only person whose name still gets translated depending on what language he's being referred to in. +Angr 13:56, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I have different names depending on language. My German name is Ä. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi]} 17:39, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I thought everyone called him Benedict? --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 14:13, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Mouse over some of the interlanguage links at Pope Benedict XVI and you'll see they don't. The French call him Benoît, the Italians Benedetto, the Portuguese Bento, and so on. +Angr 14:58, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Or Benedictus, or Benedetto, etc. Look at the interwikis along the side of the Benedict XVI article:

an	Benedet
frp	Benêt
ast	Benedictu
ca	Benet
cy	Bened
de	Benedikt
es	Benedicto
ext	Beneditu
fr	Benoît
ga	Beinidict
gl	Bieito
it	Benedetto
ht	Benwa
la	Benedictus
hu	Benedek
mt	Benedettu
oc	Beneset
pt	Bento

etc. etc. -- AnonMoos (talk) 15:01, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I know that Shakespeare wasn't the first; nevertheless, I suspect that his usage ensured the subsequent almost universal use (in English) of the Anglicized form in this particular case. Deor (talk) 14:52, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

John Wycliff used "August" and "Tiberie", but those didn't stick...I wonder if Gibbon had anything to do with it, since the Decline and Fall was extremely popular. Adam Bishop (talk) 18:39, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm sure neither Shakespeare nor Wycliff innovated or exercised any significant influence on this; this practice must have been the original one, probably dating from Anglo-Saxon times. Dropping or "translating" the Latin endings was a very common practice throughout Europe in the Middle Ages. Marcus Antonius is also Marco Antonio in Italian, Spanish and Portuguese, Marc Antoniu in Romanian, Marc Antoine in French, Mark Antonij in Russian, Bulgarian and Slovene, Marko Antonije in Serbo-Croatian. At least for Russian and Bulgarian, I can vouchsafe that -us and -os are always dropped from Roman and Greek names to this day.--91.148.159.4 (talk) 14:43, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

And also, the Pope is not an exception. Modern ecclesiastical names are still supposed to be "translated" - they are in fact "supranational" and to the extent that they have a "true" form, it is the Latin one. Saints' and biblical and classical figures' names always have their regional variants. Translations and official Latin versions were also proper for Christian monarchs' names in general until recently - any king by the (Latin) name of Carolus was Carlo, Charles, Karl etc., any Ludovicus was Ludovico, Louis, Ludwig, etc., and Johannes was Giovanni, John, Jean, etc..--91.148.159.4 (talk) 14:57, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Right. Hence we have Queen Margrethe II of Denmark but her 15th-century predecessor Margaret I of Denmark. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 21:23, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

And King Juan Carlos of Spain instead of John Charles, and his son, Felipe, Prince of Asturias instead of Philip. Woogee (talk) 23:25, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Right, in contrast to 18th century monarchs Charles III of Spain and Philip V of Spain.--91.148.159.4 (talk) 23:53, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

OK, thanks all. StuRat (talk) 01:53, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Looking for (free) Coptic and/or Aramaic translation

As for Coptic, I was recently trying to decipher a word on an icon of St Anthony, and a friend of mine found a 300-year old Coptic-Latin dictionary that was available online through google books (http://books.google.com/books?id=iE4GAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA61#v=onepage&q&f=false). But this was a cumbersome and still opaque means of translation. And as for Aramaic, the only sites I've found have been pay-for-translation.

Any help or information would be most welcome.

Staplovich (talk) 21:07, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

What's the word? Someone here is bound to know a bit of Coptic or Aramaic. Adam Bishop (talk) 21:13, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, the original word was (English transliteration:) "Pinisht". Some digging around at the aforementioned dictionary yielded two independent words: "Pi", a masculine article, and "Nisht", meaning great (Image:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:StAnthony.jpg). This translation makes perfect sense, as St Anthony is often referred to as "Anthony the Great". But my question is really broader--though I found a translation for this one word, I'd like to find a resource that I could use in the future for this sort of thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Staplovich (talk • contribs) 21:25, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Ask your local orthodox rabbi - most of them have significant experience of translating Aramaic. --Dweller (talk) 12:44, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I've seen quite a few Aramaic and Syriac dictionaries online (I'm sure there are Coptic ones, too). Google.--91.148.159.4 (talk) 14:32, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

There are images from W.E. Crum's Coptic dictionary here or here. I'm not sure about Aramaic, but I know that older dictionaries would have called it "Chaldean" or "Chaldee". There seem to be a few on Google Books. Adam Bishop (talk) 21:11, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

And there is some more modern stuff such as [10], [11], [12]. Some nice oldies: [13], [14].--91.148.159.4 (talk) 00:15, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

April 16

Chinese saying

What is the chinese saying that was used to refer to many of the female in Chinese history who were blamed for the end of dynasties? ex. Consort Yu, Daji and Yang Guifei. It is something about a red something (bird?) always disturb the water.

You are probably thinking of 紅顏禍水/ 红颜祸水[15]. 一笑傾城 / 一笑倾城 also works. [16] (literally: one smile falls city) --Kvasir (talk) 04:02, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Colloquial American English:Lifts ==>Lifs

1. Is it acceptable to says "lifs" instead of "lifts" in "He lifts heavy things"?

2. Please elaborate. --68.215.227.6 (talk) 00:22, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

First off, I'll start by saying that precisely speaking, there is no one American English; there are many American Englishes. So in some regional dialects, some Americans might pronounce the /t/ while in other dialects they might not. It might also depend on context--who is the person speaking to? Is it a casual situation, or a formal one?

That said, I can tell you that I would normally omit the /t/ sound when saying, "He lifts up heavy things." I live in Richmond, VA, and my regional dialect(s) surely affect my pronunciation. (Actually, thinking about it, I actually pronounce "dialects" as "dialex"--again omitting the /t/.) Hope this is helpful. Staplovich (talk) 00:34, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I was only asking about the pronunciation of "lifts" in casual situations where proper articulation is not of paramount importance.

User:Staplovich's answer was extremely helpful.--68.215.227.6 (talk) 00:54, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Found some interesting articles sort of related to this, hope you have JSTOR access:

• Temperley, Mary S. "The Articulatory Target for Final -s Clusters" TESOL Quarterly, Vol. 17, No. 3 (Sep., 1983)

Make sure to read Richard A. Spears' comments.

• Hultzén, Lee S. "Consonant Clusters in English" American Speech, Vol. 40, No. 1 (Feb., 1965).

Other examples of the /fts/ consonant cluster: lofts, gifts (compare GIFs), grafts (compare graphs)... -Andrew c ^[talk] 01:39, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

You pronounce GIF with a g? I use dʒ.—msh210℠ 17:25, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh, never mind: I see this is covered at GIF#Pronunciation.—msh210℠ 17:26, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I added your great links to the consonant cluster article.--68.218.108.68 (talk) 02:14, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

JapaneseChinese Translation: Fruity Oaty Bars

What is the Japanese man saying in the Fruity Oaty Bar commercial? I'd like the romaji and the translation. --Lazar Taxon (talk) 03:59, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Correct the link, please. I could see no Japanese man. Oda Mari (talk) 04:28, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

It's the correct link. Lazar Taxon just confused Chinese for Japanese. I can't understand everything he is saying because he slurs some of his words (not to mention the fact that I am not fluent in the language). He says "I am very (don't understand what he says), I don't have a Fruity Bar (我很...我没有..." I'm pretty sure he says the bar part in Chinglish. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 04:32, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I see. But when I clicked the link, it was linked to this one. I watched the commercial when I clicked the second time. It's Chinese. Sorry I cannot help. BTW, I corrected the thread name. Oda Mari (talk) 05:01, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

我很丟臉，我沒有吃過 fuity oaty bar.(I've lost face, I've never eaten a Fruity Oaty Bar).Aas217 (talk) 05:37, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

And the transliteration for that (pinyin, not romaji) is wǒ hěn diū liǎn, wǒ méiyǒu chī "fruity oaty bar". (Personally, I'm not convinced that "fruity oaty bar" is what he's saying at the end.) rʨanaɢ (talk) 13:48, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry about the misidentification. --Lazar Taxon (talk) 14:12, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

For those who don't know where this from, this fake commercial is from Serenity. rʨanaɢ missed "guo" in "wǒ méiyǒu chī guo "jiao jin hua"". I agree, I'm not convinced he said "fruity bar" either. --Kvasir (talk) 03:42, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I originally had guo there and also thought he was saying something like "jiu jin hua", but I listened carefully again and changed my mind (about both guo and "fruity oaty bars". I think he doesn't say guo and does say fruity oaty bars. What we've been hearing as guo actually does sound a bit like a fruity (or fuo-ti). But for a non-native speaker like me, it takes a couple good listens to hear it ;). rʨanaɢ (talk) 03:57, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

I viewed a related video, sorta like "the-making-of" for this commercial, and I guess the actor intended to say "fruity oaty bar" during his dialect training, but it didn't come out that way. You can hear the difference between the rehearsal and the final product. Btw, without "guo" it would sound awkward, or even incorrect given the sentence here. "mei you chi guo" indicates "have never eaten" whereas "mei you chi", just means "did not eat". --Kvasir (talk) 04:17, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

It can sound awkward or not awkward depending on the context. And besides, look at the commercial...it's far from the strangest thing there. But anyway, if you listen carefully, he definitely is saying "fruity oaty bars" (heavily accented) and not -guo jiu jin ba. There are also lots of other websites that give this transcription (just google "我很丢脸，我没有吃fruity oaty bar"). rʨanaɢ (talk) 05:42, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

I just know realized what that commercial was from. It was from the bar fight sequence in Serenity.--Ghostexorcist (talk) 05:16, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Heh, like 1.5 hours after I pointed it out.... At any rate, as with all movies, there is always difference between transcription and the actual dialogue. To my 21st century Chinese ears, he definitely said "guo". I cringe everytime these actors bastardise mix of Cantonese and Mandarin expletives on the Firefly series and on the Serenity movie. I have to keep reminding myself the film is set in the 26th century and the language may well have evolved on its way to creolisation with English. --Kvasir (talk) 13:56, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

propaganda leaflets in library books

I just got a book out of a unveristy library and it had a little leaflet inside. It was about how bad the cops are in the area. It wasn't scrawled on the paper, it was neat, and the way the paper was cut makes it seem like more than a few were printed out and placed into random books. I've heard of people putting in leaflets in books, for propaganda type reasons, to get certain messages out or to get people to think about something etc., but I can't find anything about this kind of thing on Google. Is there a term for it? Has anyone else seen this kind of thing?--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 06:35, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

It's not necessarily just university libraries either: I've found in public libraries leaflets advertising diverse causes ranging from Islam to Taizé. AFAIK there's no real term for it except subtle methods, really. -- the Great Gavini 09:01, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Book stuffing maybe? -- the Great Gavini 09:10, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Meg Whitman, a candidate for Governor of California, offered her campaign propaganda to the public libraries of California: [17]. I'm not sure how many of them took her up on the offer. Woogee (talk) 23:28, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

It'd seem to me that librarians would be the last people stuffing propaganda leaflets in books! The Youtube clip is actually kinda funny. It strikes me that a person who believes that most people "hate Jesus Christ" is that exact type of person who'd place leaflets in books.--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 06:29, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

"Great Scott" and similar phrases that mention first names

Can someone tell me who the people are that these phrases refer to? "Great Scott", "Heavens to Betsy", "For Pete's sake", and "well hells bells Margaret". Who's Scott? Who's Betsy? Pete? Margaret? Where do these names come from? Where they real historical people? -- œ^™ 11:06, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Wiktionary is your friend: wikt:great Scott, wikt:for Pete's sake. Or maybe not: I can't find the other two, and I've never heard of the fourth one. I'm guessing some of them are liturgical saints. -- the Great Gavini 11:50, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

You didn't include 'Gordon Bennett!', a name that we do have an article for. Many of these are examples of minced oaths. Mikenorton (talk) 11:56, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Which are minced oaths though? None of the names look like "God" or anything. They may just be nonsense oaths in general, but if so, it's amazing that any of them have caught on: wikt:by George, wikt:the dickens... -- the Great Gavini 12:11, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Here are 3 more:

• "You're terrible, Muriel"
• Nancy boy
• "Not tonight, Josephine" -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 12:29, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

"Good Golly Miss Molly" - does this one count? :) œ^™ 13:43, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Little Richard had another similarly-minced expression for a song, "Great Gosh A-Mighty!", except it doesn't mention anyone's name. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:58, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

There's "Holy Moly!" which is a softening of "Holy Moses!" I didn't link them because they have both been co-opted by rock bands. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:55, 16 April 2010 (UTC) There was also "Godfrey Daniel(s)!" which was associated with W.C. Fields. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:56, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

These might not be what the OP was asking about, though. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:58, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

"Heavens to Murgatroyd!" should qualify. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:01, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

All my eye and Betty Martin.--91.148.159.4 (talk) 14:27, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

(1) Maybe some people are attempting to live by the letter (but not the spirit) of http://www.mlbible.com/matthew/5-33.htm; http://www.mlbible.com/matthew/5-34.htm; http://www.mlbible.com/matthew/5-35.htm; http://www.mlbible.com/matthew/5-36.htm; http://www.mlbible.com/matthew/5-37.htm.

(2) There is a list in the middle of a discussion at http://www.innvista.com/culture/religion/deities/oaths.htm.

(3) Language learners might want to learn about such expressions in foreign languages, just enough so that they know what to avoid. Can you imagine an immigrant employee imitating the speech of co-workers or that of popular entertainers, with unexpected consequences? What a tragedy! How tragic! -- Wavelength (talk) 19:39, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

No, I can't. I either disagree or don't understand you as far as (1) and (3) are concerned (and the link in (2) won't open). But never mind.--91.148.159.4 (talk) 00:09, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Opened just fine for me... -- œ^™ 01:11, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Spoken language regional accent

Where does the speakers accent suggest he is from in this video? http://www.ted.com/talks/blaise_aguera_y_arcas_demos_photosynth.html He does not have the nasal voice associated with North America, but he does have (what sounds like to European ears) the often exaggerated deepness. I'm aware of his name. Thanks 78.151.110.54 (talk) 12:51, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I found him describing his background on the web, see the comment section of this link. I thought he sounded a little Norwegian, but that doesn't seem right at all. -Andrew c ^[talk] 13:15, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

He may appear to sound Norwegian because of the occasional [s] instead of [z], but that feature is equally expected in Spanish speakers, and he does say he spent his childhood in Mexico city - although he doesn't sound very Spanish otherwise.

I imagined some Scottish influence at times, but that seems to be wrong, too. It's odd how distinctive the (slight) non-American streak is, given that he spent both his adolescence and his youth in the US. --91.148.159.4 (talk) 14:12, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

What caught me was some of his vowels, like how he pronounces the /æ/ in "data" and "ad" with more of an [ɑ]/[ɔ], which isn't a US thing, and where a Spanish speaker would probably move the /æ/ forward, not back, right? -Andrew c ^[talk] 14:41, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I suppose so. In any case, it's clear that his pronouncing "data" with [ɑː] is not due to his inability to distinguish /æ/ from /ɑ/ in general; rather, pronouncing /ɑː/ as in father in this word is apparently formal UK and Australian practice, according to Wiktionary. But his pronunciation of the vowels is also strange for an American, IMO. His /æ/ sounds (interAct) in general are often very low, often close to [a]; his /ɛ/ sounds (collection) are often very low, too and approximate [æ]; his /ɒ/ sounds (technology) are often, well, really [ɒ] and not [ɑ]. His short vowels are really very short or "clipped" - that is, he almost never protracts them where you would expect an American to do it. Most of these features, taken separately, do occur in some American dialect (lowered /æ/ and /ɛ/s are found in Northern California, [ɒ] in 'cot' is found, I believe, some places on the East Coast, and he did spend time on the East Coast), but the combination of all of them creates some vaguely "British Isles" impression for me, even though this is apparently false.--91.148.159.4 (talk) 15:44, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

From the other side of the Atlantic, it sounds to me like an American who has begun to speak with an English accent. He uses the word "rubbish", which I believe is not used in American-English (unless you know better), but also says "go check it out" which is Americanesque. He's certainly not an English-speaker from any continental European country - I've met lots of Dutch and Scandanavians with perfect English but quite distinctive accents. He's either a Brit who has spent too much time in the US or vice-versa. Perhaps this is a Transatlantic accent? Alansplodge (talk) 18:10, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I'd say the accent is unambiguously North American of some variety, but far from typical American or typical Canadian. "Rubbish" is used in American English too, especially metaphorically rather than in reference to literal trash. He doesn't say /dɑːtə/, he says /dætə/, but his realization of /æ/ is noticeably closer to cardinal [a] than most North Americans'. Compare his pronunciation of "data" with his pronunciation of "matter" and you'll see it's the same vowel. His [a]-like realization of /æ/ is especially noticeable before nasal consonants, where he has no æ-tensing at all, which is relatively rare in North America. He has /æ/ in "marries" as well, which is normally found only in the northeastern U.S. (and outside North America). But he's fully rhotic and has North American intonation, so there's no chance he learned English anywhere but the U.S. or Canada. (I can't find an instance of /aʊ/ before a voiceless consonant to see whether he has Canadian raising.) I could believe he's not quite a native speaker (I assume from his name and his childhood in Mexico that he's a native Spanish speaker) but that he started speaking English every day (e.g., by moving to the U.S. from Mexico) when he was at the end of his critical period, say around 7 or 8. +Angr 19:17, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Generally agree. About /dætə/ vs /dɑːtə/. Well, call me crazy (and I could be biased by my own internalized quasi-Southern British phonology), but his vowels in his first renditions of "data" and "matter" don't sound the same to me at all. His "data" sounds lower and more back than his "matter", and I'm pretty sure that his "data" is also longer (relative to the context, of course) than his "matter", as you'd expect in Southern English. I actually recorded the two with Praat, and while I have neither any real training nor experience with measuring formants, the look of the spectrogram as well as the formant values that the program produces automatically seem to show a difference along these lines (higher f1 and lower f2 for "data"). Admittedly, I also definitely interpret his "vAst" as /væːst/, a long version of his "matter" vowel distinct from his "data", which is /dɑːtə/ to me; but the program seems to suggest that his "vast" is even lower than his "data", and only intermediate between "data" and "matter" in terms of frontness. So I could be imagining a pattern where there is just free variation, or perhaps a phonological distinction where there is just a minor phonetic tendency. --91.148.159.4 (talk) 00:04, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

My first thought was Canadian. With a Spanish sounding family name and claims of a Mexico City childhood, perhaps he has spent a long time in Canada. Astronaut (talk) 15:13, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

For everybody's information, I'll copy here what the man himself says on the site that Andrew c linked to above.

Father: Catalan; mother: American Jew; born: Providence, Rhode Island; childhood: Mexico City; adolescence: Maryland; young adulthood: Princeton, NJ; now Seattle.

The remaining bewilderment is mostly because his accent does not sound like typical Baltimorese or New Jersey English (here's a nice resource).--91.148.159.4 (talk) 16:38, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Another possibility is that he's very speech-conscious and is actively trying to suppress what he considers undesirable aspects of (say) Baltimorese. I know that many Americans consider æ-tensing ugly (although virtually everyone does it at least before nasal consonants), so his pronunciation of scan as [skan] may be a deliberate attempt to avoid saying [skeən], as would come naturally. +Angr 06:59, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

He sounded mid-Atlantic to be, like someone who had spent a lot of time in both Britain and America. I thought he could be from the far eastern parts of the US, although I'm only guessing if accents there are more similar to British. Interesting that he might be deliberately suppressing distinctively American aspects of his speech. Perhaps his mother learnt english with a British accent. 89.240.44.159 (talk) 12:54, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ISO_639_Icon_co.svg

Is this some kind of logo for the Corsican language (cf. [18]. Although this is a flag, the design is what I'm talking about.)?174.3.123.220 (talk) 23:59, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I can see some resemblance between "((co))" (in the file linked in the heading) and the image at A Granìtula..

-- Wavelength (talk) 00:11, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

There are hundreds of such icon images at Commons:Category:ISO 639 icons. They are not meant to be national symbols, and I don't particularly understand what the connection with File:ReunionFlag.png is supposed to be... AnonMoos (talk) 03:19, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

April 17

Japanese sentences

I tried translated some sentences into Japanese using Google translate, and I noticed that when I added a period at the end of each of my sentences, not only was a small circle added to the end of the Japanese sentence, but the last three characters completely changed. Why are different words used to mean the same thing when they are at the end of a sentence? Does every word have a middle of the sentence version and an end of the sentence version? --99.254.8.208 (talk) 03:39, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

1. Fred likes bananas
   • フレッドはバナナが好き
2. Fred likes bananas.
   • フレッドはバナナが好きです。

Is this what you saw? --Kjoonlee 05:19, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

(I believe what Kjoonlee is hinting at is that, if this is what you are talking about, it can be explained by the fact that です is a kind of sentence-final particle.) rʨanaɢ (talk) 05:31, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Japanese word order is classified as Subject Object Verb.
Fred doesn't like bananas.
フレッドはバナナが好きじゃない。or
フレッドはバナナが好きではありません。Oda Mari (talk) 09:55, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

1. The "small circle" is the Japanese equivalent of a period. 2. Google Translate is rubbish, especially when translating between languages as different as Japanese and English. Paul Davidson (talk) 10:41, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

I didn't expect good results from Google Translate, but I'm still curious about what it gave me and how the language is set up. The part that confused me is when it didn't just add characters to end a sentence, but changed existing ones: Here's an example of one of the sentences that does this:

1. I am Canadian

   私はカナダの午前

2. I am Canadian.

   私はカナダ人です。

The part that the two have in common (私はカナダ) translates as "I am Canadian". So if 人です is a sentence-ending particle and not actually a word, what is の午前? --99.254.8.208 (talk) 13:59, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

人 means "person" and です means "to be", so only 私はカナダ人です means "I am Canadian". 午前 means "morning" or "a.m." and の basically means "'s" (it makes a genitive out of a preceding noun), so 私はカナダの午前 has no verb at all but just means "I - Canada's - a.m." +Angr 14:12, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

It would appear that Google translate has some heuristic that if it hits a full stop, it takes that as completing a sentence, and translates it as a sentence, with a main verb です. If it doesn't, it doesn't know whether this is a sentence or just part of one, so it doesn't copmlete the sentence in Japanese. (the '午前' for 'am' is a different matter, but it is probably still relevant whether or not it believes it is parsing a full sentence). --ColinFine (talk) 14:31, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

The first sentence is a fragment and it seems Google has assumed that "Canadian" in this case is an adejective which is going to describe whatever follows; "the a.m" according to Angr, Google translate, and my dictionary (which I didn't believe becase it didn't make sense!). On the other hand, the second translation (私はカナダ人です。) does form a complete sentence, literally "I, Canadian person am". Astronaut (talk) 14:43, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, everyone! --99.254.8.208 (talk) 15:06, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

I think Astronaut is correct. I tried "I am Canadian citizen". Even though it lacks "a" and period, Google translated it correctly. Then I tried translating pages for native Japanese speakers. They all translate the sentence without period correctly. [19], [20], and[21]. Oda Mari (talk) 15:11, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

The condition of talking with Sinebots

_{(Moved from Misc Desk)}

I've noticed a few new users replying to Sinebot when it posts on their talk page advising them to use the squiggles at the end of their post. Is their a term for the phenomenon of attempting to communicate with an inanimate/static communication? 70.177.189.205 (talk) 13:03, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Um, no? It would be like talking to your computer screen, or a billboard. If there isn't a term, you could make it up. 2D Backfire Master ^{ballroom blitz} 13:33, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

This would be a good Q for the Language Desk. Anthropomorphization is "ascribing human characteristics to something non-human", which would include thinking that the bot can listen to you and understand. StuRat (talk) 13:51, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

To Backfire: I'm narrowing it down to the condition of thinking that you are carrying on a 2 way conversation where the 2nd subject is clearly(to the more informed), incapable of conversing. Other examples would be trying to talk back to the outgoing recording of an answering machine (where the owner has scripted a clever message that appears to be live), or replying to a "No Reply" email bulletin, thinking it was addressed to you personally (as in emails from your elected gov't representative). To StuRat: yes, heading in the right direction. I'm looking for the human condition, something of a more exact and less insulting synonym for "technologically lost", or "confused"70.177.189.205 (talk) 13:59, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

A bit more appropriate word would be "futility". Otherwise, I really don't know. Like Stu said, take it up to the Language desk. Calling back telemarketers. Or, in reverse, a tech support line calling you. 2D Backfire Master ^{ballroom blitz} 14:02, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Can you give an example of someone talking to sine-bot? I would imagine that in most cases it's a newbie who doesn't realize it's not a real person writing on their page. In that case, it's just a case of mistaken identity (not in the criminal sense, though). Buddy431 (talk) 14:22, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Happens all of the time here on Sinebots talk page. It is also on many new users pages as well, replying to the bot. I'm sure a few get ticked when they are ignored. 70.177.189.205 (talk) 15:21, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

AnomieBOT gets talk like this too. I can think of at least one relatively experienced editor who regularly sends little "thank you" notes to bots. Though the user's first 1 000 edits range in quality from the forgettable to the just plain embarrassing, this user seems now to have at least some understanding of how Wikipedia works. I'm guessing his motivation is as Dbfirs said, that the "attaboy" would get back to the human running the bot. --Shirt58 (talk) 10:04, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

The Turing test is a related but distinct notion. Gabbe (talk) 15:15, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, what would the condition be called to those thinking that they are in a discussion, that are in fact "lost"? I was hoping that some letters had been strung together to concisely identify this behavior, similar to my dogs mental state when he is chasing his tail. 70.177.189.205 (talk) 15:21, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

"Like talking to a wall", of course... -- AnonMoos (talk)

I've heard "technology challenged" used to describe people who aren't able to use it. A more specific form, like "bot challenged", might be in order here. StuRat (talk) 15:43, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Cf. ELIZA —Tamfang (talk) 06:58, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Forgive me if I am wrong, but I thought that all bots had a real human "parent" who wrote them and who monitors performance. If this is so, then replying to the bot might not be a total waste of time, since it could lead to improvements in the bot if the writer reads the replies (well, just possibly?). The phenomenon of talking to inanimate objects is surprisingly common. Is there anyone here who has never done this (even if it is only to swear at something)? We do have an article on Anthropomorphism. (sorry, just realised that StuRat indirectly linked to this above) Dbfirs 07:19, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Malling

East Malling, West Malling, Tonbridge and Malling.

What is the etymology of "Malling"? Can we include the information into the articles?174.3.123.220 (talk) 16:59, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

According to this site[22]; "'People of *Mealla'. *Mealla is a monothematic masculine personal name. Old English '-ingas'." Alansplodge (talk) 21:01, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Irish (Gaeilge): Saor & Daor

In Irish (and apparently Scottish Gaelic as well), saor applies to general concepts of freedom, while daor means both un-free as well as expensive (in American English). #1: Is it mere coincidence that these antonyms are so similar to each other? #2: Is the expensive meaning of "daor" a mere phonetic borrowing from British English (dear)? --达伟 (talk) 20:31, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

No, it's not a coincidence. Irish has several pairs of words where the "positive" one begins with s- and the "negative" one with d-. Other examples are sorcha "bright" / dorcha "dark" and sona "happy, fortunate" / dona "unfortunate, bad". In these examples (as with saor/daor), the words are no longer felt to have prefixes, but the prefixes so- and do- are still productive in other words, like so-bhlasta "tasty" / do-bhlasta "bad tasting" and soghluaiste "movable" / doghluaiste "immovable". These prefixes go back to Proto-Indo-European *h₁su- and *dus- and are thus related to the Greek prefixes eu- and dys-, as in euphemism / dysphemism. I'm pretty sure that the similarity in sound between daor and dear is just a coincidence. It happens sometimes that two languages have false cognates, i.e. words for the same thing are pronounced the same or nearly the same, purely by coincidence: the Persian word for "bad" is bad, and the Mbabaram word for "dog" is dog. +Angr 06:48, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

April 18

agō

Does Spanish have any terms derived from the Latin agō? 12.105.164.147 (talk) 03:47, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Right now, I can think of agente and agitación, but there are probably quite a few more -- Ferkelparade π 04:17, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

See http://www.verbix.com/webverbix/Spanish/agir.html. -- Wavelength (talk) 05:46, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

None of the dictionaries I checked have agir- are you sure that's a verb in Spanish? Nadando (talk) 05:55, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

No, I am not, but it seems to be treated as a Spanish verb by http://conjugador.reverso.net/conjugacion-espanol-verbo-agir.html. (I found "agir" in a Portuguese dictionary, "agir" in a French dictionary, and "agire" in an Italian dictionary, but, of course, that does not prove that "agir" be a word in Spanish.) -- Wavelength (talk) 18:03, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Also acción and reacción. I don't speak Spanish, but I suspect there are many more. --Магьосник (talk) 05:59, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

And, the etymologies of all acto, actor, actriz, actuar, actuación, activo, actividad, activar, activación, agenda, and agencia can be traced back to Latin agō. Being a Romance language, Spanish quite naturally has lots of words derived from one of the most productive Latin roots. --Магьосник (talk) 06:33, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Romanian names

Looking at the Romanian Wikipedia, I found that a lot of Romanian first names seem to have two different standards. For example, for the English Peter you have Petru (Petru Bălan) and Petre (Petre Roman). For Michael you have Mihail (Mihail Sadoveanu) and Mihai (Mihai Antonescu). Other examples are: Paul (Paul Călinescu) and Pavel (Pavel Badea), Veniamin-Beniamin (Beniamin Fărăgău/Iosif Veniamin Blaga), Dumitru-Dimitrie (Dimitrie Anghel/ Dumitru Răducanu), Chiril-Ciril, Cristofor-Hristofor, Blasiu-Vlasie, Ambrozie-Ambroziu, Vichentie-Vincenţiu, Porfirie-Porfiriu, Patriciu-Patrichie, Onufrie-Onofrei, Metodiu-Metodie, Matei-Matia, Manuel-Manuil, Lucian-Luchian (Ioan Luchian Mihalea/Lucian Predescu), Laurenţiu-Lavrenţie, Ignaţiu-Ignatie, Gabriel-Gavriil (Gavriil Musicescu/Gabriel Marinescu), Gervasie-Ghervasie, Eutimiu-Eftimie, Procopiu-Procopie, Eleuteriu-Elefterie, Eusebiu-Eusebie (Eusebie Mandicevschi/Eusebiu Camilar). It's like sometimes it ends with -u, sometimes in -e, sometimes has a c/g, sometimes a ch/gh, b or v, -uel or -uil. Is there an explanation for this phenomenon? --151.51.15.200 (talk) 16:37, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't know for certain, but a lot of those look like one form is of Romance origin and the other Slavic. Mihail, Pavel, Petre, Chiril, Gavriil, Hristofor, Dimitrie (and pretty much any of those ending in -ie) all look Slavic, while their counterparts strike me as Romance. 128.135.222.164 (talk) 18:37, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Some of the ones ending in -ie you would only find as names of monks nowadays. Rimush (talk) 19:03, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

I second the suggestion of Romance vs Slavonic versions. Romanian took part of its orthography from Italian, specifically the groups 'ci', 'gi', 'chi', 'ghi' are as in Italian; so, for example 'Chiril' would be pronounced with /k/ as in Slavonic names, whereas 'Ciril' would be pronounced with /tʃ/ like the Italian 'Cirillo'. --ColinFine (talk) 20:24, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Head scratching

I am wondering why the action (or the depiction) of someone scratching his head is used in order to represent puzzlement or confusion. What is the correlation? How did this come about? Thanks. (64.252.65.146 (talk) 18:29, 18 April 2010 (UTC))

It came about because people often actually do scratch their head when they're puzzled. I'm not sure if we know precisely why, but the article Body language alludes both to this and to several other such unconscious gestures. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 23:20, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. That's funny ... I did not know that people actually do this! I thought that it was just a caricature / cartoon / humor device! So, I guess my question is transformed – as you allude to – into why do people do this? Thanks for the info. I really did not know that. (64.252.65.146 (talk) 23:54, 18 April 2010 (UTC))

I think anything can take on the role of a communicative device. Turning the palms upward can mean "I don't know." It is that empty-handed feeling that corresponds to the not knowing of something. If one person does it, and another person appreciates its value in communication and imitates it, the gesture is reinforced within a group of people. I think the scratching of the head is accompanied by a facial expression that also conveys an inability to comprehend something. Of course this is original research, so I really shouldn't be pontificating. Bus stop (talk) 00:05, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. Hmmmmmmm ... maybe my question was poorly worded. I know why people do this (i.e., to communicate that they are puzzled). But, I am trying to figure out how the physical action of head scratching equates to puzzlement. I guess I just don't see any correlation or relationship. Any ideas? Thanks. (64.252.65.146 (talk) 01:26, 19 April 2010 (UTC))

I think there is a type of facial expression that accompanies the head scratching that helps to make it clear that one is unable to recall a fact, or figure something out. It would be pure speculation on my part (as if I haven't been purely speculating all along) but the scratching on the head is the treating of the head as if it were a more mundane object. A coconut or a cantaloupe for instance might be picked at or probed to determine something about it. If one is puzzled one might choose a gesture to indicate probing the source of the shortcoming one is experiencing at that moment — the inability to figure something out via thinking, which could also equate with puzzlement. Bus stop (talk) 02:34, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Here is my theory: puzzlement --> mental exertion --> confident deep breathing OR

puzzlement --> mental exertion --> loss of moisture --> itchy head --> head scratching AND/OR

puzzlement --> mental exertion --> loss of moisture --> itchy throat --> throat clearing.

If you are puzzled by something, you might want to think optimistically and inhale deeply. -- Wavelength (talk) 02:52, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Polish names

Is it ok in formal writing to refer to the recently deceased Polish PM and his spouse as "Lech and Maria Kaczyński", or is it necessary to say "Lech Kaczyński and Maria Kaczyńska"? Thanks. 66.127.54.238 (talk) 23:57, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

If you want to use the proper Polish form, it would be Lech and Maria Kaczyńscy (using the plural form of their surname). 128.135.222.164 (talk) 01:03, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! I never saw that form before. 66.127.54.238 (talk) 04:08, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree that the plural form is correct in Polish. Please note that Lech Kaczyński was a president, not a prime minister. It is his brother, Jarosław Kaczyński, still alive, who used to be a prime minister. — Kpalion^(talk) 08:11, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

April 19

French translation

Les conventions du mariage avec Nicolas de Laval[3] furent arrêtées à Vierzon, le 27 janvier 1499. Une procuration donnée par son père, le 27 mars 1499, enjoignait à Guillaume de Poitiers-Valentinois de chercher à la marier au gré du roi.

Nicolas, ayant accompagné la princesse Anne et le roi Louis XII, son époux, en 1500, au voyage de Lyon, il fut du tournoi qui s'y donna en l'honneur de leurs majestés, et fut le chef du parti de la reine. Le 20 juillet[4], le mariage fut célébré dans l'église de Sainte-Croix de Lyon. Et à ce mariage, dit Bertrand d'Argentré[5], furent faicts d'étranges tournoys, et les lices tendues de draps de soye en la place de Grenette. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk • contribs) 02:27, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

This starts out easy but then seems to get a bit weird, which probably means I have some important words wrong. The only translation of "tournoi" in my dictionary is "tournament", and I assume "faicts" is an old spelling of "faits", but that gives me the following:

The agreement of marriage with Nicolas de Laval was stopped at Vierzon on January 27, 1499. A proxy given by his father on March 27, 1499, required Guillaume de Poitiers-Valentinois to seek a marriage within the king's liking.

Nicolas was accompanied by Princess Anne and King Louis XII (her husband), in 1500, on the trip to Lyon. There was a tournament and he was given the honor of Their Majesties, and was the chief of the queen's party. On July 20, the marriage was celebrated in the Church of St. Croix of Lyon. And at this marriage, Bertrand d'Argentré said, there were made strange tournaments, and the lists were held from silk clothes in the place of Grenette.

--Anonymous, 04:42 UTC, April 19, 2010.

The second part starts off with "Nicholas, having accompanied" (not "accompanied by" since he is accompanying far more important people). I'm not sure about "il fut du tournoi", maybe literally "he was of the tournament", i.e. he participated in it, and he was the leader of the queen's team, which would presumably mean two teams battled each other, one supported by the king and one by the queen. If so, it says "he participated in the tournament which was given there in honour of their majesties, and was the head of the queen's party". The "lists" are the boundaries of the tournament area, and in this case they were decorated with silk curtains. Adam Bishop (talk) 06:13, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

This is very strange. The first part is modern French, but the last part, starting from "Et à ce mariage", is spelt using French spelling 1790 or earlier. Like a patchwork. Weird... --Lgriot (talk) 07:02, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

The last sentence is a quote in old French from Bertrand d'Argentré (a little bit modernized however, I think). It could have been written: Bertrand d'Argentré a dit : « [Et à ce mariage] furent faicts d'étranges tournoys, et les lices tendues de draps de soye en la place de Grenette. » That's the reason why the sentence is in italics in the French Wiki [Here] — AldoSyrt (talk) 08:13, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Ah, that makes sense. I wonder if "étrange" means "foreign" or "strange" or something else ("different"? Maybe there were two tournaments?) Adam Bishop (talk) 12:47, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Freida Pinto

What is the etymology of "Freida" in Freida Pinto('s name)?174.3.123.220 (talk) 03:24, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Wiktionary has one for Frida. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:38, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

English possessives of French names ending in silent -s

Is the wife of Monsieur Thomas (pron. to-mah):

• (a) Monsieur Thomas's wife, or
• (b) Monsieur Thomas' wife?

Some people baulk at adding –'s to a noun ending in –s, so they'd be uncomfortable with how (a) looks. But it sounds OK when spoken: / to-mahz waif / (which requires the speaker to remember that the s before the apostrophe is silent but the s after the apostrophe is not, which may be just that little bit too tricky for some people).

Those people would prefer to write version (b), which might look OK if you're only half-familiar with the rules for English possessives, but sounds completely wrong: / to-mah waif /. Or do they somehow add in a / z / sound, despite the spelling not so indicating?

What wins out here – the look or the sound?

To put this into perspective, it doesn't seem to be an issue with other silent letters. For example, nobody would write Cochet' wife; it's always Cochet's wife. The fact that the silent letter in question in the Thomas case happens to be an -s rather than a -t or a -d shouldn't make any difference to the principle, should it? -- (Jack of Oz =) 202.142.129.66 (talk) 03:30, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

The way I understand it is that:

• James'
• James's

both spellings are perfectly acceptable. I personally prefer the s's spelling when a "schwa" sound inserted, and the s' spelling when the pronunciation is unaffected, but that's probably just me. --Kjoonlee 07:25, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Right, but that's a case where the ‹s› at the end of the word is pronounced anyway. Jack's asking about cases where the ‹s› is silent, as in the French name Thomas. Certainly here at Wikipedia we talk about Arkansas's congressional districts and Illinois's congressional districts, where those names have a silent ‹s›, but then we also talk about Texas's congressional districts and Massachusetts's congressional districts, so we follow the rule of always adding 's even to names ending in ‹s›. Jack's question is more this: If you're the kind of person who writes "James' hat" rather than "James's hat", what do you with the hat that belongs to Jacques (with a silent ‹s›)? Pronouncing it [ʒɑːks hæt] is easy, but do you spell it "Jacques' hat" or "Jacques's hat"? If you say/write "James's hat" to begin with, then "Jacques's hat" is obvious; but what do people who say/write "James' hat" do? See this link for a related discussion (careful, rather spammy link). +Angr 07:46, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Couldn't have put it better myself. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 08:06, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Thomas' hat, surely. You could consider that the apostrophe itself is providing the 's' sound. Then it would look like it is pronounced, with only one sibilant. FreeMorpheme (talk) 09:09, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

How could an apostrophe provide any sound except perhaps a schwa? You choose not to write the 's' in, but pronounce it anyway, as if it were there. If you're going to pronounce it, what's the objection to writing it in? -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 12:00, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, think of a count noun that ends in silent ‹s› in the singular, like chassis. That's pronounced [(t)ʃæsi] in the singular and [(t)ʃæsiz] in the plural, but it's spelled the same either way – the plural isn't spelled *chassises. If the ‹s› of chassis can be silent in the singular and pronounced in the plural, why can't the ‹s› of Thomas be silent in non-possessive forms but pronounced in the possessive Thomas’? +Angr 12:27, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Italian sentence

What's Italian for 'Please give me some earplugs'? 213.105.212.205 (talk) 09:06, 19 April 2010 (UTC)