Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 12:06, 1 July 2011

Welcome to the language section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

Shortcut

WP:RD/L

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.

June 25

Spoken language identification

What language is being spoken between about 1:45 and 2:10 of this video? Red Act (talk) 03:56, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds a little like Hebrew to me, but I don't speak Hebrew so take that with a grain of salt. rʨanaɢ (talk) 09:53, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In the last part of the episode at about 11:20 the girl says Shukran jazilan so it seems to be a form of Arabic. Sussexonian (talk) 10:51, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Red Act (talk) 17:29, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

She says lütfen in the beginning, which is Turkish for "please". The whole thing sounds Turkish, albeit spoken with a really bad accent. Apparently lutfen or lutfan means "kindly" in Arabic too, though...80.123.210.172 (talk) 18:10, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's Turkish. I don't know Turkish itself, but I'm familiar enough with some closely related languages (Uyghur and Uzbek), but this doesn't sound similar. A lot of these languages have borrowed heavily from Semitic languages like Arabic, which might explain the familiar-sounding words. rʨanaɢ (talk) 20:19, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

He says something ending "-ač", which doesn't sound like any sort of Arabic. I thought for a moment I had identified some Turkish, but I don't think so now. Farsi maybe? --ColinFine (talk) 20:23, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

More likely it's meant to be "-aj" with final devoicing. Also, at last he says minhummah, which is translated as "right this way" and sounds like a reasonable Semitic expression for "from here". The bit translated as "my family" also ended in "-i". So I'm guessing Arabic.--91.148.159.4 (talk) 00:17, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The most of the text is in Arabic, in a bad accent (mainly the cop's accent).

["Please..."] Turkish.

"Can you help me?" Arabic.

"Where do I go?" Arabic.

"Follow the people." Arabic.

"Is someone meeting you?" Sounds Turkish, but I don't speak this language.

"My Family". Arabic.

"Right this way". Arabic.

HOOTmag (talk) 13:41, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalization of "but"

Resolved

– – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 12:25, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the capitalization specifically for the article Anything But Ordinary and the song title "Anything But Ordinary" on the Let Go album, shouldn't "but" be lowercased? My understanding is that "but" is only capitalized as an adverb, and it's an adverb if it's synonymous with "only" (my feeble source: [1]). In this case, I believe the intended meaning is a contrasting "anything[, and not] ordinary". – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 12:42, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The answer is that, if you don't otherwise know, you shouldn't capitalize short conjunctions or prepositions like but, and, or, etc. However, for titles of works (books, songs, etc.) always defer to what the author chose to do. That is, if the creator of the work capitalized but in titles his or her work, you should too. --Jayron32 14:13, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I believe there's a convention that in three word titles, the middle word gets capitalized, even if it normally wouldn't. But yea, always defer to what the author does. Hot Stop (c) 15:21, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Except that Wikipedia doesn't necessarily practise that preaching. See the recent discussion @ Talk:Gone with the Wind (film)#Title of the film. The studio spelled the word "with" as "With", but our film-naming guidelines override that. One might say that deference to the author's wishes is a thing of the past; yea, gone - gone with the wind. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 20:58, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One of wikipedia's purposes apparently is for non-notables to correct usage mistakes made by notables. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:33, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, thank you everyone. In this particular case, I went ahead and moved the album because—and to my total surprise—the album cover shows a lowercase "but". The Lavigne album capitalizes every word of every song on the back of the CD, so I suppose it'll stay. – Kerαunoςcopia^◁_galaxies 12:25, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, many books contain the title only in all uppercase, so you can't defer to the author. In that case, you may try to look in library catalogues. (A few books are even worse, as they only contain the title in some fancy title font.) – b_jonas 17:42, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Spanish terms - pronunciation

How does one pronounce "Alejandro Lerroux"'s surname? Is it le-rue (as in the French for 'street') or le-row (as in 'row your boat')? Or is it something else? Also, how is the acronym CEDA pronounced - is it in fact an initialism? Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 20:52, 25 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As for the name, pronounce it more like the French, but ending with a subtle Voiced glottal fricative. And the acronym, like SAY-duh. Schyler (one language) 00:54, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm no Spanish speaker, but since CEDA is of Spain and not the New World, I would have supposed it was pronounced /θeda/ (thay-da). Certainly ONCE is /onθe/. --ColinFine (talk) 20:27, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I thought the "th" thing was a regionalism within Spain. I don't have to follow any region in particular, so it might not be a problem. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 20:45, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

CEDA is indeed pronounced /'θeda/ and Lerroux is usually pronounced /le'ruks/ by Spaniards (and almost surely by Lerroux himself too). --Belchman (talk) 21:10, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Almost surely, for reals? :-) --Trovatore (talk) 09:24, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I said that because in my - original research warning - experience people with foreign surnames tend to (mis)pronounce their own surnames like the rest of the people in their country. That's what I meant by "almost surely" :D --Belchman (talk) 19:56, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

June 26

Translate to Hawaiian

Help me translate "Fast is now beautiful", the slogan of Internet Explorer 9, to Hawaiian. 125.235.104.170 (talk) 13:25, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No guarantees, but this site[2] translates the words this way:

Fast = awiwi, wikiwiki [but we knew that]

Is = [not listed]

Now = i keia manawa

Beautiful = nani, u'i, maika'i

This site[3] has some details on how to express "to be", which it says does not have an exact equivalent in Hawaiian. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:22, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also, it may not be as straightforward in Hawaiian as it is in English to use an adjective as the subject of a sentence. You may have to settle for the translation of "Speed is now beautiful" or something like that. —Angr (talk) 05:49, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good resource for learning the Queen's English (RP) accent?

Anyone know where or how (other than going to London and being with high society), I can learn the RP accent effectively? My girlfriend would like me to do so (Israeli women are just as impressed by it as American women apparently). :p Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 15:16, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Or whatever style of presumably English accent she was talking about when she said I "must learn a British accent". Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 15:30, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, being British, I'd suggest whatever form of Radio 4 you can get hold of. Whilst the Queen's RP is, well, unique, learning the formal tones of Radio 4 will give the impression of an educated, formal elite. Plus, it's a more practical suggestion than finding tapes of the monarchy! Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 15:32, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look at that. :p I wonder if she is looking for that estuary style? She'll probably want the fanciest one of course. :p Anymore suggestions? Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 15:40, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Radio 4 will be a good place to hear RP, though you'll hear other accents too. You'll find that Lizzie's accent has changed quite a bit over the years, so she doesn't speak "the Queen's English" herself any more - I think her modern accent is probably closer to the norm, if not quite 'estuary'. You could also listen to broadcasts of our esteemed Parliament - though I'd not recommend it if you want to learn how to talk sense... AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:51, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If I watch Parliament's questioning of the PM, I will most likely laugh my ass off (not intended to be offensive, but they are quite funny) if my previous viewings are any indication. Whichever makes me sound like the hoity-toity fancy Brit that would suit an Israeli girl. :p

Also, I either didn't know or had forgotten you were British. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 17:17, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, typical Anglo-Scottish Brit mongrel - though with some Irish and a bit of Low Countries thrown in (I may be part Walloon, or - Horrors! - French, though we haven't had much luck tracking that side of the family down) My accent tends to vary between near-RP and "sarf Lund'n", depending on context. Actually, you might do better to listen to the House of Lords (or what now remains of it) for RP, and for more polite debate. The House of Commons has quite a range of accents though, including quite a few old Etonians (e.g. a significant chunk of the Cabinet). Or see if you can track down anything by Boris Johnson the mayor of London - another old Etonian, with a nice line in upper-class bumbling chat - think of a cross between Hugh Grant and an overgrown puppy. An ideal accent for giving the impression that you have inherited a great deal of money, if not necessarily much in the way of brains (though there are claims that Boris isn't as daft as he makes out to be). AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:52, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have heard it said that Sir Trevor Macdonald learned to speak the Queen's English, and acquired his rich tones, by listening to broadcasts on BBC World Service. I agree that listening to BBC Radio 4 is probably a good way to hear the accent, but to change your speech you will need either access to a voice coach, or a tape recorder so you can tape yourself and play back the results. --TammyMoet (talk) 18:08, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The BBC is not the standardbearer for "proper" English that it used to be. There are a lot of clearly Scottish voices (and other regional UK varieties) on the World Service these days. Roger (talk) 18:16, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To hear some of the classic BBC and RP speech, you can visit the BBC's audio archives, for example, this one on the outbreak of World War II (including Neville Chamberlain's announcement that war had been declared and The King's Speech, as well as some of the BBC's own announcers, such as Stuart Hibberd, and topical interviews with ordinary people in different regions): http://www.bbc.co.uk/archive/ww2outbreak/ —— Shakescene (talk) 02:32, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese reading help

Hi! I would like to have the text of the Chinese characters in http://www.99ranch.com/images/top_image_new.jpg

Thank you WhisperToMe (talk) 17:09, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

大華超級市場 and 大華與您共創未來. Oda Mari (talk) 18:28, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for getting the characters! Now regarding "大華與您共創未來" I need some help on how the phrase is read. The ambiguous characters are "大" (dà or dài), "華" (Huá or Huà), "與" (yú, yǔ, or yù), and "创" (chuāng or chuàng) WhisperToMe (talk) 18:46, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dà Huá yǔ nín gòngchuàng wèilái rʨanaɢ (talk) 19:03, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! So would a good translation be "Giving for your shared future"? WhisperToMe (talk) 20:51, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's more along the lines of "Dahua [supermarket] is creating the future together with you". rʨanaɢ (talk) 20:58, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense ("Dahua" is 99 Ranch Market) - Thank you all so much :) WhisperToMe (talk) 04:05, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar structure

Dear Sir, I am very delighted to join you on wikipedia. It is really an endlless world of knoledge. I do appreciate and feel very lucky to be among you. please allow me to ask you a question concerning grammar use.

Is it correct to say : "What kind of feeling don't you like to express ?

" what kind of attitude do you like to show ?

"What kind of attitude you like to show ?

looking forward to hearing from you soon. my best regards to all. Krim 1962 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krim1962 (talk • contribs)

"what kind of attitude do you like to show?" is correct grammatically, but it does not mean anything. Looie496 (talk) 19:23, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't say that. A context can be found (or devised) to fit it. That and the first sentence are correct, but the last one is lacking the word "do". -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 19:25, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Feelings" would be better than "feeling" in the first sentence, and "What kind of feelings do you not like expressing?" (or "... do you have difficulty in expressing?") might be more natural. I agree with Looie496 that the second and third aren't really specific enough to answer - "attitude" covers far too wide a range of views, beliefs, opinions, and emotions for anyone to give a reasonable answer to the question. Tevildo (talk) 20:22, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ec: From a non-native English speaker: The fragment "... kind of ..." seems superfluous to me. Of course, the specific tone of spoken English in Krim´s culture must apply. The wording of the question implies that any brief and concise / precise question may be considered impolite and rude in her / his local usage of English. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 20:24, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

transitive uses of "dissemble"

Today's featured article is about Peter Falk and quotes a Variety columnist thus:

"The joy of all this is watching Columbo dissemble [sic?] the fiendishly clever cover stories of the loathsome rats who consider themselves his better."

I added the [sic?], with the question mark because I don't actually know whether it was in the original source, which I don't have. My guess is it probably was, and the columnist thought dissemble was another way of writing (or at least near in meaning to) disassemble, but another possibility is that it was incorrectly transcribed.

Anyway this led me to look up the Wiktionary entry, wikt:dissemble, which has a couple of transitive meanings for what I normally think of as an intransitive verb. They strike me as a little strange or off, especially meaning 2, which I quote:

2. (transitive) To deliberately ignore something; to pretend not to notice.

Now, that would be fine as an intransitive verb: Bob heard his wife calling, but he dissembled, pretending not to hear. But transitively? *Bob dissembled his wife's voice? To me that just doesn't work.

Does anyone think this meaning is in fact correct? Or have I misinterpreted the entry somehow? --Trovatore (talk) 21:58, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This meaning is listed as "obsolete" at dictionary.com, with no examples of usage, and similarly at thefreedictionary.com, where the definition is cited to Collins. It's not listed in Merriam-Webster. I think it's safe to say that it's not a valid usage in contemporary English, and that "disassemble" is the word that should have been used. Tevildo (talk) 22:22, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're still talking about the Columbo thing, right? That's not what I was asking. I was asking about meaning 2 in the wiktionary entry, which can't be replaced with disassemble. --Trovatore (talk) 22:23, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, sorry for not making that clear. I _have_ found an example of the "ignore" usage, from John Gill's commentary (c. 1755) on Deuteronomy 22:3 - "'thou mayest not hide thyself': from seeing it and taking care of it, in order to restore it to the right owner; or dissemble a sight of it, and pretend he never saw it, and so entirely neglect it." So it was comprehensible to a well-educated audience 250 years ago. Tevildo (talk) 22:41, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I followed your first link, and I guess you are talking about meaning 2 from wiktionary.

I wonder if someone should take this up at wiktionary? I don't really know what their procedures are. --Trovatore (talk) 22:29, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think it just needs to be marked "obsolete", but I don't know how to go about doing that either. Tevildo (talk) 22:49, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

June 27

What does the Alaskan accent sound like

What does the Alaskan accent sound like Neptunekh2 (talk) 00:40, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely not like Welsh. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 01:05, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

During the New Deal, the Roosevelt administration settled many (for Alaska then, not for the Midwest) distressed farmers in the relatively undeveloped and unpopulated lands of the Territory of Alaska under a version of the Homestead Act. When the question of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin's accent first arose during the 2008 campaign, I read that the original settlers from Minnesota and other upper Midwestern states, many of them coming themselves from Scandinavian stock, established the common accent that subsequent waves of immigrants tended to follow (Sarah Palin herself was born in Idaho, before her family moved to Alaska). So if you're identifying an Alaskan accent as something similar to the way Sarah Palin speaks, that's a variant of the Scandinavian-based accents of Minnesota and Wisconsin. If you have a sharp ear, you may be able to discern similarities between Gov. Palin's accent and that of the two current Republican presidential candidates who are from Minnesota: U.S. Representative Michele Bachmann and former Gov. Tim Pawlenty. (Or with former Minnesota Governor, presidential candidate and professional wrestling star Jesse Ventura.)

¶ Incidentally, the resettled Midwestern farmers feeling good reason to be grateful to FDR and the New Deal, tended to vote for Democrats; but later waves of conservative oil and gas workers from the petroleum fields of Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana and the Southwest made Alaska one of the more reliably Republican states in the Union. After her admission as a state in 1959, Alaska very narrowly voted for Richard Nixon (R) over John F. Kennedy (D) in 1960, then for Lyndon Johnson (D) in 1964, but since then has always voted for Republican presidential candidates, usually with some of the highest Republican percentages in the nation. —— Shakescene (talk) 01:42, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To my ears, Palin sounds kind of Minnesotan/Dakotan, and Tina Fey kind of used that type of accent when imitating her. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:15, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah Palin is of course not the only Alaskan on the planet, but like Sarah Palin, a large portion of people who currently live in Alaska weren't born there. (Mike Gravel, who was also in the 2008 Presidential election, is originally from Massachusetts.) So you hear accents from all over the country in Alaska. And Alaska Natives have accents that are different from white peoples' accents, and both are different from Asians' accents. I really doubt there can be said to be one uniquely identifiable Alaskan accent. —Angr (talk) 05:34, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

American accents tend to become homogenized as you move westward, reflecting how these areas were settled, and Alaska is no exception. In the Eastern U.S., there are often recognizably distinct accents within a few miles of each other (for example, a trained ear can hear the difference in accent between Lowell, Massachusetts and Boston, Massachusetts, despite them being seperated by less than 40 miles), often there are 3-4 very unique accents within a single state on the Atlantic Seaboard. However, as you move west, these tend to get homogenized into a few very broad accents covering large geographic areas; thus there's a general "midwestern" accent; a general "desert southwest" accent, a general "California" accent. You'd have a hard time picking out someone from Detroit as being distinct from someone from, say, Indianapolis based purely on their accent. Sarah Palin's accent is that of a general "midwesterners" accent, I don't think if you dropped it in the middle of a bunch of people from Iowa, Illinois, and Indiana you could necessarily pick out the Alaskan from the bunch. If you did the same thing with, say, someone from Brooklyn, New York or Savannah, Georgia, they'd be very easy to spot. --Jayron32 02:44, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Palin has a Midwestern accent? Not a chance. A Minnesota or N. Wisconsin accent perhaps, but it would be very easy to differentiate her accent from someone in Des Moines or Peoria or Indy. Googlemeister (talk) 16:22, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Trap basalt - etymology

In geology, a large area of basalt rock produced by volcanic action is known as a flood basalt or "trap basalt". Our article on the Deccan Traps says that the term "trap" is derived from the Dutch word for stairs. However, Siberian Traps says that "trap" is derived from the Swedish word for stairs. Does anyone know which etymology is correct ? Gandalf61 (talk) 08:53, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A good dictionary should tell you. The OED says: "trap, n.5 A dark-coloured igneous rock more or less columnar in structure: now extended to include all igneous rocks which are neither granitic nor of recent volcanic formation. Etymology: < Swedish trapp" Random House on reference.com also says Swedish, from Middle Low German (meaning 3[4]). Merriam-Webster doesn't have it as a separate meaning. --Colapeninsula (talk) 09:26, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just off the top of my head, English is the only Germanic language that does not use "trap", or a variant therof, to mean "step" - so whether it is said to come from Dutch, German or Swedish is neither here nor there. Given the Sankrit origin mentioned below I wouldn't be too surprised to learn that it can be traced all the way back to PIE. Roger (talk) 12:01, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Trapdoor? --TammyMoet (talk) 18:10, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but "trap" as used in Deccan Traps, Siberian Traps and Emeishan Traps is a technical geology term, so it must have been coined within, say, the last 200 years, and the geologist who first used the term presumably took it from a specific European language, most likely their native language (I am not buying the Sanskrit theory). Anyway, OED is a good enough source for me, so I'm going with Swedish. Gandalf61 (talk) 12:23, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There are also plenty of sources that say it derives from a sanskrit word also meaning step e.g. [5]. Mikenorton (talk) 10:36, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's absolutely hideous. I doubt there's many sources outside that though. -- the Great Gavini 11:14, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like that most of those sources have actually taken the Sanskrit origin from 'Deccan Traps' where Deccan is from the Sanskrit and Trap is from the Swedish according to this [6] - I should have looked into this a bit more closely before responding. Mikenorton (talk) 13:05, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Dutch article nl:Vloedbasalt calls it trapp. The double p is a clear sign that Dutch got it as a loan word. The Dutch word for 'stairs' in accordance with Dutch orthography is written with a single p.

Svensk etymologisk ordbok says: 2. Trapp (en bergart), 1758 (Svab, Cronstedt) = da. trap (eng. trap från nord.), till följ., efter det trappstegsformade utseende, som stenarten stundom företer. which means 2. Trapp (a rock type), 1758 (Svab, Cronstedt) = Danish trap (English trap from Norse), derived from the following word [the word for 'stairs'] motivated by the stairway-like formations, in which the rock type sometimes occurs.

That means the term is from Swedish, coined by Swedish geologists von Swab and/or Cronstedt (Försök til mineralogie, eller mineral-rikets upställning), but it is probably from a dialectal form (or Norwegian) and thus lacking the final a that is present in the Swedish trappa. Could be Norwegian because on page 227 Cronstedt says that Drammen in Norway is an important trapp site. But on the following pages Cronstedt also mentions other sites in Norway and in Sweden. It's likely that Cronstedt/von Swab took the local dialectal term common at one of the sites and used it for their writings. --::Slomox:: >< 13:16, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent response - thank you very much. Your barnstar is in the post. Gandalf61 (talk) 15:01, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

vegetables

what vegetable is spelled with these nine letters: gnieebrau — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.51.81.177 (talk) 11:56, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Aubergine Maid Marion (talk) 12:01, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And you can see pictures and descriptions of aubergines at our article, aubergine. 86.164.67.252 (talk) 12:21, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

But aubergines are not vegetables, they are fruit. DuncanHill (talk) 15:12, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's still widely considered a vegetable (just like the tomato). This website lists it under vegetables, and our own article says that in Indian cuisine it's sometimes called "the king of vegetables". I wouldn't be surprised if the clue for a word puzzle described it as a vegetable. Personally, I also always think of it first and foremost as a vegetable. rʨanaɢ (talk) 16:18, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tomatoes and aubergines are fruits (and so are pumpkins, zucchini and cucumbers), but that doesn't mean they aren't vegetables. The two terms are not mutually exclusive. They're fruits because they're the fleshy, seed-bearing parts of a plant used for food. They're vegetables because they're edible parts of plants. —Angr (talk) 19:41, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Terminology depends on the context. They're fruits according to botanical classification, but vegetables for culinary purposes, which is by far the most common context in which we encounter them. Imagine a fruit and cheese platter or a fruit salad that contain slices or chunks of raw aubergine, in the blinkered belief that they're a fruit for all time and in all circumstances, merely on the say so of botanists who might not know the first thing about culinary affairs - what a turn off. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 20:10, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Very true. In fact a vegetable doesn't even have to be a plant; mushrooms are (culinary) vegetables but no longer considered plants (though they were not so very long ago). And a culinary fruit might not be a botanical fruit (rhubarb, for example).

In the case of eggplant, I don't think there's any doubt it's a culinary vegetable. Not that I necessarily see the connection with serving it raw. You wouldn't serve rhubarb raw, either. --Trovatore (talk) 01:53, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No, but in the 2 cases I mentioned (cheese platter and fruit salad) the ingredients are all raw. Even cooked aubergine in these dishes would be a complete no-no. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 02:17, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mmmm, eggplant pie rrrghh </HomerSimpsonVoice>. --Trovatore (talk) 02:29, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Was that a homework question? HiLo48 (talk) 20:40, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I learned a new word: blinkered. The alliteration of blinkered belief isn't bad either. Bus stop (talk) 02:19, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to be of service. It's not far removed from "Yes, well, that's the kind of blinkered, philistine pig-ignorance I've come to expect from you non-creative garbage. You sit there on your loathsome spotty behinds, squeezing blackheads, not giving a tinker's cuss for the struggling artist .........". :) -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 02:26, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm struggling to figure out why artists are saddled with the burden of of always seeming to be struggling. Do these cliche-ridden commentators wear blinders or something? Bus stop (talk) 04:08, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think Bus stop knows about the secret Mason's handshake, JackofOz - best keep shtum ;-) AndyTheGrump (talk) 02:38, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is that related to the Mason jar? Bus stop (talk) 04:14, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here's what everyone needs to remember about vegetables and fruits:
- Culinary definition of them is that a vegetable has primarily savory applications, while a fruit has primarily sweet applications.
- Botanical definition is that a fruit is the seed-bearing portion of a plant. Botanists don't use the term vegetable, because it is a purely culinary term. Nearly all culinary fruits are also botanical fruits (i.e. all things you think of as fruit, which you eat, also happen to be biologically fruit, with the notable exception of rhubarb). However, a LARGE number of culinary vegetables are also botanical fruits. Think of squash and cucumbers and eggplant and chili peppers and tomatos... No one thinks of a chili pepper as a fruit, for eating purposes, but how is it functionally different (biologically speaking) from an apple or an orange? --Jayron32 02:35, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rhubarb is not the only item that is not a botanical fruit, but may be considered a culinary fruit (as well as a culinary vegetable). Consider this clause from the European Union's Council Directive 2001/113/EC relating to fruit jams, jellies and marmalades, etc.: "for the purposes of this Directive, tomatoes, the edible parts of rhubarb stalks, carrots, sweet potatoes, cucumbers, pumpkins, melons and water-melons are considered to be fruit" (emphasis mine). — Kpalion^(talk) 05:15, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Carrots are fruits, eh? How do you like them apples, Bugs? -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 06:11, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Eggs are both vegetables and fruits by that definition. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 06:31, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is possible to make jam out of watermelon? I would not think it is thick enough. Googlemeister (talk) 16:17, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I imagine it would taste pretty bland, but apparently it is possible, otherwise Afrikaans-speakers wouldn't need the word wildewaatlemoenkonfytresepteboekassistentsraadgewer, meaning "assistant advisor for a wild watermelon jam cookbook". Or perhaps "need" is putting it too strongly. --Antiquary (talk) 18:37, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about watermelon jam, but watermelon rind preserves are sometimes made. LadyofShalott 04:54, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unknown Korean words

I frequently heard 2 Korean words which roughly sound as "grosmida" and "grcho". What do they mean?--178.180.24.62 (talk) 17:39, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't speak Korean, my only knowledge of the language stems from watching Dae Jang Geum. The words you describe sound like kurosimnida and kureso (I suck at romanization of Korean, thank you). Both mean, IIRC, something like "alright" or "fine", the difference being (I think) that the ending -imnida is used for polite speaking. Again, I don't speak a word of Korean, so this is the best I can do. 80.123.210.172 (talk) 18:39, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, they mean "That is so," "That's true," or something similar. They're both polite forms, with 그렇습니다 being more formal, and 그렇죠 being slightly closer to casual. --Kjoonlee 07:33, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

June 28

Chinese verbal particles and complements

I am learning Mandarin Chinese from Pimsleur recordings, which have the disadvantage of failing to fully explain grammar. The recordings indicate that, for the verb 到，the correct way to express action completed in the past is 是到的 (e.g., 我是到的), whereas for other verbs, the recordings seem to use 了 to indicate completed past action, so that I would have expected 到了 (e.g., 我到了). Does the 是 . . . 的 construction express a different aspect or other grammatical quality than 了, is the 是 . . . 的 construction specific to a certain class of verbs, or is there some other explanation for when each form is used instead of the other? Thanks. Marco polo (talk) 00:55, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

我是到的 is not idiomatic modern mandarin. If you are trying to express "I have arrived" I would expect "我到了", this can be varied to carry different meanings, e.g. "我已经到了" for "I have already arrived", "我早就到了" for "I arrived ages ago", "我到了北京站" for "I arrived at Beijing Station", and "我到[了]北京站了" for "I have arrived at Beijing Station".

If I heard "我是到的" in conversation I would assume that I heard "我是倒的", "I am [always / by nature] upside down", where 倒的 (or 倒着的) is an adjective rather than a verb, and which I imagine may make sense in some specific context. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 03:24, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

是。。。的 is used when you're not saying that an action happened, but giving some further information about some event that we already know happened. For example, if I were asking you how you came to Beijing (thus entailing that I already know you got to Beijing), you could say "我是坐火车来北京的", "I came to Beijing by train". rʨanaɢ (talk) 06:50, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I didn't think of that possibility. So similarly, in the same conversation, to the question "so when did you arrive" you could answer "我是昨天到的", which is most naturally "I arrived yesterday" but is lexically something like "my arrival was yesterday" (from this perspective, Rjanag's example might be seen as soemthing like "my coming to Beijing was by train").--PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 07:20, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. This starts to clear things up. In fact, the utterance on the tape was "我是昨天到的". But how is that utterance different from "我昨天到了"? Would the first utterance be used only if the speaker and listener understand and/or have already discussed that the speaker had been away and recently returned? Marco polo (talk) 14:28, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the latter would only be used if you are recounting the fact without context (new information), whereas the former is used if you are giving clarification/details about an event that is already known (given information). In the most explicit example, if someone directly asked when you arrived ("你什么时候到北京的", "你来北京多长时间了" or something like that), you would definitely answer with 我是昨天到的. Of course, I don't think this distinction is maintained 100% of the time in spoken/informal language, especially if the other person is not directly asking you when you arrived—in some situations it might be a little fuzzier what part of the utterance is meant to be the "new" information and what part is meant to be the "given", so in those instances there may be a little more flexibility in which structure gets used. rʨanaɢ (talk) 16:15, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Question about the word "HAVE" in Latin

Hi, I'm hoping someone here will know a lot about Latin and Ancient Rome. So anyway, I took this photo of a mosaic "Welcome mat" (for lack of a better word) outside a house (large villa) in Pompeii, back in 2009, when I was there. I want to know what exactly it means; now I know that the word "AVE" means Hail or Welcome, but what does it mean with a H in from of it? Is this just a spelling variation of AVE? Or something else? I've tried putting the word "HAVE" into online translators, but they just come up blank and I also couldn't find any reference to the word anywhere else (probably because Google thinks I'm just searching for the English word have).

Anyway, I was just reading the article on Ave and thought that my photo of the Pompeii mosaic might be a good picture for the article (and perhaps for the Pompeii article to), but since the spelling is different I wasn't sure how to proceed. So can anyone tell me if this means what I think it means and whether it's right for those articles? Thanks. --Hibernian (talk) 01:44, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's at the House of the Faun; our article has a photo of the same mosaic. Here's a dictionary entry for the verb in question showing that it was indeed spelled with an H at times.--Cam (talk) 02:41, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, I remember the name of the building now, so does it mean the same thing as AVE? Because the description in the other photo ([7]) says it means "Translated to modern day English = Have (to own, possess etc)". Come to think of it that image is very low resolution, I think I should replace it with my own (it's a lot clearer to). Thanks for the info. --Hibernian (talk) 02:54, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The uploader probably assumed "HAVE" was a form of the verb habeo which means "to have".--Cam (talk) 03:17, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I think I'll replace it then, with an explanation. --Hibernian (talk) 03:54, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In Vulgar Latin at least, the "H" of Classical Latin was completely silent, so many less-educated speakers would not write H's where they should've been and added them where they shouldn't've. It may just be that the person who made that mosaic misspelled it. Voikya (talk) 04:09, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's definitely "Ave" with a silent H. There are other words spelled with or without an H in the classical period - "(h)abundantia", "(h)arena", for example. Adam Bishop (talk) 07:21, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps someone could link us to the Latin poem (by Catullus, I think) which records mock-horror at the dropping and adding of 'h's. 86.164.67.252 (talk) 11:23, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, yeah, I forgot about that. Catullus 84. Adam Bishop (talk) 12:43, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've answered at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Latin#Question about the word "HAVE" in Latin, where this question was cross-posted. My answer is basically the same as Voikya's. —Angr (talk) 13:35, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for the answers everyone, very interesting stuff. I put the photo on Ave and House of the Faun, I'll add that it is a spelling variant of Ave. --Hibernian (talk) 17:10, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note that if Ave (the greeting) is from a Punic word for "to live" (root ḥwy), as has been argued (confirmation easily found on google books), then the spelling with H was the original one, and its loss was the distortion. The gutturals were being weakened and lost in Punic itself, though, so the variation may have been found in the original language as well.--91.148.159.4 (talk) 22:32, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Questions on meanings of some words from Mrs Amworth

I was reading Mrs Amworth by EF Benson and found some words confusing. Can anyone please clear my doubt. From this paragraph,

"The village of Maxley, where, last summer and autumn, these strange events took place, lies on a heathery and pine-clad upland of Sussex. In all England you could not find a sweeter and saner situation. Should the wind blow from the south, it comes laden with the spices of the sea; to the east high downs protect it from the inclemencies of March; and from the west and north the breezes which reach it travel over miles of aromatic forest and heather."

What does heather, downs, spices, inclemencies mean here? The definition provided by dictionary is difficult to fit here. For example, my dictionary says inclement means "stormy weather" or "merciless". How does this meaning fit here? Similarly what is the meaning of "spice" in this context? --111Engo (talk) 13:38, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Heather refers to a large group of plants, see Ericaceae and the heather disambiguation page for more. Down (or more usually downs) refers to hills. See North Downs and South Downs for examples. Inclemencies means exactly what you think; the downs are protecting the area from the worst of the March storms. The spices of the sea presumably refer to the pungent saltiness of air that's come in off the ocean. Matt Deres (talk) 13:46, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) Spices of the sea refers to the smell of sea air, heather just refers to heather, a fragrant, downs are a landform in England. Inclemencies refers to bad weather in March ("comes in like a lion, out like lamb"). Could be worse; I grew up between an onion field and a sheep farm so I always "knew which way the wind blows" as well. Rmhermen (talk) 13:51, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see why sheep would stink, but think an onion field would smell nice. StuRat (talk) 14:20, 28 June 2011 (UTC) [reply]

The terrain type could be called a heath or heathland in England, also note the "see also" section of that article for a variety of terms for similar terrains around the world. You may find one that you're more familiar with :) SemanticMantis (talk) 14:56, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ashdown Forest is the largest Sussex upland meeting that description. The Winnie the Pooh stories are set there. Beautiful place, but I don't think the south winds bring any spicy scents from the sea. Itsmejudith (talk) 08:17, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Here is a picture of Gill's Lap in the Ashdown Forest which may help you to visualise the scenary. The low vegetation in the foreground is heather, the taller yellow flowered one is Gorse. The trees in the background are Scots Pines. This is the hilltop in the Pooh stories; "by-and-by they came to an enchanted place on the very top of the Forest called Galleons Lap". One of my favourite places on a sunny day, without too many tourists. Alansplodge (talk) 22:06, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fussable Chasselais

Hello, dear friends, how are you all tonight? Well, I trust. Good. Then let's begin.

In the famous Monty Python "Four Yorkshiremen" sketch, they use the expression (sounds like) "very fussable". Was "fussable" a recognised word before then, and in which idiolects does it occur? I assume it means something like "so good, it's worth making a fuss over". Has it entered the lexicon? I can't say I've ever heard it used anywhere else.

What they're making a fuss over is a wine they call (sounds like) "Château de Chasselais". Is this a real brand? I've discovered Château de Chasselas, which has a vineyard as many French châteaux do, but there's no mention of any export trade. Is this the same thing, or were the Pythonists just making it up surreally as they went along? -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 14:00, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Found approximately here. Also here. And here. Bus stop (talk) 15:00, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This non-Yorkshireman, but one-time Yorkshire resident, thinks they're actually saying "passible . . . , very passible", which in this case is normal British understatement meaning "very good".

While I can't say anything definite about the name of the wine, it was in the UK a rigid convention on the (non-advertising) BBC channels never to mention a real-life brand name (except in a news context or similar), so in such fictional sketches, even if not originally for the BBC, most writers would automatically make up something plausible sounding. (This sketch (actually pre-Python) was pretty certainly scripted, not ad-libbed, even on the first of the several occasions it was performed (on an ITV (advertising channel) show, Bus stop's second link), so the writers may either have invented something that, by chance, comes close to a real châteaux that they'd never heard of, or deliberately varied a known name to retain verisimilitude. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.201.110.117 (talk) 17:04, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've always heard it as passable too. HiLo48 (talk) 17:31, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is certainly not "fussible", which in a Yorkshire accent would have the vowel /ʊ/ as in "foot". I'm sure it's "passable". And on the 1948 show version they say "Chasselas", not "Chasselais". I'm startled! Looking at those clips, I can only conclude that I've never actually seen the sketch before. I've heard it certainly (I'm pretty sure it was on I'm Sorry, I'll Read That Again before it was ever on TV), but my mental picture has always had the four sitting round a pub table in flat caps and scarves with pints in front of them, not DJ's and cigars. --ColinFine (talk) 19:57, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How dumb of me; of course it couldn't have been 'fussable'/'fussible' in that accent. For approximately 40 years I've had the wrong idea about that word. That's quite some rut. Never too late to change, as they say. But maybe I'm not the only one to get it wrong. Fussible is a member of Nortec Collective, and most of them seem to have made up names, so I'm guessing they've misheard it too. If it's not a legit word, it should be, and I will now use it whenever the occasion demands. Thanks. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 21:29, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Colin, the flat-caps-and-pints version you remember may be from The Secret Policeman's Ball (1979), when (as the article says) it featured John Cleese, Terry Jones, Michael Palin and Rowan Atkinson. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 11:30, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Korean text

What is the Korean text found in this image? http://web.archive.org/web/20070108093549im_/http://www.ntsb.gov/events/kal801/Kor_link.gif

Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 17:13, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It must be KAL801기 사고 청문회. --Theurgist (talk) 18:01, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! WhisperToMe (talk) 18:11, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also what is the full text at File:Kor banner1.gif? Part of it is "KAL801기 사고 청문회" but there is additional text. Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 19:08, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think the text must be: 청문회에 관한 다음의 번역된 글을 읽기 위해서는 한글 소프트웨어가, 사용하고 있는 컴퓨터에 설치되어 있어야함니다. --Theurgist (talk) 06:03, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much! WhisperToMe (talk) 06:24, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

June 29

Wikisource template in Korean

Would anyone mind translating this Wikisource template in Korean?

wikisource:en:Template:PD-USGov

You can use all or parts of Commons:Template:PD-USGov/ko in the one for Wikisource

Thank you, WhisperToMe (talk) 05:07, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rockefeller University motto

What does the Latin motto on Rockefeller University's seal translate to in English? --Cybercobra (talk) 06:20, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My (admittedly very weak) latin gives me "Science for the benefit of human growth", but I will defer to someone who is stronger in latin than I am. --Jayron32 06:23, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Knowledge for the good of humanity" - "humanum genus" is "human kind", humans/people/humanity. Adam Bishop (talk) 06:59, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. See I was thinking "generis" as being cognate with "generate" or "genesis" rather than "genus". Good one. --Jayron32 13:58, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is indeed cognate with "generate" and "genesis" as well as "genus". Also "general", and more remotely both "kin" and "kind". --ColinFine (talk) 19:54, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, and gender, gentle, almost anything that starts with gen- (except for words related to the root for "knee", that's different). Also, the -gn- bit of "pregnant", I think. Adam Bishop (talk) 21:57, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Different alphabets/scripts/writing systems

I was recently trying (unsucessfully) to convince a friend that the Arabic alphabet/script is used for several languages, not only Arabic itself. That got me wondering how many different "writing systems" (is that the correct term?) there are in the entire world and how many languages are written in each of them? I'm aware that particularly Asia has many different alphabets/scripts and that Western Europe had standardised on the Latin alphabet many centuries ago while eastern European languages mostly use Cyrillic, but outside of that I'm fairly ignorant. Please enlighten me. Roger (talk) 06:57, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As a starting point, see Alphabet and List of writing systems, which also gives you the map I inserted at right. Jørgen (talk) 08:38, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You can show this to your friend: Arabic alphabet#Languages written with the Arabic alphabet. 80.123.210.172 (talk) 08:59, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Roger (talk) 10:31, 29 June 2011 (UTC) [reply]

There's also Omniglot, a webpage about writing systems and languages, which of course has a page for the arabic script. (I didn't answer your question on how much the arabig script is used today to write non-arabic languages.) – b_jonas 12:39, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Distinct reflexive pronouns

Are there any languages other than English which have distinct reflexive forms for the first and second persons - i.e. using different object pronouns in the sentences "She sees me" and "I see myself"? --Lazar Taxon (talk) 09:34, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. In Irish, reflexive pronouns take féin in the same way as English reflexive pronouns take -self, so Feiceann sí mé is "She sees me" and Feicimse mé féin is "I see myself". In Yiddish, there's just a single reflexive pronoun zikh which is used in all persons, so Zi zet mikh is "She sees me" and Ikh ze zikh is "I see myself". (I hope I've gotten the conjugation of zen "to see" correct.) I think the Yiddish pattern is also found in the North Germanic and the Slavic languages, but I don't them well enough to know for sure. —Angr (talk) 09:49, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hungarian does have reflexive pronouns for all numbers and persons (magam, magad, maga etc), with declensions to all cases. These can be used in a way somewhat similar to "myself" in English, but they come up a bit less often than in English.

Also, you may want to see the translation section of wikt:myself, though of course that page alone won't tell you all about the usage of those words in foreign languages. – b_jonas 12:35, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone know if Welsh behaves like Irish? That could be another piece of evidence for a Brythonic substratum for English. Marco polo (talk) 13:54, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. I see this is already covered here. Marco polo (talk) 13:59, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, your question is not about "distinct reflexive forms for first and second person"; a reflexive pronoun only appears in your second sentence ("I see myself"), whereas the second sentence ("She sees me") contains only regular pronouns—a reflexive pronoun is one which refers to the same person/thing as its antecedent. Also, there is no second person in any of your sentences.

Secondly (assuming that what you are trying to ask about is whether other languages have different reflexive and non-reflexive forms), many languages behave like English in this way. Mandarin Chinese adds zìjǐ after regular pronouns to make them reflexive (tā yǒu kàn wǒ vs. wǒ yǒu kàn wǒ zìjǐ), French similarly adds -mème after regular pronouns (although this is optional, it doesn't happen to cliticized pronouns) Uyghur uses öz plus a person marker as a reflexive pronoun (e.g., özi for third-person, özang for second-person, etc.). rʨanaɢ (talk) 14:03, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

@Angr re Germanic and Slavic: no, there's a difference between these groups, in that Germanic languages (all of them AFAIK) use first and second person pronouns for reflexive use, while the Slavic ones I know use the invariable "się" (that's the Polish word, but there are similar forms in others) for all persons. This isn't quite germane to the question though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ColinFine (talk • contribs) 20:02, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My question is about distinct reflexive forms for the first and second person: reflexive forms, for the first and second person, which are distinct from the non-reflexive first and second person object pronouns. I know what reflexives are, I know what I'm asking, and everyone else knew what I was asking, so I don't appreciate your condescension. --Lazar Taxon (talk) 01:08, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"She" or "Her"?

Telephone caller: "Is Mary there?" Response by Mary: "This is "she". Or, "This is her"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.91.89.34 (talk) 17:33, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The least problematic would be "I am Mary." (I have always liked "I am she.") Bielle (talk) 17:42, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How about I am I? Except then if you can avoid continuing with ... Don Quixote, the Lord of La Mancha, my destiny calls and I go, you're a stronger person than I am. --Trovatore (talk) 18:55, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is she also works. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 17:43, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) "It's Mary speaking" or "That's me" or "I'm Mary" would be preferable to either. But if you must restrict yourself to those 2 options, the first sounds toffy and pedantic (although it might work in a certain register), and the second is for colloquial use only (well, obviously ...). I dislike both of them and can't split them. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 17:45, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It may be an Americanism, but I just say "speaking". It seems to work. --LarryMac | Talk 17:49, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not an Americanism Larry - when I was trained as a secretary in the UK I was taught that "speaking" was the correct polite response. --TammyMoet (talk) 18:29, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See predicate nominative, which describes this issue in some detail. Others have mentioned work-arounds, but that just dodges the issue. The crux is deciding if you care more about prescriptive grammar or descriptive grammar. For most English speakers, mutual understanding of either phrase will not be an issue, so it really comes down to taste. SemanticMantis (talk) 18:21, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is me. works quite adequately in informal speech; nevertheless, This is I. is far more proper. I'm not quite sure what the rule is apropos constructions such as I am I [sic], but I, for one, should say I am myself. Pine (talk) 20:16, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's not really an English construction, no. In Italian you render "it is {I/me}" with sono io, which could be literally translated "I am I", or perhaps just "I am", with the emphasis on I ("the one who is am I", or some such). I assume it's the same in Spanish (would be soy yo, I guess), which probably explains the choice of the Knight of the Woeful Countenance. --Trovatore (talk) 17:42, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're absolutely correct, Trovatore, the construction does exist in Italian and Spanish. But that is simply because verbs in Romance Languages are far robuster than those in English. (See here for what I mean by that.) Pine (talk) 19:01, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure it was derived from Latin, which had a system of declension. That is, a noun has a different ending depending on whether it is a subject, a direct object, an indirect object, etc. Ordinarily, the accusative case is used for direct objects and the nominative for subjects. However, with forms of the verb "to be," the nominative is used for both the subject and the object. I know at least some Indo-European languages still have this rule. Some language people used to insist that English follow the rules of Latin grammar. That's where the now universally derided rule on split infinitives comes from. You can't say "to boldly go" in Latin, because "to go" is a single word. Similarly, some people would say that because the nominative is used with "to be" in Latin, the same should go for English. English doesn't even have noun cases any more, except with pronouns. I, he, she and they are nominative; me, him, her and them are accusative. So, "This is she." Of course, English is a completely different language from Latin, and there's no reason English should have to follow Latin rules. I don't think anyone should complain about saying "It's me at the door." -- Mwalcoff (talk) 01:14, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

C'est moi. μηδείς (talk) 01:32, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Chart of suffix-based verb derivatives in English.

Greetings. I've been trying to refine my knowledge of how one derives adjectives, adverbs, and nouns in the English language from verbs.

What really annoys me, though, is that most dictionaries and usage guides that I've come across, only list each verb's derivatives after its definition, and do not instruct the reader on any kind of pattern. Please don't misunderstand me. When it comes to adjective to adverb derivations (just add "-ly") and preposition to adjective derivations (just add "-most"), I have very little difficulty learning. But verbs—at least in Indo-European languages—are an entirely different animal.

After a few sleepless nights, I've come up with a chart of sorts that I believe depicts the pattern of verb derivatives in English. It follows immediately below.

eg. To comply

Finite Forms	Present Indicative /Present Subjunctive /Imperative, comply	Present Indicative (3rd Person singular), complies	Past Indicative /Past Subjunctive, complied

Adjectives	Present Participle [actor] complying Past Participle [recipient] complied	[actor] compliable [recipient] compliant

Adverbs	[actor] complyingly [recipient] compliedly	[actor] compliably [recipient] compliantly

Adjectival Nouns	[actor] complyingness [recipient] compliedness	[actor] compliableness [recipient] compliantness

Abstract Nouns	Gerund [actor] complying [recipient] [N/A]	[actor] compliance [recipient] compliability

Countable Nouns	[actor] complier [recipient] compliee

My question is simple: Am I "on the right track" to understanding how derivations work, or is there some other factor that I must consider?

EDIT: Forgot to add: Verb ==> Adjective: add "-ive," "-ent/-ant" [recipient], or "-able/-ible", "-ic" [actor].

Verb ==> Abstract Noun: add "-ance/-ence/-ency," "tion/sion" [recipient], or "-ment," "-ity" [actor].

I apologize, by sleeplessness is REALLY starting to show now! :) Pine (talk) 20:54, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's actually quite complicated, and a lot of it seems to be lexically specified. E.g. one who acts is an actor while one who buys is a buyer.The suffixes that change a word's part-of-speech aren't always consistent. The only derivation that is consistent are the present participles (in -ing), past participles of weak verbs (in -ed), infinitives (in to ...) and 3rd person singular presents indicatives for non-modal verbs (in -s). Even noun plurals and genitive/posessives have some irregularities. There are common suffixes, but no reliable pattern; most people have to just learn each form from a given root as individual words. Wabbott9 Tell me about it.... 01:31, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this is for the most part lexical, not grammatical. You are treating Latinate back formations as if they were necessarily productive. English is quite tolerant of neologisms. But you will produce a large number of inadvertantly funny forms if you take your inductions seriously. μηδείς (talk) 03:20, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In particular, your "compliable", and all the forms derived from it, hardly exist. The OED lists two meanings for "compliable", but marks one as Obs(elete) and the other ? Obs. The meanings it gives do not agree with your "actor" - indeed, most words in "-able" are passive in meaning "able to be x-ed". I also do not recognised "compliedly", "compliedness" or "compliee" - and the last does not make any sense, since "comply" is not a transitive verb.

Applying an existing pattern to a different word does not necessarily give you a real word, and even if it does, it does not necessarily have the meaning you expect from how you constructed it. --ColinFine (talk) 19:23, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both for the prompt responses.

I understand quite well that this is definitely lexical, and not grammatical per se. I cannot help but think, however, that—lexical differences notwithstanding—there must be some sort of grammatical order to it.

eg. one boy, two boys, etc.

-->But: one man, two men, etc.

Though differences exist (and not all of these constructions, as Medeis said, are productive) there is clearly some kind of pattern involved. Regarding the two verbs mentioned by Wabbott9:

eg. To act

Finite Forms	Present Indicative /Present Subjunctive /Imperative, act	Present Indicative (3rd Person singular), acts	Past Indicative /Past Subjunctive, acted

Adjectives	Present Participle [actor] acting Past Participle [recipient] acted	[actor] actable [recipient] active

Adverbs	[actor] actingly [recipient] actedly	[actor] actably [recipient] actively

Adjectival Nouns	[actor] actingness [recipient] actedness	[actor] actableness [recipient] activeness

Abstract Nouns	Gerund [actor] acting [recipient] [N/A]	[actor] activity [recipient] action

Countable Nouns	[actor] actor [recipient] actee

For these, the derivations form faily easily. But look at what happens when I try the irregular verb that Wabbot9 suggested.

eg. To buy

Finite Forms	Present Indicative /Present Subjunctive /Imperative, buy	Present Indicative (3rd Person singular), buys	Past Indicative /Past Subjunctive, bought

Adjectives	Present Participle [actor] buying Past Participle [recipient] bought	[actor] buyable [recipient] [?]

Adverbs	[actor] buyingly [recipient] [?]	[actor] buyably [recipient] [?]

Adjectival Nouns	[actor] buyingness [recipient] [?]	[actor] buyableness [recipient] [?]

Abstract Nouns	Gerund [actor] buying [recipient] [N/A]	[actor] buyability [recipient] [?]

Countable Nouns	[actor] buyer [recipient] [?]

Here—for the recipient derivatives—the best I could think were: buyative, buyedly, buyatively, buyedness, buyativeness, buyation, and buyee; all of which strike me as total, utter nonsense. :)

———English is quite tolerant of neologisms. But you will produce a large number of inadvertantly funny forms if you take your inductions seriously.———

You are absolutely right, Medeis, but may this be particularly true of irregular verbs? To wit, are they, by their very nature, simply incapable of forming recipient derivatives (save, of course, for the past participle)?

EDIT: I saw your post, ColinFine. Perhaps "actor" and "recipient" are not the best words to describe what I'm suggesting. Indeed, "-able" does seem to suggest passivity. 2nd EDIT: Fixed an error in the table. Pine (talk) 20:24, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Of course there are patterns. When you encounter a word that seems to fit a pattern, you can - usually - deduce the structure and role of the word. But there are both exceptions and irregularities, and there are 'holes' in the pattern for particular words. Read Pinker's Words and Rules. --ColinFine (talk) 07:49, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

June 30

German Warsteiner

What does it mean? I know that the -er means 'from', 'stein' means stone, and 'war' does not mean 'war'. But what does 'war' mean in German in this case? "Was"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiweek (talk • contribs) 00:48, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know that it means anything. Warsteiner_Beer_and_Brewery sais that the beer is brewed in Warstein, Germany. So the name just means "from Warstein". Wabbott9 Tell me about it.... 01:38, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

According to Google Translate "war Stein" means "was rock". The article on Warstein doesn't give its etymology. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:39, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Often the etymology of town names isn't transparent. Often when one language comes to dominate an area, a toponym (placename) gets quite mangled in translation. The toponym Wabash (as in Wabash River) comes from a Native American language (the specific one escapes me at the moment) via French into English, and has nothing to do with the verb to bash, so it may be that Warstein isn't related to stein or the Indo-European root Hwes (where H is a laryngeal, not sure which one at the moment). Wabbott9 Tell me about it.... 02:51, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. I am reminded of one of one of the more accepted explanations of the etymology of Oregon (toponym), which holds that it has the same root as Wisconsin, which is not readily apparent from the modern names in any way. --Jayron32 03:05, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The German article doesn't mention a meaning either. But the Wäster river flows through the town. Rmhermen (talk) 04:36, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Stein" in German place names generally refers to a castle (or similar fortified structure) on a rock. As Rmhermen says, it's conceivable that "War" comes from the local river. This paper by an amateur historian has some other plausible speculations relating to various forms of the German words bewahren (keep, save) and Wehr (army, weir). It comes to the conclusion that War in this context refers to a fishing weir, but the arguments are more intriguing than conclusive. Hans Adler 09:45, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is this quote real?

"...in The Jade Goddess, the twelfth-century Chinese fable, Chang Po says to his beloved, “Since heaven and earth were created, you were made for me and I will not let you go.”" (according to a website) A variant from a Chemistry.com scientist says, "Since heaven and earth were created, you were made for me and I was made for you." I somehow find them suspicious. Thanks. Imagine Reason (talk) 01:34, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Very suspicious, as he is unlikely to have had such a good command of English. However, I don't see why he shouldn't have expressed that sentiment: people say the most illogical things to their beloveds.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:33, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is real. It is taken from "The jade goddess" in Famous Chinese Short Stories translated and retold by Lin Yutang. The original Chinese story is 碾玉观音 collected in 《京本通俗小说》 or 《警世通言》. It seems to me that this particular plot is fabricated by Lin, the original story is different. --刻意(Kèyì) 11:28, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Which version of the quote is correct, or were both variations in the story? May I trouble you for a link, or at least the original quotes (in Chinese)? Thanks so much. Imagine Reason (talk) 11:43, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

see Abridged Lin's English story contains your quote or re-translated Chinese version of Lin's story, finally the original Chinese story in early Vernacular Chinese.--刻意(Kèyì) 11:54, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

More Korean help

This document:

http://www.twayair.com/img/V2/main2/copyright.gif

Does it include an address? If so, what is the text of the address? Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 07:30, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it reads 706-1 Yeoksam-dong, Gangnam-gu, Seoul. --Sushiya (talk) 12:39, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Parkinson's disease

What is the word which means "an inability to initiate movement"? Kittybrewster ☎ 12:06, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Akinesia. —Angr (talk) 12:25, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

-ling

The suffix "-ling" occurs in English in "earthling" and the rarely used word "hireling" and "foundling" and probably some others. If you search online dictionaries that match wildcards, with *ling, it includes "cling", "fling", "ailing", "killing", "rolling", "recycling" and lots of other things that are not instances of the use of that suffix. The same suffix occurs in German in "Häuptling" (chieftain), "Mischling" (hybrid, mongrel, or mixed-race person), "Feigling" (coward) and other words, and I have the impression that it's used more often in German than in English. Are there compiled lists of instances in English and German? Michael Hardy (talk) 18:27, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For English there are some in wikt:Category:English words suffixed with -ling and wikt:-ling#Derived terms. Lexicografía (talk) 18:40, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And for German there's wikt:de:Thesaurus:-ling. --Antiquary (talk) 19:00, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Lexicografia and Antiquary. Michael Hardy (talk) 19:41, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A Danish poem by Halfdan Rasmussen begins like this: En kælling og en kylling og en killing der var tvilling tog til Kolding med en rolling for at købe for en skilling, meaning: a bitch and a chicken and a kitten who was a twin went to Kolding with a baby to buy for a dime. Also Danish yngling youngster, yndling favorite, svækling weakling, særling oddball, samling collection, gamling old man, ælling duckling, vælling gruel, and gnalling chunk of cheese. Bo Jacoby (talk) 19:11, 30 June 2011 (UTC).[reply]

This reminds me of German Säugling and English suckling — a baby feeding at its mother's breast. Michael Hardy (talk) 19:41, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Likewise, Dutch has zuigeling (suckling) and vondeling (foundling). The -ling suffix also appears in afstammeling (descendent), vertrouweling (trustee), huurling (mercenary), ouderling (deacon), tweeling (twin), eenling (loner), banneling/balling (an exile), dorpeling (village dweller), stedeling (city dweller), zwakkeling (weakling), nieuweling ('newbie'), vreemdeling (stranger), ellendeling (crook), hoveling (courtier), schipbreukeling (castaway), wellusteling (lecher), zaailing (seedling), krakeling (kringle).[8] Iblardi (talk) 22:35, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

EO has some general info:[9] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 08:47, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

July 1

Silent w in wh- words

At Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2011 June 27#Culinary advice - permitted? I’ve just discovered that the word whortleberry is pronounced "hurtleberry". I can see already it's going to be a crackerjack weekend. That's the only wh- word I can think of where the w is silent, other than "whore".

Are there any others, and is it possible that these 2 words could be even remotely related? -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 08:45, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Whoever said that got the whole thing wrong. Mikenorton (talk) 08:59, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. Shit, what a goof-up. Crackerjack weekend, here I come. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 10:59, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't "who" have a silent w?194.176.105.39 (talk) 12:05, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 404: / Line 404: @@
 :Whoever said that got the whole thing wrong. [[User:Mikenorton|Mikenorton]] ([[User talk:Mikenorton|talk]]) 08:59, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
 :: Indeed.  Shit, what a goof-up. Crackerjack weekend, here I come.  --  [[User:JackofOz|<font face="Papyrus">Jack of Oz</font>]] [[User talk:JackofOz#top|<font face="Papyrus"><sup>[your turn]</sup></font>]] 10:59, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
-::Doesn't "who" have a silent w?[[Special:Contributions/194.176.105.39|194.176.105.39]] ([[User talk:194.176.105.39|talk]]) 12:05, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
+:::Doesn't "who" have a silent w?[[Special:Contributions/194.176.105.39|194.176.105.39]] ([[User talk:194.176.105.39|talk]]) 12:05, 1 July 2011 (UTC)