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

May 12

Difference between Native Americans in the US and Mexico

Culturally, what are the differences and similarities between the Native Americans in what became the US to those who were in what became Mexico? --Llaanngg (talk) 00:31, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

you're going to have to get far more specific...I'm not sure your question is particularly answerable as stated..68.48.241.158 (talk) 00:41, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Each ethnic group had/has their own distinct culture. Native Americans in the US aren't all the same. They can be broadly grouped, usually by local geographic region, but Indigenous peoples of the Pacific Northwest Coast have very little in common with the various groups called "Plains Indians" and both these groups have very little in common with Indigenous peoples of the Southeastern Woodlands. The same applies to Caribbean, Central American and the various South American groupings. I suggest taking a look at Classification of indigenous peoples of the Americas for starters.--William Thweatt ^TalkContribs 00:58, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

(edit conflict)If you want to get into it, there is a big geographic barrier that separated the Native Americans in what became Mexico and those in what became the U.S., so they did develop upon distinctly unrelated cultural lines, with little interaction. Mesoamerican chronology is a good introduction to the Mesoamerican cultural zone, the best known groups of which are probably the Olmec, the people who founded Teotihuacan. the Aztec, the Maya. These people interacted and shared common history, culture, language, and mythos to a considerable degree, but were isolated from other parts of the Americas by the impenetrable landscape:In the South at what is today still known as the Darien Gap, and in the North by the expansive deserts (the Sonoran Desert, the Mojave Desert, the Chihuahuan Desert, etc. There only known contact between Mesoaamerican and Northamerican peoples was some limited trade with the Anasazi people who lived right along the edge of the desertlands of what is now the American Southwest. In North America, the Native American groups are generally divided into several linguistic and cultural spheres, such as the Mississippian culture of what became the Southern U.S., the Algonquian peoples which lived along both the East Coast and along great swaths of what is now Canada and the Great Lakes region, and the Plains Indians which occupied the Central portion of the continent (mostly Siouan peoples, but also some Algonquian speakers in there), and various smaller isolated pockets of native cultures in the Mountain and Coastal west (the Salishan, the Uto-Aztecan peoples of the Rocky Mountains (Paiute, Comanche, Shoshone, Ute), the Anasazi, and probably several others, not excluding the northern groups, such as the Athabaskan, the Inuit, etc. --Jayron32 00:59, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Are you thinking of specific ethnic groups who were arbitrarily divided by the European creation of the US-Mexico border? There are, for example, the Pima people. From our article:

the Keli Akimel O'odham and the Onk Akimel O'odham have various environmentally based health issues that can be traced directly back to that point in time when the traditional economy was devastated. They have the highest prevalence of type 2 diabetes in the world, much more than is observed in other U.S. populations. While they do not have a greater risk than other tribes, the Pima people have been the subject of intensive study of diabetes, in part because they form a homogeneous group. The general increased diabetes prevalence among Native Americans has been hypothesized as the result of the interaction of genetic predisposition (the thrifty phenotype or thrifty genotype as suggested by anthropologist Robert Ferrell in 1984) and a sudden shift in diet from traditional agricultural goods towards processed foods in the past century. For comparison, genetically similar O'odham in Mexico have only a slighter higher prevalence of type 2 diabetes than non-O'odham Mexicans

There are other groups (peoples or nations) divided by the imposition of a border. Carbon Caryatid (talk) 23:42, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Organs in German

I quote from Talk:Organ (music):

Improvisation in E (Münsterorgel Dinkelsbühl) I tried googling both, nothing came up, what does Münsterorgel Dinkelsbühl mean in German? I'm guessing I tried translating it, part of it comes up as organ, but not musster and Dinkelsbuhl. Is it a proper noun? The snare (talk) 04:00, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

The context is File:06 Auszug e.ogg, which in this article is captioned Improvisation in E (Münsterorgel Dinkelsbühl). Any ideas? Nyttend (talk) 13:03, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

The piece is called Improvisation in E, played on the organ located in the Minster (church) (probably St. George's Minster) in the town of Dinkelsbühl. Lectonar (talk) 13:07, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Agree. As far as I can tell, St. George is the only minster in Dinkelsbühl. We have an article at de:St.-Georgs-Kirche (Dinkelsbühl). The church has a description of the organ here. As you probably know, German loves compound nouns. Münsterorgel is Münster-Orgel, or "organ of the minster". --Stephan Schulz (talk) 13:23, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

More than one is/are ?

I was just wondering, why do we say "if more than one room is available" when logically "more than one" is a plural? "If more than one room are available" seems logical but sounds totally wrong! -- Q Chris (talk) 13:28, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

See formal agreement and notional agreement. There is not any universally agreed upon correct answer; and there will be dialectical differences between when to use one or the other. Some dialects of English will agree "is" with "room" (formal agreement) and some dialects will agree "are" with "more than one..." (notional agreement). This style guide has some ways to make it work. As you can see it gets confusing. This forum post, which cites several style guides, may also give you some guidance. --Jayron32 14:12, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

In principle you're right, but a quick googling of "more than one room are" found no examples of its use (relevant examples, that is, where "more than one room" is the subject). I'd be interested to see some. Henry^Flower 15:39, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

You can read anything here and get more information if you like. "More than one...are" and "More than one...is" are both attested according to many of those sources. --Jayron32 15:44, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

I see examples of "more than one are", but not of "more than one X are". Henry^Flower 16:49, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

The first and third both contain that construction. I stopped looking after that, since it's obvious even you didn't get that far. --Jayron32 01:09, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

The first does not. Trying to assume good faith, I suppose google may be providing you with different results from me. Henry^Flower 14:01, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Sorry. For me This is the first link and it discusses the following: "Q: Which is better: “More than one person is going” or “More than one person are going”? Put more abstractly, should the verb agree with the meaning of the word “one” or the meaning of the phrase “more than one”?". If that's not your first link, I apologize for assuming so. --Jayron32 14:47, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

That is also my first link, but I think that we just have a misunderstanding. That's somebody asking the question "is this OK"; it's not an example of somebody using the construction in the belief that it's OK. My idea of an "example" would be the latter, and I still haven't found one in this instance. Henry^Flower 15:27, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

In which case, the third link here contains some information. There are some sources there (archaic) which have the construction "Everie one of you are", which is pretty similar. It also has links to other discussions on the matter, and to some pretty good sources. It may lead you interesting places for your research. --Jayron32 16:58, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Mm, I see again a question: "Would any native speakers here have said/heard the structure ... "more than one + singular noun + are"?" I still suspect the answer is "no" (at least for "said", and perhaps changing "native speaker" to "competent speaker"). (Those archaic examples are interesting, but a bit of a detour for our purposes. (If we have any.)) Henry^Flower 19:31, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

I think in this case, people tend to pluralise X; searching for "more than one rooms are" turns up a couple of examples. Warofdreams talk 20:47, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

That sounds totally ungrammatical to me. Not that it's something I might not say, if I got lost in the middle of a sentence, but still ungrammatical. --Trovatore (talk) 20:59, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

I agree. I doubt that "people tend to pluralise X" in that case. I've never heard anyone say this. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:40, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Actually, "more than one room is available" seems correct to me on the ground that the 'more' refers to the second room available. There might be multiple rooms available, but the 'more' doesn't need to refer to them; all it's concerned with is the fact that there's a second. Akld guy (talk) 07:15, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

I don't buy it. Then wouldn't you also say "*more than two rooms is available"? But you don't.

Aside: This reminds me a bit of One Thousand and One Nights, which in some languages is rendered ... Night instead. (E.g. Le mille e una notte in Italian, Tausendundeine Nacht in German.) --Trovatore (talk) 07:32, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, you got me there. Akld guy (talk) 09:09, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

The Italian is plural "nights"...also in Arabic the title is actually "one thousand nights and one night". Adam Bishop (talk) 10:22, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

No, the Italian (for this work of literature in particular) is singular "night". See the article I linked. --Trovatore (talk) 18:54, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Embarrassingly, I'm not actually sure whether this is specific to the Arabian Nights, or a general rule. I've asked a question at the Italian equivalent of the refdesk. it:Wikipedia:Oracolo##.22Mille_e_uno.22_.E2.80.94_singolare_o_plurale.3F. --Trovatore (talk) 19:53, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

"When a noun immediately follows ventuno and compounds of -uno, it must be in the singular, unless preceded by an adjective: quarantuna lira (= 41 lire); trentun cavallo (= 31 horses); but trentun buoni cavalli." (Teach Yourself Italian, by Kathleen Speight, page 104)

—Wavelength (talk) 20:31, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. At the Oracolo they seem to feel that this rule is somewhat suspect, perhaps dated. --Trovatore (talk) 20:50, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Ha! In Russian it's very peculiar and complicated. 1001 is "thousand and one night" (nom. sing.). But 1002-1004 are "thousand and two/three/four nights" (nom. pl.), and 1005-1020 are "thousand and five ... twenty of nights" (gen. pl.). 1021 is back to "thousand and twenty-one night" (nom. sing.). It all depends on the last word, so that 1, 21, 31, 41 ... 101, 121, 131 ... 1001, 1021, 1031 ... 1,000,000,000,0001 .... all take nominative singular for the object of the number. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 12:21, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Note, that it can be declined further, even when the base form is in Gen. pl. (пять ночей, пятью ночами, пяти ночам, о пяти ночах, but *пять ночи). Actually, the declension of Russian numerals is so obscure and tangled that even native speakers make mistakes regularly.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 13:44, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Тысяча раз спасибо (1,000 thanks) for that confirmation. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:38, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

In Norwegian, we use the singular "Tusen og en natt", yet we use the plural in "101 Dalmatians" and usually also if we were to say "I have told you a thousand and one times...", although the singular doesn't sound totally ungrammatical in the latter case. The journalist and author Åsne Seierstad has written a book called "Hundre og en dag" (hundred and one day) about her experiences during the Battle of Baghdad (2003), but I assume the title is a reference to a 1001 nights. Interwiki-links may be useful in investigating this further. In German, the title is singular: de:Tausendundeine Nacht, yet the plural "1001 Nächte" is used in the article. In the Italian article it:Le mille e una notte, the plural "notti" doesn't appear in a context which clarifies the question of whether the singular is used only for the literary work. In Spanish, the plural is used for the title: es:Las mil y una noches, as it is in French: fr:Les Mille et Une Nuits. --NorwegianBlue ^talk 21:40, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

May 13

What was this typo supposed to be?

Here's a paragraph from an old magazine clipping I'm reading for research:

First, the context:

• When Fredrikson won the school English prize, he was offered a job as a reporter at The Evening Post. His father urged him to accept. "You'll never get an offer like that again", he said.

Then the offending sentence:

• But Fredrikson dri ards art, enrolling for night classes at the Wellington School of Design.

"Art" is probably correct, but what could "dri ards" have been meant to be. I doubt "drifted towards" would be right.

I've rummaged around the keyboard to find close possibilities but can't quite see the solution. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 00:09, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

My best guess would be "was drawn towards" art. Bus stop (talk) 00:25, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

It's an OCR error, not a typo. If anybody has access to newspapers.com (I do not), the original page/text can be viewed here [1].--William Thweatt ^TalkContribs 01:05, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Maybe OCR was a factor somewhere in the typesetting process, but I have the actual hard copy paper article. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 12:05, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

If the text was originally prepared on a computer, which I think is pretty likely by the year 2000, perhaps the explanation for the weird typo is that the writer or editor selected some text to cut and rewrite, and was distracted and accidentally selected a bit too much. --69.159.60.83 (talk) 14:04, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Perhaps "drifted towards art"? Peter Grey (talk) 01:37, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, I already mentioned that, but I doubt it's right. It seems to have been a clear cut, strong-minded, definite decision rather than just drifting into anything. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 03:26, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

@JackofOz: Instead of "drifted towards art", how about "driven towards art"? That sounds like a clear cut, strong-minded, definite decision rather than just drifting into anything. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 02:44, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Good Weekend, Feb 26, 2000, page 54, says "dri ards art", and it's a direct scan of the page. The link I have for it is [2] (a pay link). That's apparently the magazine supplement for The Age newspaper of Melbourne. The article's author is Valerie Lawson. Have you tried contacting the author? It's recent enough they might remember what they were intending to say. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:50, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Of all English words beginning DRI, the only one which would make any sense here is DRIFTED. 81.132.106.10 (talk) 12:02, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

What's wrong with "driven" or "driving"? Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 00:57, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

It seems to be viewable here if you search for "dri ards art". Bus stop (talk) 13:09, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Here I read "Thousands of dri ards have been cured". In that case I suspect the correct term is "drunkards". Bus stop (talk) 13:18, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

dri could be Jr. or Jnr, but I can't guess what "ards" mans in that case. jnestorius^(talk) 17:10, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

I might just assume it was meant to be "preferred" and carry on acordingly. I doubt we're going to get an equinoscular* answer. (* A word I hereby official coin, meaning 'pertaining to horses' mouths'.) -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:58, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

• I'm glad you explained that word. When I saw it, it made me wonder which two nosculars you were expecting to be equal. --69.159.60.83 (talk) 20:49, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

You could try. The worst that would happen is that the author wouldn't get back to you. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:54, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

We might as well have equinascular which I hereby coin to refer to horses' rear ends. Akld guy (talk) 23:36, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

To each his own orifice. :) -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 06:54, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Double consonants in German verbs

Why do some verbs have double consonants before consonants in the conjugation? E.g. kommen: (du) kommst, (es/ihr) kommt, but (du) kamst, (ihr) kamt. But compare brennen: brennst, brennt, brannte, branntest, branntet, gebrannt; or schwimmen: schwimmst, schwimmt, schwamm, schwammst, schwammt (unlike kamst, kamt).--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk)

The vowels before double consonants are short (e.g. "schwammst"), whereas the a in "kamst" is long; this is reflected in the spelling. --Wrongfilter (talk) 14:38, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

We do that in English, too, although there are countless exceptions. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:24, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

FWIW: The etymology of the verb kommen shows that it derives from the Middle High German komen or kumen. The version with a single m appears in Medieval German poetry (and is still used in Low German / Dutch / English). It seems that Luther used the verb as komen in his translation whilst contemporaries - presumable from other areas - have used the mm version. --178.189.192.81 (talk) 16:41, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Pronunciation of German loanwords in English

German loanwords are, in my impression, becoming increasingly more used in English, at least in academic contextes. Examples: Zeitgeist, Schadenfreude, Über-*.... Is the English pronunciation close to the German one, or is it simply an attempt to apply English pronunciation rules to German spelling? I would like to know how my examples are pronounced in the different flavours of the English language. Thank you. --NorwegianBlue ^talk 21:57, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

See "Outline of German expressions in English" and "Forvo" (http://forvo.com).

—Wavelength (talk) 23:25, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

• I am not sure that this phenomenon is all that new, German influence in math, philosophy and the sciences especially was quite high in the 19th Century. Many American postgrads studied German and went there for postgraduate work. Also, there are more Americans of German than of English descent, so some familiarity with the expected pronunciations of combinations like "oe" is common. For example, the first time I read the name of the late Speaker John Boehner I knew people would pronounce it as if it were the English "Bayner". Yet I have heard non-Americans say Boner (no joke intended).

Where does that pronunciation ("Bayner") come from, exactly? You could give a very respectable approximation of the Hochdeutsch by saying "Berna", but I pretty much never hear that.

Is it Yiddish, maybe, like Bei Mir Bistu Shein, the English lyrics for which really don't rhyme at all if you try to say bei mir bist du schön in Hochdeutsch? Or is it part of some German dialect continuum distinct from Hochdeutsch, that happened to be highly represented in immigration to the United States? --Trovatore (talk) 19:50, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Those are a couple of examples. For whatever reason, German loanwords with the "oe" tend to be pronounced like a long-A, or sometimes like a long-O. Similarly, the "ue" combination will tend to be pronounced like a long-U. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:30, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Any pretense at the rounding of the vowel was lost, but the fronting isn't. The majority of Americans with a HS education would say zight-geist, shodden-froyduh and Oober, which are pretty close to the original, compensating for the sounds we don't have. Then, of course, there's the misbegotten Ritcherd Vagner, awful on several accounts. μηδείς (talk) 17:10, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! So the initial "t" sound in "zeitgeist" is not pronounced? --NorwegianBlue ^talk 20:08, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Not in British English, where a similar pronunciation is used to that described by User:Medeis above, except that the first syllable of Schadenfreude I think, rhymes with "car". Alansplodge (talk) 00:03, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

But Medeis includes both t's in her pron of Zeitgeist, Alan, so your comment has confused me. Anyone who would ever use this word at all is surely not going to say "zigh-geist" (instead of "zight-geist"), unless they don't mind being snickered about as a failed poseur. Do you say it that way? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 06:52, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

See Medeis' reply below. I was referring to the first of three t sounds: tsight-geist. That's why I wrote "initial" and not "first". --NorwegianBlue ^talk 07:22, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Thanks. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 07:43, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

First to "shoddenfroyduh", we mean the same sound assuming you are using arhotic Received Pronunciation, Alan. I didn't want to mess with IPA, the conventions in its use are different between Americanists and the Brits in any case. Basically the verb is very close to the German, and is like the vowel of cot, not caught.

As for Zeitgeist, my late parrot, /ts/ is a borderline sound. Like Bach, Loch Ness, gnocchi, etc. Most Americans, especially those who've studied the languages whence Zeitgeist and tsunami originate, can and will say Tsightgeist and Tsunami in formal or considered circumstances. To me it's never been an issue. My father's grandmother was Bavarian, and he also studied German in school, whereas my mother's family is pure Rusnak, which also has /ts/--so I have a familiarity most people don't, and make a poor subject, as I am an extreme outlier. μηδείς (talk) 03:11, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Most English people manage a "t" in "tsunami" (with a sibilant "s") but not in zeitgeist. Bach and loch don't make the same sound in the UK, perhaps somebody who can make sense of IPA could help us out please? Alansplodge (talk) 07:59, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Here is my perception as a non-academic "standard American English" speaker who has lived in Michigan and California all my life. If a German loan word like "hamburger" is fully incorporated into English, then no native English speaker will attempt to "Germanize" the pronunciation. The pronunciation will be thoroughly Anglicized or Americanized. If, on the other hand, the German loan word is not widely accepted as English, or especially if it is used mostly in academic contexts, then many (but not all) educated American English speakers will attempt an approximation of a German pronunciation, with greater or lesser degrees of success. It helps that such words are used most commonly in writing in colloquial English, more often than being actually pronounced aloud. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 08:37, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Medeis will like this [3]. Outliers are highly intelligent people who get on well with others. 151.226.217.27 (talk) 09:52, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

I meant that I was an outlier "ootleeyay", as in the French sense of someone who ootles. μηδείς (talk) 00:38, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

I've been doing a bit of ootling myself recently, and I have never had any problem with pronunciations of foreign words in English. I am not sure what planet Alan's Plodge is on, but the 'ch' sounds in Bach and Loch are the same where I come from (Scouseland). KägeTorä - (^影_虎) (もしもし！) 09:46, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Confirm [4] sounds more authentic than [5], but still to slow during the part "geist" (in the links, click the left speaker icon to hear). --Hans Haase (有问题吗) 20:08, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

To slow, or not to slow ... did you mean "too slow"? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:29, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, everyone! --NorwegianBlue ^talk 19:38, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

What word describes this relationship between words?

We have a "common" or well-known phrase or statement. Specifically, "Heaven Can Wait". The title of a new TV show is "playing on words" with that and is called Kevin Can Wait. What word describes this relationship? We would say that "Kevin Can Wait" is a _____ of "Heaven Can Wait". Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 01:00, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

See "Snowclone".—Wavelength (talk) 01:28, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Or, for those wary of deliberately manufactured neologisms, try allusion, as in, the title "Kevin Can Wait" alludes to the more familiar "Heaven Can Wait" . --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:36, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Wordplay. Then the sentence would read, "Kevin Can Wait" is a wordplay on "Heaven Can Wait". Akld guy (talk) 01:40, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

A type of pun? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 05:46, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, all. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:27, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

May 14

"Pelt a bluff"

There is an expression which appears to be used in Trinidadian and Guyanan English: "to pelt a bluff". Examples of usage:

"... the vast majority of is in Trinidad not prepared to take it to court so they pelt a bluff and we accept" [6]

"But watch them, they pelt a bluff the government waited until they filed judicial relief ..." [7]

"Several studies have demonstrated that those who begin their conversation with 'I have/ I am' are quite narcissistic by nature. Next time you try to pelt a bluff, try to leave out the capital 'I'". [8]

"Well it was tough, rough/ I really had to pelt a bluff" (song lyric) [9]

What does this mean? --Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:16, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

It may mean "to strike".[10] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:28, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

"pelt a bluff". Bus stop (talk) 02:49, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Judging by the way it is used, it seems to mean "present an argument". Bus stop (talk) 02:55, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Looking at the context of those examples, I think it's simpler than that: just "to bluff". The second example also has the interesting "skin up the bluff", which in my theory would then be to call a bluff. Henry^Flower 05:38, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks to Henry for his suggestion, and thanks to Bugs and Bus stop as well. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:47, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

sanskrit

45.115.53.30 (talk) 08:08, 14 May 2016 (UTC)how to read wikipedia in sanskrit?-

See sa:. This of course, assumes you already know Sanskrit. Intelligentsium 08:37, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

See Category:Sanskrit and http://www.learnsanskrit.org and http://learnsanskritonline.com

and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1kiiX5e9_o (14:33)

and http://www.ukindia.com/zip/zsan01.htm and http://www.americansanskrit.com

and http://www.dmoz.org/Science/Social_Sciences/Linguistics/Languages/Natural/Indo-European/Indo-Iranian/Indo-Aryan/Sanskrit/.

—Wavelength (talk) 15:14, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

If you mean the word "Wikipedia", see विकिपीडिया (Vikipīḍiyā). —Stephen (talk) 22:50, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

Maktoum tree, translate from Arabic

Could someone translate the little boxes, giving the contents of each one in a systematic manner so that I know what's what? Someone requested an English version at the Graphics Lab, but that obviously requires English text first. Nothing is specified about the language, but the uploader, Commons:User:Producer, was a resident of the UAE and a contributer to ar:wp, according to his Commons userpage. Nyttend (talk) 23:17, 14 May 2016 (UTC)

It is the pedigree of Emirs of Dubai. This wiki page (Emirs_of_Dubai) should help you. Notice the dates of rule in the referred pages. Let me know if you need more help. Omidinist (talk) 04:16, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

May 16

A record-breaking seven parties

Background: I had a brief dispute with a native English speaker at Talk:Serbian parliamentary election, 2016#Election(s) about the indefinite article in sentence In contrast to the 2014 elections, a record-breaking seven non-minority lists passed the 5% threshold. I don't see an appropriate singular noun to which the article can be plausibly attached; wikt:record-breaking is a compound adjective, so "a" is hardly an antecedent of record, and it's even harder an antecedent of seven lists. OK, I gather that the phrase a record-breaking seven lists is formulaic, but then, is there a grammatical sense in it, or is it just... because? No such user (talk) 15:01, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

It is certainly correct English - the whole phrase would sound completely wrong without that indefinite article. My understanding is that there is an implied "number" - it refers to "a record breaking number of lists" which happens to be seven in this case. The record inn question is the number of lists which qualified for representation. 81.132.106.10 (talk) 15:31, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

To me, the phrase "a number of studies have been made" sounds right and "a number of studies has been made" sounds wrong. 80.44.167.65 (talk) 15:56, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

The compound modifier a number of, meaning "numerous", and making the modified noun plural, is semantically and grammatical not the same as the phrase a [modifier] number of [complement], where number is no longer part of a compound but is a noun in its own right. I believe that 81.132... is correct about an implied singular "number of" in the sentence in question. Marco polo (talk) 17:39, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Refinement sought

Can somebody check the paragraph below and see if it is okay? Does it under mine any religion? Rephrase the paragraph if wished/possible?

"In life our age increments, we age to a detrimental point when we realise what life is all about, some of us realise at an early stage (due to the life we live), some realise after (due to health issue(s) conceive[d] either genetically or environmentally, some after death…), do not be late to realise who God is, in life. God doesn’t need you, you need God. No one will help you in life and or in the afterlife if you don’t help yourself. Not even the prophet, messenger, apostle, messiah, whoever or whatever that comes by, because even they are under God. God come first, the sooner you acknowledge Him, the better for you. He is/will be the reason why you’ll have a solicitor (the religious leader of the religion you follow) in the afterlife. Activate God by using your logic, consciousness and understandings. Have a route (religion you was born with or of your choice) to be distinguished from other routes. Use your logic, consciousness and understandings while following a religion, a solicitor/angel or whatever will automatically be there for you in the afterlife…"

Thanks in advance. -- Apostle (talk) 20:46, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

See Paraclete for the theology, incidentally - "advocate" would be a better term than "solicitor". The paragraph needs quite a bit of work to get it into usable form - you need to merge the parentheses into the text and get rid of the "and/or"'s and similar constructions, to start with. Tevildo (talk) 21:37, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

To describe the point in life when we realize what life is all about as "detrimental" jars in the ears of a non-native speaker. I would consider that to be a point of enlightenment. And IMHO stating that being alive implies aging is stating the obvious... --NorwegianBlue ^talk 22:38, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

There are a number of errors in grammar, vocabulary and punctuation, especially in the first half. But I'll just mention the points where you fail to communicate your point at all (at least to me):

1. "detrimental point" - This doesn't really make sense.
2. "solicitor" - not sure I understand what this means -- someone who tries to convince God to give you better treatment?
3. "Activate God" - I don't know what this means.
4. "Have a route ... distinguished from other routes" -- seems vacuous; all routes are distinguished from other routes.

CodeTalker (talk) 00:03, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

A statement intended to appeal to people of all religions should not use masculine terms to describe the deity. That excludes people who reject the notion that God has a human gender. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:01, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Okay, I understand what you guys mean: Keep my flopped out philosophies to myself because my English is rubbish... -- Apostle (talk) 20:16, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Can somebody refine the enquoted paragraph please, my English is not good enough, and some thing's (philosophies) I have to insert in my book; one of this is this crap paragraph... -- Apostle (talk) 20:16, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Here are a few suggestions. I really do not understand some of it, so it still needs work:

“In life we age in increments. At some point we age to a point of enlightenment where we realise what life is all about: some of us realise it at an early stage (due to the life we live); some later (due to genetic or environmental health issues); and some after death. Do not wait too long to realise who God is in your life. God does not need you, you need God. No one can help you in life or in the afterlife if you will not help yourself. Not even the prophet, messenger, apostle, or messiah, because even they are below God. God comes first. The sooner you acknowledge Him, the better it will be for you. He is the reason why you will have an advocate (the religious leader of the religion that you follow) in the afterlife. Dedicate yourself to God by using your logic, consciousness and understanding. Have a path (the religion you were born with or that you choose), to be distinguished from other paths. Use your logic, consciousness and understanding while following a religion, an advocate or angel will automatically be there for you in the afterlife…” —Stephen (talk) 20:42, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you Steph.

Btw, can I use the words "god(s) and or goddess(es) wannabies" before the word prophet? Also, is it okay if I insert the following words "prophet, messenger, apostle, or messiah" in plural form? e.g., "prophet(s), messenger(s), apostle(s), or messiah(s)"? -- Apostle (talk) 06:31, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

I would shorten it. "Realize who God is sooner rather than later. God doesn’t need you; you need God. With death comes the need for an advocate. Activate God in life utilizing the religion you were born with or a religion you adopt." Bus stop (talk) 07:38, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

-- Apostle (talk) 18:59, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Wannabes is the wrong register, too chatty and informal. Maybe "competing gods and goddesses" or "competing deities" instead. Try not to use parentheses except where absolutely necessary, so "prophets, messengers, apostles, or messiahs". —Stephen (talk) 07:55, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Okay! -- Apostle (talk) 18:59, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks a lot everyone. Regards -- Apostle (talk) 18:59, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

A song in a Norwegian dialect

Hello, There is this song of which I can't make out some (many) parts: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2rkxrwvZHw. I'm rather bad at this, and the dialect doesn't help either. Would any Norwegian speaker like to help me with the missing words (and possibly identify the dialect, besides being from somewhere in the eastern part of the country)? I have written out the parts that I do get.--95.42.25.72 (talk) 23:35, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Jeg har et lite småbruk langt opp i ......,
men kjerringa ...................................,
................................................ utedo,
drar noe særlig damer, men apropos -
jeg har .......................... på TV-2,
......... fullt av kvinnfolk på høghælte sko
og......... så vælja blant alle dem som kom,
men det er ei spesiell ei som jeg drømmer om.
(Refreng:)
Det er ‘a Katrine Moholt e vil ha,
‘a Katrine Moholt som gjør meg glad,
.............. aldri (gjør seg tau?!)
jeg må bare si at jeg (vil ikke ha no’ laug?!)
............ aleine i alle disse år,
med brennende begjær blant gris og kuer og får
..............gamle kjerringer fra nær og fjern,
men det er ei spesiell ei som gjør meg helt gæren.
(Refreng.)
Det virker itte som ‘a Katrine Moholt er noe klar,
sjøl om (jeg er lei?).................. jeg skulle ønske at ‘a var,
men det er et håp om at når filmrullen er dum,
så skal ‘a Katrine Moholt .......... (litt om?)
(Refreng.)

The performers/songwriters "no:Trøste og Bære" consisted of Bjørn Anders Hermundstad (recently deceased) [11], from Gran in Hadeland, and Trond Amlie from Toten. The dialect is from the west side of Mjøsa. Whether it's Hadelandsdialekt or Totendialekt, I'm not sure; both go under the general heading of "Opplandsmål". I'll see if I get the time to fill in the blanks, but hey, it's 17. mai! If I get the time, would you like the version "written in dialect", i.e. "Je" instead of "Jeg", "tel" instead of "til", or would you like standardized spelling? --NorwegianBlue ^talk 13:33, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the dialect identification, og gratulerer med dagen! It's not a problem if it's not *today* but tomorrow or the day after tomorrow that you fill them in - I'll be very grateful if you do it at all. As for the spelling, the closer to what he is actually singing, the better, but by all means do whatever is more convenient for you! Cheers, --95.42.25.72 (talk) 18:37, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

OK, here goes:

Je har et lite småbruk langt opp i tæ dals,

men kjerring har det æller kømmi frivillig tæ gards,

Det virker ikke som traktor og utedo, drar noe særlig damer, men apropos:

Je har vørti med på no - på TV-2,

GALA/GARDA fullt av fullt av kvinnfolk på høghæle sko

og je ska messom vælja blant ælle dom som kom,

men det er ei spesiell ei som jeg drømmer om:

(Refreng:)

Det er a Katrine Moholt je vil ha,

a Katrine Moholt som gjør meg glad,

Dom andre jinten' som går rundt og gjør seg tel

jeg må bare si at jeg vikke ha dom læll

Og je som gikk aleine i ælle disse år,

med brennende begjær blant gris og ku og får

Plutslig kom det kjerringer fra nær og fjern,

men det er ei spesiell ei som gjør meg helt gærn.

(Refreng)

Det virker itte som a Katrine Moholt er noe klar,

sjøl om det er der jeg skulle ønske at a var,

men jeg har et håp om at når filmrullen er tom,

så skal a Katrine Moholt få tenkje seg litt om

(Refreng)

Notes

The singer switches between standard forms "jeg", "ikke" and dialectal forms "je", "itte"

Some translations:

• a = hun/henne (In many dialects, names are very often prepended with han/'n or hu/ho/a)
• te = til
• æller = aldri
• kømmi=kommet
• dra damer = attract ladies
• vørti = blitt
• GALA/GARDA: I'm unable to recognize this word, but assume from the context that GALA fullt means chocking full
• messom=liksom
• vælja=velge
• dom = de/dem
• jinten' = jentene
• gjør seg tel = I cant think of an exact translation to English, it means pretend to be (something they aren't)
• vikke = vil ikke
• læll = likevel
• plutslig = plutselig
• itte = ikke
• tenkje = tenke

And for the benefit of those who don't understand Norwegian, but still would like to know the meaning of this work of art:

I have a tiny farm far up in the valley

But no woman has ever visited it voluntarily

It appears as though a tractor and and outhouse doesn't attract the ladies, but a propos:

I have joined this thing, on TV-2 (Refers to a TV show, Norwegian version of "Farmer Wants a Wife")

Chocking full of ladies on high-heeled shoes

And I'm supposed to chose between all those who come

But there is someone special, who I'm dreaming of:

(Refrain)

It is Katrine Moholt (The host of the TV show) that I want

Katrine Moholt fills me with joy

The other girls who walk around and pretent to be (hot)

I just have to say that that I don't want them anyway

And I who walked alone, during all those years,

With burning desire among pig and cow and sheep

Suddenly comes ladies from near and far

But there's a special one who drives me out of my mind

(Refrain)

It doesn't appear that Katrine Moholt is ready (at all)

Even though it's there that I would wish that she would be

But I have a hope that when the film reel is empty

Then Katrine Moholt will think things through

(Refreng)

-NorwegianBlue ^talk 21:40, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

I cant think of an exact translation to English, it means pretend to be (something they aren't). - Masquerade? Akld guy (talk) 22:52, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Not really. "Gjøre seg til" has connotations of acting silly, and its meaning will vary quite a bit depending on context. It can mean pretending with the intention of actually achieving something, or pretending just for fun. --NorwegianBlue ^talk 15:20, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

May 17

Tihwa

An ancient name for the city of Ürümqi was 迪化 (Tihwa or Dǐhuà). What is the Uyghur Arabic script translitteration of this name? Thanks! --2.37.228.109 (talk) 09:42, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

I would write it this way: «دىخۇئا». —Stephen (talk) 21:12, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Peter Peter Pumpkin Eater

• Peter Peter Pumpkin Eater
• Had a wife but couldn't keep her.
• He kept her in a pumpkin shell
• And kept her there very well.

What is the meaning of this nursery rhyme? I imagine that it is about a man named Peter who struggles to keep his wife with him, because he eats pumpkins all day and never works. He loves his wife very much, but without a job, his wife decides to dump him. Peter does not want his wife to leave him, so he makes a giant pumpkin and traps his wife in it. Do I have the right meaning of "keep"? Is this one of those nonsense nursery rhymes? 198.30.87.2 (talk) 12:32, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Hm. I assumed that Peter Peter Pumpkin Eater was about a recent widower burying his dead wife as fertilizer, but this article and this one suggest that the wife was a prostitute and that the husband jealously murdered her. Not academic sources, though. Ian.thomson (talk) 13:26, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

I'd certainly be suspicious of the first one: it repeats the popular 20th-century notion of Ring a Ring o' Roses referring to the Black Death, although the eminent folklore researchers Iona and Peter Opie demonstrated that the words had gradually mutated to their familiar modern form from rather different ones that had nothing to do with the plague. {The poster formerly known as 87.18.230.195} 185.74.232.130 (talk) 13:50, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

As noted at Nursery rhyme#Meanings of nursery rhymes one must be very careful about trying to ascertain meaning from traditional rhymes with no known author; most of the "meanings" of nursery rhymes we have were basically invented out of whole cloth in the 19th century (many centuries after they were probably first created) with no known actual historical or literary methods used to verify the stories behind them. Many of these putative "meanings" are fairly untrustworthy anyways. As was noted about a week ago, a big part of the "meaning" of any art form has to lie in the audience; this is doubly true where we have no known author to interview and ask them what they meant. --Jayron32 14:50, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Keep has a meaning of "to provide financial support for" as seen in the phrase "kept woman". Rmhermen (talk) 17:06, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Right, and in this case it could mean he couldn't afford a house, so carved out a large pumpkin, instead. Clearly not practical, but nursery rhymes aren't expected to be accurate. StuRat (talk) 17:36, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

I'd rather that than being whipped soundly and sent to bed, for the unforgivable crime of being born to a nymphomaniac who lived in a shoe. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:09, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Shoe dwellers get a bad name, even with a profession. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:13, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

You don't need a job to live large when you have a cunning pussy. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:44, May 17, 2016 (UTC)

You're a cunning linguist and a master debater. --Jayron32 21:47, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Or when you have a famous dick. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:49, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

These are most likely skipping rope rhymes, invented by children. If so, they have no meaning, but are the products of children's imagination. OK, there's a guy in the village who grows pumpkins and eats them. The children name him Peter Pumpkin Eater. His wife leaves him, and word gets around among the villagers that Peter Pumpkin Eater couldn't keep her. The children make up a skipping rope rhyme. Not hard to see how it develops. Akld guy (talk) 20:25, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

I once read a book (Who really Killed Cock Robin?) that argued that the apparent nonsense in nursery rhymes is the result of censorship to remove sexual or pagan themes. I suppose its possible, and in some cases even plausible, but the author seems to ignore the fact that sometimes people just make up nonsense rhymes for the fun of it. Iapetus (talk) 09:49, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Grammar of English nursery rhymes

• Jack be nimble
• Jack be quick
• Jack jump over the candlestick

• Fee Fi Fo Fum.
• I smell the blood of an Englishman.
• Be he alive, or be he dead.
• I will grind his bones to make my bread.

Why do English nursery rhymes have a preference of using this form of grammatical construction? Using this grammar, what are the rhymes supposed to mean? Also, what is "Fee Fi Fo Fum"? And about the content, why would Jack jump over the candlestick? Artistic depictions usually make Jack about the size of a candlestick and paint a man who has to jump over it. Is this artist depiction true to the original meaning? 198.30.87.2 (talk) 12:41, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

"Jack be nimble" is an imperative - we are giving Jack an order to be nimble - which is unremarkable modern English grammar. "Be he alive or be he dead" is a subjunctive construction, which connotes uncertainty or counterfactuality. The subjunctive is not as commonly used in English as it used to be, but it's still part of standard English grammar. It means "whether he is alive or dead". As for "Fee Fi Fo Fum", WP:WHAAOE: Fee-fi-fo-fum, which gives a few possibilities for its origin, including one from Shakespeare. And according to Jack Be Nimble, jumping over a candle without putting the flame out was once held to bring good luck. --Nicknack009 (talk) 13:02, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

I think it's a little hard to be sure whether "Jack be nimble" is addressed directly to Jack. It could be a third-person imperative, which is expressed with the present subjunctive. --Trovatore (talk) 17:56, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Bear in mind that some candles were and are quite large, particularly those used in churches for permanent lighting rather than individual devotional purposes. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 185.74.232.130 (talk) 13:57, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Meh, the two Jacks, of beanstalk and candlestick fame, are pretty lame in my opinion. Sing a Song of Sixpence is where to find the real action. although grammatically it's pretty prosaic. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:36, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

It's worth pointing out that "Jack" as a name has been frequently used in literature to mean any generic guy, maybe something like "Joe Schmo". Another nursery rhyme example is "This Is the House That Jack Built". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:02, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

"Joe Shmoe and the Beanstalk" sounds fine to me. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:15, 17 May 2016 (UTC) These nursery rhymes often really mean nothing at all, you know.

Right, they mean bupkis, and in that context "Joe Schmo[e] and the Bupkis-stalk" works. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:25, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

... "goat droppings"?? You must be thinking of a more hircine tale.... Martinevans123 (talk) 15:43, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

"Beans". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:57, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

"Beanz Meanz Hanz". Martinevans123 (talk) 20:38, 17 May 2016 (UTC) Buggsy, you're a real scream

Keep in mind that nursery rhymes are for small children, so the words are each kept short, with lots of repetition, for easy learning. "Be he alive, or be he dead" could be written "Whether he's alive or dead", but it wouldn't be as memorable. StuRat (talk) 17:33, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Nor would it be as poetic. For an example of somewhat twisted English, see the Frog poem.[12] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:36, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Any chance that Fee, Fi, Fo, Fum might be the notes for musicians tuning up, just as we use doh, re, me, fa, soh, la, te, doh, or My Dog Has Fleas today? They do seem to be in descending order of musical note, but I'm no musician so what do I know. Akld guy (talk) 20:34, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

The poor devil. You can get chilli powder for that. But it's only three syllables in Act 3, Scene 4 of King Lear. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:48, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

So that's where it's fum. Another few neurons used up. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:52, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Disenfranchised

"Disenfranchised" means unable to vote. But more and more it seems to be used as a synonym for "disadvantaged," "socially marginalized," or "politically alienated." The US media is using it a lot to refer to poor whites who support Donald Trump. Is this correct? 173.17.170.8 (talk) 17:09, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

The term "disenfranchised" means "deprived of civil or electoral privileges."[13] It's often used metaphorically in reference to groups of people who feel they have been "left out" of the electoral process - or, more accurately, that the election didn't go the way they wanted it to. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:14, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

wikt:disenfranchised says "Not represented; especially, not having the right to vote". So, the broader meaning of not having any power in society seems to apply here. For example, pollution is often far worse in poor areas, because the people who live there lack the political power to keep the polluters out, even though they do have the vote. StuRat (talk) 17:18, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Also note that the poor and minorities often are prevented from voting in the US. See voter suppression in the United States. As yet, that article seems light on 2016 examples, but requiring photo ID (which poor people often lack), a permanent address (which the homeless lack), or barring anyone convicted of crime (which is disproportionately minorities), are some current methods. Arranging for long lines in poor and minority areas on election day by understaffing them is another method. StuRat (talk) 17:22, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

think of it as "not having the franchise"...and the right to vote is a kind of franchise...but there are other kinds of franchises..68.48.241.158 (talk) 17:54, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

McDonald's, for example. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:55, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

One of the strongest underlying themes of U.S. politics in recent years is that the wealthy, the well-connected and the insiders wield vastly disproportionate political power. So, even though ordinary working people and middle class people have the right to vote, their votes are far less powerful than they ought to be. This results in a deep sense of disenfranchisement, even if the formal right to vote exists. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:42, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

May 18

Origin

What is the origin and literal meaning of the word 'remember'?--178.106.99.31 (talk) 22:15, 18 May 2016 (UTC)