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

July 14

Subject-keyword disconnection

• "People taking 5 or more medicines a day rising"
• "Man critical after being struck by train"

Those are 2 recent news headlines, both exhibiting the disconnection of a keyword from its proper subject and attaching it to some other subject.

By that I mean, people are not really rising, and the man is not really critical (mainly because he's probably in a coma and in no position to be complaining to anyone about anything).

In an ideal world the proper subjects would be:

• "The number of people taking 5 or more medicines a day rising"
• "Man's condition critical after being struck by train" (or "Man in a critical condition ...")

What's this type of stranding/disconnection/misconnection called, technically? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:03, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

While having no answer to Jack's question, I dispute his claim that the second headline is an example. "Critical" can apply to a patient in critical condition according to the first online dictionary I checked. --69.159.11.113 (talk) 21:06, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Are you referring to definition 3b: Medicine Being or relating to a grave physical condition, especially of a patient.? To me, that says that "critical" refers to the physical condition of a patient, not to the patient themself. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 23:33, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

As I read it, it works either way. --69.159.11.113 (talk) 04:19, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Headline writers try to keep things as short as possible. Hence "Sticks Nix Hick Pix". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:19, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

That's well known, but shortening a sentence does not necessarily lead to what I'm referring to. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 00:39, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Did you understand what the headlines meant, at first glance, even though they fell a little short of perfect English usage? I recall a CNN headline not too long ago which read, "Crowds protest border conditions outside Senator Rubio's office." It's pretty clear what they were trying to say, even though it sounds like Rubio's office is next to the border. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:52, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Oh yes, I understood what the words meant. I'm not on some sort of pedantic high horse here. I'm simply wanting to know what grammarians call this sort of thing. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 00:39, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

We do have Headlinese. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:47, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

JackofOz -- it's related to "dangling modifier"... AnonMoos (talk) 04:58, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Hmm, maybe sort of ... -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:34, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

I would call the original examples "contractions". There is nothing inherently negative in using them when space is a factor, such as with headlines. There is no ambiguity that could be considered a grammatical error. Jmar67 (talk) 06:20, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

But example one is grammatically wrong — it says that people taking 5 or more medicine are rising (surely that's not what it's intended to mean, right?), whereas it's the use of medicines that's actually rising. TotallyNotSarcasm [lɨi̯v ə me̞sɪ̈dʒ] [kɔnt͡ɹ̠̝̊ɹ̠ɪ̈bjɨʉ̯ʃn̩z] 09:13, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

I agree with you about that, but my question was not at all about grammar. It asks what is the name of the construction whereby a keyword is attached to a subject other than the one it actually refers to. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 09:51, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

I should have mentioned that I was replying to Jmar67 (though it was kind of obvious). I was just pointing out that there was a grammatical error, though they said there was not. TotallyNotSarcasm [lɨi̯v ə me̞sɪ̈dʒ] [kɔnt͡ɹ̠̝̊ɹ̠ɪ̈bjɨʉ̯ʃn̩z] 10:28, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

I think that this could be considered a form of Hypallage, in a broad sense. It's clearly a transfer of a quality ("rising-ness", criticality) from its logical referent (number, condition) to another, related referent (people, man). Deor (talk) 15:57, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

I think we're getting closer to the answer now. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:34, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

I think that Deor's mention of hypallage could be acceptable, though I'd like to point out that the typical idea one thinks of when hearing the word hypallage is a completely calculated poetic device, not a cheap headline abbreviation. Pallida  Mors 22:45, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Couldn't it be accidental or unconscious hypallage? I mean, people engage in hyperbole, oxymoron, litotes etc etc all the time without the faintest skerrick of awareness that they are doing so. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 23:08, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Technically, yes, I guess, since the term defines the syntactic transfer, not the intended meaning of such figure of speech. Pallida  Mors 12:31, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

The pertinent concept is that of crash blossoms, though the examples given aren't quite confusing enough to qualify as such. Vide Language Log for plenty more--the idea certainly deserves a standalone article, maybe I'll write one this weekend. Temerarius (talk) 02:27, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for that. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 04:45, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

July 15

British accents

Would a realisation of /oʊ/ as something near [œʏ] be found (in significant numbers) anywhere in Britain? If it is, please do specify an area.
I know it can be realised as [əʏ], and [ə] isn't far off from [œ] (it's the closest sound in RP to [œ], if I remember correctly). TotallyNotSarcasm [lɨi̯v ə me̞sɪ̈dʒ] [kɔnt͡ɹ̠̝̊ɹ̠ɪ̈bjɨʉ̯ʃn̩z] 12:44, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Please sign and date your posts. Add 4 tildes (~) to the end. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 12:33, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Feel free to throw in some real word examples. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:38, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Sorry for forgetting to sign.
Real word examples? Coat /coʊt/, oak /oʊk/, rope /roʊp/, etc. TotallyNotSarcasm [lɨi̯v ə me̞sɪ̈dʒ] [kɔnt͡ɹ̠̝̊ɹ̠ɪ̈bjɨʉ̯ʃn̩z] 12:44, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

You can add the template "YesAutosign" to your user page to trigger a system-generated signature if you fail to sign. (Like it should here.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baseball Bugs (talk • contribs) 14:15, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Can you please provide examples where the [œʏ]; [əʏ]; [ə] and [œ] sounds are used in your own accent, and specify what that is to allow us to provide a valid a meaningful response. Thanks Anton 81.131.40.58 (talk) 12:51, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

You will find a number of academic papers when you search the web for "goat vowel" and "fronting", but the result seems to be usually described more as "əʏ" than as "œʏ". Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:02, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

I've seen "əʏ"; I want to know if there are any with "œʏ". TotallyNotSarcasm [lɨi̯v ə me̞sɪ̈dʒ] [kɔnt͡ɹ̠̝̊ɹ̠ɪ̈bjɨʉ̯ʃn̩z] 13:18, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

TotallyNotSarcasm -- IPA [œ] is not really all that close to IPA [ə] in a phonetic sense, even though (for semi-complicated reasons), sometimes English speakers approximate French [œ] with their [ə] vowel, while French speakers sometimes approximate English [ə] with [œ]. As far as I know, the main trend in quasi-standard London English seems to be [oʊ] → [əʊ] → [eʊ] (where [eʊ] can be perceived as "posh", though not traditional standard RP)... AnonMoos (talk) 13:37, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Here's one mention, for the vowel in "down". See pp 95-96, where this type of diphthong was observed in a small number of locations in Devon, Somerset, Cornwall and Gloucestershire. (Few enough instances that the researchers call for further study.) 70.67.193.176 (talk) 19:55, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

@TotallyNotSarcasm: Wells says that [œø] is a possible (female) realization of GOAT in cockney. I'd say that it's more or less the same as [œʏ]. Apart from that, [œɨ], [œʉ] and [œː] are (more or less) standard realizations of GOAT in General White South African English (which can theoretically be classified as a Southern British dialect). Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 13:15, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

The second example isn't quite what I wanted, but the first is exactly what I was looking for. I had a feeling it'd be cockney. I remmbered someone asking whether there was a shift of the GOAT vowel to FACE, and [œʏ] is what first came to mind. Thanks for your answer. TotallyNotSarcasm [lɨi̯v ə me̞sɪ̈dʒ] [kɔnt͡ɹ̠̝̊ɹ̠ɪ̈bjɨʉ̯ʃn̩z] 16:24, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

@TotallyNotSarcasm: If you want an example of GOAT sounding like FACE, then Scouse [ɛʉ] is first that comes to my mind, but it's quite variable (as is cockney [œø], which is normally something like [ɐɤ] - more like MOUTH). Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 20:02, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

"Weha"?

I was recently in Carinthia, Austria. At the hotel bar I asked in German if they had any whisky. One of the customers said something like "Weha Whisky? Jack Daniels, Red Label, ...?" What does this "weha" mean? Is it some kind of Austrian dialect, or did I even hear it correctly? JIP | Talk 20:22, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

If I’d have to guess: standard German welchen = "which [kind of]". The l gets somewhat assimilated in Austrian dialects, and the n falls under the table anyway. Cheers ⌘  21:08, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, this. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 21:56, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

This kind of question would be perfect for JackofOz (talk · contribs) or HiLo48 (talk · contribs). ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:50, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Short for "Jack of Austria", obviously. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:32, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Oops. Time for new glasses. :( ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:01, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Austrian accents can sound weird to people like me who have only learned standard German in school. I remember one time in Carinthia when I had to call a taxi to get back to my hotel. When the taxi driver asked me for the address I said "Irgendstraße achtzehn" ("Irgendstraße" is not a real street but I don't remember the exact name). The taxi driver replied "Irgendstraße ochtzehn?" JIP | Talk 23:15, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

10 Austrian Words that Germans don't understand 77.58.230.187 (talk) 07:25, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

I have to say, I had not encountered any of those words ever before. Good that they explained them. JIP | Talk 10:03, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you so much, IP 77. What a wonderfully amusing video. And very instructive. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:04, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Not exactly Jack, but still from Austria:

Specific phonemes are pronounced quite differently, depending on the local dialect. One such example is the fricative ch in local variants of Austrian German. In Carinthia is is almost inaudible (turning into a voiceless glottal fricative) whilst in Tyrol it sounds like a "hard" k-sound (a voiceless velar plosive). In simple terms: Carinthian is a very soft and melodic dialect. There may even be subtle traces of tonal characteristics. Historically (and I am speculating here) this specific dialect may go back to Carolingian Franks who, in various guises, controlled vast areas from todays Bavaria to the Adria, including Carinthia. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 08:57, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Could have been nominative case (welcher) rather than accusativ (welchen). The ending -er is Tiefschwa which comes very close to 'a'. --Stilfehler (talk) 15:15, 16 July 2019 (UTC) (native speaker of German)

@Stilfehler: According to Richard Wiese, native speakers of German are unable to distinguish [ɐ] from [a]. The two are basically the same when pronounced as monophthongs (apart from the fact that [ɐ] can be diphthongized to [əɐ] and rhotacized to [ɐʁ] in deliberate speech. But that, again, would be indistinguishable from [aʁ]). The main reason [ɐ] and [a] are assigned different symbols in IPA transcriptions of German is phonemic identification. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 17:21, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Some years ago my (English) parents, then living in North Rhine–Westphalia, decided to drive to Austria for the weekend. My father had picked up some German from colleages, but wasn't confident enough to use it extensively in a formal situation, so at the border post he said in German to the Austrian official: "I'm sorry, I don't speak German."

The official replied, in English: "That's all right, neither do I."

{The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.122.177.55 (talk) 17:01, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

July 17

I've heard loads of Brits pronounce "Kentucky" with "took" rather than with "tuck".

I wonder, if that way of pronouncing the American state's name, is just a typical British mistake, or a British tradition of pronouncing "Kentucky". Umzu (talk) 19:04, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Pronouncing a short "u" like the "oo" of "look" or "book" is not so unusual. "In Penny Lane, the barber shaves another coostomer…" ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:07, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

It's generally associated with Northern English, so yes Lancashire, Yorkshire, Derbyshire, County Durham, etc. etc. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:19, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

I'm fairly certain I heard Phil Liggett say a short-u word that way recently, and he seems to be from that same general area. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:27, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Ooh, I wouldn't trust Phil, if I were you, since although he's from Bebington, he may have been contaminated with corks round his hat by now. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:58, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

@Umzu: See foot-strut split, which Northern English accents lack. It's worth noting that this pronunciation is considered to be strongly regional and non-standard, like the cockney pronunciation of face as fice [faɪs]. The standard British pronunciation of the stressed vowel in Kentucky is /ʌ/ (phonetically [ɐ] or [ʌ]), as elsewhere in the English-speaking world. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 19:31, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I speak both Northern English and something approaching RP, so I would say /kɛnˈtʌki/ to southerners, but maybe /kɛnˈtʊki/ to locals. The local pronunciation of book and look is, however, the much longer /uː/, though this pronunciation is dying out. I would never say /kɛnˈtuːki/ to anyone. Dbfirs 19:49, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

@Dbfirs: It's actually interesting that you won't find pretty much anyone (maybe apart from a tiny minority of speakers) from Scotland that would say /kɛnˈtʊki/ (or /kɛnˈtuki/, as they don't differentiate between /ʊ/ and /u/). There's actually a rather big gap on the map between Scotland and Welsh/Southern English dialects that do differentiate between /ʊ/ (or, in Scotland, /u/) and /ʌ/, with the Northern English dialects being that very gap. The lack of the trap-bath split is, as of 2019, probably universally accepted in the UK as being standard (with pronunciations like /bɑːθ/ being increasingly seen as southern regionalisms), but the lack of the foot-strut split is not. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 20:54, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes, the trap-bath split is the simplest way to identify a southerner here in the north of England. We use /ʊ/ rather than /u/, though they are very similar, but /uː/ is quite different and often pronounced something like [əuː]. Dbfirs 22:01, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

"Yes, the split bath trap is the simplest way to identify a southerner here in the north of England." Martinevans123 (talk) 22:13, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Incredible! Don't Northern English speakers make a phonemic (hence phonetic) distinction, between (the vowels of) "took" and "tuck"? Umzu (talk) 22:10, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Well "took" can be /tuːk/, but this distinction is dying out, so many northerners pronounce both as /tʊk/. I would make a distinction if I were speaking to a southerner with my attempt at RP. We do make distinctions between the vowels of words such as "law" and "lore" that southerners do not make. Dbfirs 22:28, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Do you mean that "lore" ends with a rhotic r, or with a schwa after the /o:/ ? Umzu (talk) 10:34, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

No, I mean the vowel itself. Lore is [lɔː] as in RP (or perhaps a fraction more open) but law is [lo̞ː]. I do sometimes colour the ɔː of lore, or even pronounce the r for emphasis, as in Scottish, but this is not what I meant. The same applies to similar words such as awe and ore. The local dialect version of "oh" also uses [o̞ː], but this is seldom heard these days. The vowels are still shifting here. Dbfirs 11:06, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Interesting. I've never been aware of this Northern British back vowel - as an additional phoneme! In my American accent, the only difference between lore and law is reflected by whether the identical vowel is coloured by a rhotic r. Additionally, I do have five different phonemes of back vowels: cooed, could, cawed, cod, cud (not to mention phonemes of front vowels). Do Northern British English speakers make a distinction between all those five words? Umzu (talk) 13:37, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

@Umzu: Speakers of Northern England English differentiate between cooed, could, cawed and cod, with cud being the same as could. Speakers of Scottish English distinguish cooed, cawed and cud, with could being the same as cooed (still different from cud) and cod being the same as cawed. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 16:16, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

So, Northern England English speakers pronounce "a good luck " like "a good look "? I must admit that's quite interesting... How don't they get confused? Umzu (talk) 16:37, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

@Umzu: Either that or they pronounce "luck" as your "look" and "look" as your "Luke". AFAIK English /ʊ/ and /ʌ/ are largely in complementary distribution as they come from the same Middle English phoneme /u/. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 17:12, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Since they distinguish "could" and "cooed" (per your testimony), so they probably (I guess) distinguish "look" and "Luke", don't they? Umzu (talk) 18:03, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Depends on the dialect. In Lancashire, traditionally, "look" and "Luke" are the same, pronounced with an /u:/, as in the standard pronunciation of "Luke"; but in Yorkshire "look" and "luck" are pronounced with the same vowel (the short, back vowel in "look" in Southern accents) and "Luke" is different with the long /u:/. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 22:47, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

To sum up: Northern England English speakers (like RP speakers and General American speakers) have five back vowels as phonemes: 1. "cooed", 2. "cawed", 3. "cod ", and 4. "cud " - pronounced /kʊd/ by Northern England English speakers (rather than /kʌd/ as pronounced by RP speakers and General American speakers), with "could " - being the same as "cooed " in Lancashire - and being the same as "cud " in Yorkshire. Additionally, they have a 5-th back vowel as a phoneme, reflected by the distinction between "law " and "lore ". However, This fifth phoneme is not recognized in RP, nor in General American, which have the back vowel of "could " as a 5-th phoneme. I think that's a good summary of the whole issue about "a fifth back vowel as a phoneme"... Umzu (talk) 01:31, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

@Umzu: That's mostly correct, except for the fact that I think that most (or at least many) words with RP/GA /ʌ/ /ʊ/ take /ʊ/ in all Northern English accents, regardless of region ("could" /kʊd/ is probably one of them). The pronunciation of look etc. with /uː/ is regionally variable, confined to a limited set of words and may be recessive (so that speakers increasingly say /lʊk/). I don't know where you can find a list of words that can take /uː/ in (some) Northern English that have /ʊ/ in RP and GA, but you can compare the corresponding close back vowel in German. For instance, book (/bʊk/ in RP and GA, /buːk/ in some Northern English) is translated as Buch in German and has a long vowel: /buːx/, as does Swedish bok /buːk/. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 10:11, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

It seems that you had wanted to write "except for the fact that I think that most (or at least many) words with RP/GA /ʌ/ [/ʊ/] take /ʊ/ [also] in all Northern English accents, regardless of region (could /kʊd/ is probably one of them) ".

Otherwise, I can't understand your reservations about what I've written. You write: "except for the fact that I think that most (or at least many) words with RP/GA /ʌ/ take /ʊ/ in all Northern English accents, regardless of region (could /kʊd/ is probably one of them) ". Please notice that I have nowhere written that words with RP/GA /ʌ/ does not take /ʊ/ in some northern regions. Further, your example of "could" cannot be an example of a word with RP/GA /ʌ/. I have only written that "could " is pronounced the same as "cooed " in Lancashire - and the same as "cud " (i.e. /kʊd/) in Yorkshire. Umzu (talk) 13:37, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

@Umzu: Fixed, I did mean /ʊ/. Thanks. I still don't think "could" has a long vowel in any type of Northern English though. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 14:26, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

My question: isn't it basically the case that words that have /ʊ/ in RP/GA which take /uː/ in some Nothern English are those spelled with "oo"? Wells seems to term this later shortening (from /uː/ to /ʊ/), as opposed to early shortening of /uː/ to /u/ (apparently in Middle English, judging by transcription), which has ultimately resulted in /ʌ/ in RP and GA. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 10:54, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

According to User:filelakeshoe's comment, "could " has /ʊ/ in RP/GA, and takes /uː/ in some Nothern English accent (e.g. in Yorkshire Lancashire), but still is not spelled with "oo". Umzu (talk) 13:37, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Nah thats not what I meant. I am pretty sure "could" has /ʊ/ everywhere, as Mr K says, but in Lancashire (not Yorkshire) some other words have /u:/ where other accents have /ʊ/, e.g. took, book, cook, look. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 13:47, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Sorry. It's my mistake. I though that "could" (pronounced /kʊd/ in RP and GA) is treated as "look" (pronounced /lʊk/ in RP and GA). Umzu (talk) 13:58, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

You might be interested in the feverish Shrowsbury/Shroosbury debate largely ignored in our article on Shrewsbury, but nicely written up here --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 12:44, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with IPA and nobody's used the helpful device which explains the pronunciation when you mouseover, but a lot depends on whether or not "law" or "lore" is followed by a word beginning with a vowel. It's not clear to me whether that also affects the pronunciation of the vowel Dbfirs is discussing. 2A02:C7F:A05:DC00:90EB:8D18:146:2B9C (talk) 12:48, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

No, a following consonant or vowel does not affect the pronunciation. Awe has the vowel of thought (/θɒt/) whereas lore has the vowel of core. Dbfirs 13:57, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

I've never been to Shropshire and I have never heard the name of its county town pronounced as anything other than "Shrowsbury". Until today, I was unaware that there was any other pronunciation. 2A02:C7F:A05:DC00:90EB:8D18:146:2B9C (talk) 13:02, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

That's the beauty of the Ref Desks! --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 21:38, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Indeed. I used to work with a Shrewsbrarian (or maybe Shrewsburyite?) who said "Shroosbury" and claimed that only posh people in the town used "Shrowsbury"; but I'm sticking with the latter which I learned at school. Worth a visit by the way, everything is half-timbered, even the buses. Alansplodge (talk) 22:27, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Correction, I think the demonym might be Salopian, at least if you went to Shrewsbury School (now that is posh). Alansplodge (talk) 22:43, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

/lu:k/ and /bu:k/ are not "Northern", they are North-Western! (Traditionally, Lancashire, but I'm not sure which of the traditional or current neighbouring counties they spread into). In Yorkshire, "book" and "buck" are both /bʊk/. --ColinFine (talk) 22:48, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Sixty years ago, /lu:k/, /bu:k/, /hu:k/, cru:k/ and /nu:k/ would have been the usual pronunciation in this corner of what was then Yorkshire (but is now Cumbria). I think the RP pronunciation is taking over in all of the North West. One seldom hears the old vowel in these words used by younger people, but it is, of course, retained in words such as spook. Dbfirs 13:57, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

July 19

Irregular death in Serbo-Croat

Brian Aldiss, in his Bury My Heart at W. H. Smith's, writes that "Serbo-Croat has two words for dying, one referring to human death, one to animal death, although two animals are the exception to the rule. Bees and dolphins are irregular, and take the human form of the verb."

Aldiss did know a bit of Serbo-Croat, but this still seems too good to be true. Is it? Henry^Flower 08:54, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Regarding the idea that umreti and its cognates in other Slavic languages should only be used to talk about humans, this may be a prescriptive rule but the actual usage tends to be a little shakier. The same rule exists in Czech (with the verb umřít) but people do quite commonly use that to talk about animals, especially their pets. Conversely, using any "animal death" word (e.g. chcípnout) to talk about humans is horribly insulting and offensive. So some distinction exists but it's not as clear cut as language purists make out. I suppose the same is the case in BCS, as I found plenty of usage of pas umro (= the dog died, using the "human death" verb) on a google search.

I asked a Serbian friend about dolphins and bees, and she told me she would use uginuti (that's the "animal death" verb) to talk about bees, but for dolphins either uginuti or umreti is possible. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 11:15, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

@Henry Flower and Filelakeshoe: Re cz:chcípnout see wikt:chcípnout.
Similar ru:wikt:подыхать, wikt:подохнуть, pl:wikt:zdychać, wikt:zdechnąć (etym. 'loose ones breath') neutral for most animals except (in pl) bees and pets, vulgar and offensive for people vs. neutral ru:wikt:умирать, wikt:умереть, pl:wikt:umierać, wikt:umrzeć. --CiaPan (talk) 11:45, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks both -- for now I suppose I can classify it as half-true; I'm especially intrigued that bees may indeed have special status. Henry^Flower 13:41, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

@Henry Flower: Here is a quote from a Hyde Park Corner at the readers' forum of a Hunting Daily:

Gdy zginie ostatnia pszczoła na kuli ziemskiej ludzkości zostanie tylko cztery lata życia. To powiedział Einstein. Pszczoła jest odpowiedzialna za zapylanie ogromnej ilości roślin na ziemi. Ok. 84 procent. Więc jeśli zabraknie pszczół to zabraknie jedzenia. Pszczoła zawsze była otaczana wielkim szacunkiem. Pszczelarz z szacunku do dziś nie mówią że pszczoła zdechła tylko umarła.

— http://dziennik.lowiecki.pl/forum.php?f=11&t=391203&numer=2404

My rough translation, with some help from Google Translate:

When the last bee dies, mankind dies in four years. So Einstein said. A bee is responsible for pollination of huge amount of plants – about 84 percent. So when there is no bees, there will be no food, either. A bee was always deeply respected, beekeepers never say a bee zdechła, only umarła.

Minor note: in Polish the noun 'pszczoła', a bee, is of feminine gender, so the two untranslated verbs are sing. fem. past.

This of course is not a scientific, lingustic source – but the same I've seen in many places, both in the Web recently and in books in older times, so that's how people commonly understand the difference bees make, and a reason why we use a 'human' verb for them. --CiaPan (talk) 15:09, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

On a side note, an image has been recurring in social media in the recent couple of years that discusses the terms for dying in the Albanian language. See e.g. here. The text is:

[English] Die means to die. It also is the singular of dice.

[Albanian] "Vdes" means die, but is only used for humans, "ngordh" means to die and is used for animals, but it can also mean starve when used for humans, but you cannot use "ngordh" for bees or battle horses since they are respected animals, so you have to use "vdes" for those, but "vdes" in dialectal tosk also means to exhaust someone to death. There is also dialectal gheg "cof" which means die, but is only used for animals (bees not included again), but used to be for plants, but now "vyshkem" is for plants, that's why whe [text intentionally cut off in source]

--Theurgist (talk) 20:02, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

English is not quite that simple, see Tap and die and Die (manufacturing). Alansplodge (talk) 12:58, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Fiddling while Rome burned

According to tradition, Nero "fiddled while Rome burned". The main article says nothing about this, but in Talk:Great_Fire_of_Rome it is claimed that Similarly, most of our generation associate the Great Fire with the image of Nero merrily playing his fiddle as Rome burns, obviously inspired out of the ancient anecdote that Nero 'fiddled while rome burned'. In truth, this is an idiom. The musical instrument was invented many centuries later; to fiddle at that time merely meant to squander needlessly away the time in vain, as is still a popular use of the word today.. However, this itself is an anachronism - "fiddle" is an English word, not Latin, and the sense "to squander needlessly away the time in vain" comes from the instrument, not the other way around. So can anyone say where the myth of Nero playing the fiddle came from? Did ancient sources say he was playing some sort of instrument, which later tradition represented as a fiddle? Did ancient sources say he was wasting time, which later English writers rendered as "fiddling", resulting in confusion? Something else? Iapetus (talk) 12:12, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

I believe you are close to the truth, although it may just be that he was perceived as wasting time rather than fighting the fire. Of course, with the fire fighting technology of the time (bucket brigades), there's not much they could do to stop a widespread fire. SinisterLefty (talk) 12:29, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Our article on the fire quotes Tacitus and Suetonius both saying that he was "singing and playing the lyre". That old talkpage draft about the idiomatic use of "fiddling" is nonsense. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:06, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

I've looked at translations of Tacitus and Suetonius, and Suetonius says that Nero started the fire by means of gangs of thugs armed with torches, and then put on his "tragedian's costume" and sang about the fall of Troy, while Tacitus says that some of those things were unverified rumors. Nero sometimes tried to play the lyre, but neither Tacitus and Suetonius mentions a lyre in the context of the fire, as far as I can see (just singing)... AnonMoos (talk) 13:24, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Wow, thanks for this correction. Never trust a Wikipedia article. Who put those distorted summaries there? Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:51, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

So, fixit! —2606:A000:1126:28D:90E5:ABEC:4279:A682 (talk) 20:16, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Latin monumental inscription

Andrew Rutherfurd, Lord Rutherfurd and his wife Sophia had an unusual monument, designed by William Henry Playfair at Dean Cemetery in western Edinburgh. The inscription is this: Uxori desideratissimae contra votum superestes moerens posuit Andreas Rutherfurd, et sibi, MDCCCLII. Any Latin scholars care to enlighten us? (I managed the 1852 at the end.) Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:11, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

According to this article it means "Andrew Rutherfurd, surviving against his will, placed this tomb in mourning to his most beloved wife, and to himself, 1852". DuncanHill (talk) 21:33, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

(pedantry alert) The inscription actually has "(...) superstes mœrens (...)". ---Sluzzelin talk 22:40, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

(OCD alert) Who has the time to bother finding out how to type "œ" ? 2606:A000:1126:28D:90E5:ABEC:4279:A682 (talk) 23:07, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

(point taken) My main reason to nitpick was "superestes" (not a Latin word) instead of "superstes", but I see that the typo is in the source Monuments and Monumental Inscriptions in Scotland. For comparison, here's a photo of the inscription. ---Sluzzelin talk 16:47, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

July 20

Terminology or terminologies?

Let's say that each of the 50 states uses different wording to describe something. Would we say that the 50 states employ "different terminology" or "different terminologies"? Neither choice sounds good to me, for some reason. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 19:03, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

• "Each state employs a different terminology".

• "The states employ different terminologies". SinisterLefty (talk) 19:21, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. So, does this sound right?

Among the 49 lower houses of state legislatures in the United States, various terminologies are employed:

• House of Representatives: 42 states

• State Assembly: 4 states (California, Nevada, New York, and Wisconsin)

• House of Delegates: 2 states (Maryland and Virginia)

• General Assembly: 1 state (New Jersey)

• No lower house: 1 state (Nebraska)

Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 19:35, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Looks good, except that Nebraska doesn't belong in that list. Discard it in the intro: "...States (Nebraska lacks a lower house), various...". You might also want to avoid saying "state" quite so many times, say by putting "US" in the intro. SinisterLefty (talk) 19:56, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Great. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 20:01, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

Resolved

I disagree. You are talking about different terms, not different terminologies. "Different terminology" would be correct but why not just use the shorter word? --69.159.11.113 (talk) 21:45, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

From a non-English speaker

Hello, if "lift" is to elevate a thing, isn't "lift up" redundant? Thanks --181.27.158.49 (talk) 21:39, 20 July 2019 (UTC)