Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 15:07, 21 August 2019

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.

August 14

"from last one century."

Are the structures "from last one century", "from last one year", correct and standard English? Somehow I see it more often used by Pakistani speakers. Would it be like "since last century" or "since last year"? --C est moi anton (talk) 19:35, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It may be correct in Pakistani English (I can't imagine people just make up such a construction), but it's certainly not correct in standard English. I'd be guessing as to its meaning. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 19:51, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Full context: "Natural languages have been an area of interest from last one century. In the late nineteen sixties and seventies, so many researchers as Noam Chomsky (1965) [5], Maron, M. E. and Kuhns, J. L (1960) [6], Chow, C., & Liu, C (1968) [7] contributed in the area of information retrieval from natural languages. "C est moi anton (talk) 19:53, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"... so many researchers as Noam Chomsky". I presume that means "many researchers, such as Noam Chomsky". -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 19:57, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it stands literally like that in the original article. I assume their mastery of the English language was not that high. Quite amusing for a published work. Authors are one Portuguese and one Pakistani.C est moi anton (talk) 20:48, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

August 15

When did an "icon" become "iconic".

When I was at school in the 1960s and 1970s, I'm fairly certain that an icon only referred to an Orthodox religious image - you may correct me if I'm wrong. Is its wider use as a best example of something connected to the little computer screen symbols, and if so, which came first? Alansplodge (talk) 14:31, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is from the Greek, which means simply "likeness". Of course, in the Orthodox Church it has a specialised meaning. 2A00:23C4:7997:6F00:BC9D:5A89:EEB8:D485 (talk) 15:29, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The OED has a citation for the sense of 'A person or thing regarded as a representative symbol, esp. of a culture or movement; a person, institution, etc., considered worthy of admiration or respect' from 1952, which long predates the computer sense (first citation 1982). The 1952 citation is about F Scott Fitzgerald's The Diamond as Big as the Ritz. For the metaphorical use of 'iconic', the earliest citation is from 1976, referring to 'Robert Smithson's iconic "Spiral Jetty"'. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 15:43, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

When I checked the OED before posting I found references going back to 1572. 2A00:23C4:7997:6F00:BC9D:5A89:EEB8:D485 (talk) 15:50, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

'The OED’s first citation in writing for “iconic” is from Thomas Blount’s dictionary Glossographia (1656): “Iconic, belonging to an Image, also lively pictured' [1] (so not really the modern sense of the word). Alansplodge (talk) 16:24, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The computer and traffic-sign sense of the word "icon" was probably influenced by the writings of Charles Sanders Peirce, whether directly or indirectly. According to the "II. Icon, index, symbol" section of that article, Peirce was using the word "icon" in his special meaning as early as 1867, though ordinary people in Western societies didn't commonly confront sets of visual "icon" signs (contrived by graphic designers) in their daily lives until well into the 20th century... AnonMoos (talk) 16:18, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some "icons", in the modern sense, existed long ago. There's the Rod of Asclepius/caduceus, for example, or many symbols from heraldry (some of them on the sinister side [2]). SinisterLefty (talk) 01:45, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but in earlier decades we might have said "emblem" or "symbol". The word "iconic" is bandied about very frequently these days; 1976 seems to have been the start of it. Alansplodge (talk) 12:01, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

SinisterLefty -- Consciously-designed sets of symbols which are visually meaningful, but not simply artistic drawings, occurred later. Isotype dates from 1925. According to our Traffic sign article, "In 1909, nine European governments agreed on the use of four pictorial symbols, indicating 'bump', 'curve', 'intersection', and 'grade-level railroad crossing'", while "intensive work on international road signs" started in 1926... AnonMoos (talk) 01:12, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everyone. Curiously, I read The Diamond as Big as the Ritz at secondary school, but had forgotten all about it. Alansplodge (talk) 16:27, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have access to oed.com right now, but I'm under the impression that a very important meaning of icon (or legend) is "person who gets at least a few hits at Google". Now that the meaning has been so devalued, I can only get excited about legendary icons (example) and iconic legends (example). -- Hoary (talk) 03:33, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In their draft additions of June 2001, the OED has the definition: "A person or thing regarded as a representative symbol, esp. of a culture or movement; a person, institution, etc., considered worthy of admiration or respect. Frequently with modifying word." with cites from 1952 to 2000. Dbfirs 07:07, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

... sorry, just noticed that this is mentioned above. Dbfirs 07:09, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Don't apologise; it's interesting that this definition wasn't included until 2001. Alansplodge (talk) 14:35, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

August 16

Personal pronoun "I" capitalised in English

Written English has the unusual feature that the first person singular pronoun "I" is capitalised, while none of the various other personal pronouns is, not even "me" or "my".

Is there any other language that's exactly like this? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 18:55, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Huh, apparently English is the only language that capitalizes the first person singular pronoun at all. Source. Interesting question and fact for the day! 70.67.193.176 (talk) 19:03, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I got about two sentences into that link when the New York Times informed me I had to subscribe to see the rest of it. So much for that. However, EO also has an explanation.[3] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:12, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's done for the same reason that the original SI requirement to represent liters as "l" in lower case was abandoned: legibility. The single lower case letter "i" as a word by itself would be too easy to misread. --76.69.116.4 (talk) 21:13, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What would it be mistaken for? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:50, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That statement in our I article is referenced to Is capitalising "I" an ego thing?. Alansplodge (talk) 23:01, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Or maybe vice versa. And, again, what would lower case i be mistaken for? EO's explanation seems more likely. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:14, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

EO says "It began to be capitalized mid-13c. to mark it as a distinct word and avoid misreading in handwritten manuscripts." Anyway, the "use of swash for distinctiveness" and "capitalization for distinctiveness" explanations are not fully mutually exclusive. As for misreading, in the blackletter alphabet style commonly used in England during the late medieval period, the letter "i" was written as a minim, while the letters "u"/"v", "n", and "m" were written as sequences of minims. Minims belonging to adjacent letters were not reliably written differently from minims within a single letter, which could sometimes lead to confusing situations. (Of course, word-spacing was often erratic during that period...) AnonMoos (talk) 00:26, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe if someone's copying it but not reading it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:31, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by "but not reading it", Bugs? Are you saying that reading the text in the image at right is a trivial exercise? Deor (talk) 02:07, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that Baseballbugs - I don't have a subscription either and was allowed to read the whole thing so for all I knew it was not paywalled. Will see if I can extract some judicious quotes.

"The generally accepted linguistic explanation for the capital “I” is that it could not stand alone, uncapitalized, as a single letter, which allows for the possibility that early manuscripts and typography played a major role in shaping the national character of English-speaking countries."

"“Graphically, single letters are a problem,” says Charles Bigelow, a type historian and a designer of the Lucida and Wingdings font families. “They look like they broke off from a word or got lost or had some other accident.” "

"The growing “I” became prevalent in the 13th and 14th centuries, with a Geoffrey Chaucer manuscript of “The Canterbury Tales” among the first evidence of this grammatical shift."

At the end of the article, the writer speculates on a link to egotism but makes it clear that is speculation alone, and challenges the reader to write their next email using reverse capitalization--You and i--to see how it feels. 70.67.193.176 (talk) 02:34, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion made me think of the practice of capitalising the third person pronouns in hard core Christian writing when it is used to refer to that faith's god - He, Him, Himself, etc. Does this happen in other languages? HiLo48 (talk) 00:00, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dunno, but even the typical Bible doesn't do that. It seems to be a non-biblical convention. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:14, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There's an apocryphal story that the reason why 5-bit telegraph codes (Baudot code) were printed out in all-capitals instead of all-lowercase is that a late-19th-century telegraph corporation executive objected to the spellings "god" and "jesus" that would result from all-lowercase... AnonMoos (talk) 07:56, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Danish pronoun I ("you", plural nominative) is likewise always capitalized. It has a different pronunciation and origin from the English pronoun, so the two are homographs even in the narrow definition of the term. --Theurgist (talk) 17:08, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to all for interesting info. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 23:30, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

In Polish it is common to capitalize the second-person pronoun, but not the first-person one. This is, however, a stylistic, rather than grammatical rule. In other words, the words for "you, your, yours", etc., are capitalized to show respect to the reader, but it's still grammatically correct to leave them in lower case. — Kpalion^(talk) 10:04, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In German, the honorific 2nd person pronouns are also capitalized, but I think that's mainly because they're so ambiguous: uncapitalized sie can mean "they" or "she", while capitalized Sie means "you" (not joking)... AnonMoos (talk) 11:35, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

August 17

Pronunciation of "gauche" as English word

wikt:gauche#Pronunciation gives IPA and an audio sample with the middle "au" pronounced like the o in "go", which is close to the French pronunciation. But I've heard and have been pronouncing it more like the "a" in "raw" or "law". Is there any wisdom about this? I'm ok with a "gauche" pronunciation as it were. The French-way sounds a little bit fancy to me (US west coast). Thanks. 173.228.123.207 (talk) 21:53, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, this ageing BrE speaker has only ever heard it pronounced as you first describe.

A friendly question: why do you consider pronouncing a word, well known to be a recent borrowing from French, in a manner similar to its French pronunciation "fancy"? Presumably there is not a standard way of pronouncing it differently in your part of the world, otherwise you'd just use that. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.123.24.56 (talk) 23:08, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In terms of Wikipedia:IPA for English transcriptions, the prevalent English pronunciation would be [ɡoʊʃ]. That's the only pronunciation given at https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/gauche (except for a technical chemistry meaning), and I don't think I've heard it any other way. There are some words where attempting to pronounce the French accurately could be considered pretentious ("hors d'oeuvres"), or where a wrong attempt to pronounce in French has resulted in a horrible botch which is neither natural English nor accurate French ("lingerie"), but I don't think this applies to "gauche"... AnonMoos (talk) 00:56, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, the French way it is then. The "non-fancy" pronunciation sounds to me more like an English word of French origin (loanword) while the French pronunciation is more like a French word shoehorned into an English sentence. I just came across the articles inkhorn term and aureation which also convey the image. Ideally I want an effect that's sort of the opposite, more down-to-earth or whatever, but without actually being an error, so oh well. Thanks! 173.228.123.207 (talk) 02:11, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The OED has /ɡəʊʃ/ for the UK (RP) and /ɡoʊʃ/ for the American pronunciation, though, here in Northern England, my "standard" pronunciation is closer to the American. I think I have heard [ɡɔːʃ] but I wouldn't say it that way: my local dialect (Yorkshire) would be [ɡo̞ːʃ] Dbfirs 06:58, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The American pronunciation of French loan words such as "premier", "debut" and "route" are at variance with the original vowel sounds too. Perhaps it's because they're a bit further away from France (ditto Yorkshire). ;-) Alansplodge (talk) 11:52, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

At least the pronunciation [ˈɡæɹɪdʒ] doesn't exist in the U.S., only [ɡəˈɹɑː(d)ʒ]... [4]

-- AnonMoos (talk) 16:48, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

... so do you say [mæɹɪˈɑː(d)ʒ] and [kæɹɪˈɑː(d)ʒ] on your side of the pond? It's strange how pronunciation varies. Dbfirs 07:55, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Those aren't recent enough loanwords from French... AnonMoos (talk) 08:07, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's true: 1300 and 1425, so they have been thoroughly Anglicised. I was surprised to see how recent garage is. Montage is even more recent, and we both use [ɑːʒ], but with different stress. Dbfirs 10:59, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Part of the issue here is that French has an entirely different vowel system from English. When a word is adopted into English, the vowels often and quickly change to the nearest English approximation. See English phonology#Vowels and French phonology#Vowels. I count at most only 2-3 potential vowel sounds in common, and it may literally be none, depending on one's dialect. --Jayron 32 12:18, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Which is partly why it makes little or no sense to include the French diacritics when we steal a French word and make it an English word. The way we pronounce our 'debut' (or 'début' if you must) is not the same as the French pronounce their début. Same for role (rôle), cafe (café) etc etc. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 18:45, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

So is it safe to write cafe and make them rhyme? Dbfirs 17:51, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

August 18

German exonym of Padua

I have been researching and recording the exonyms of various cities across Europe for various Europea languages, specifically the ones that are no longer actively used in in the modern era in addition to having enough different pronunciation and spelling from the native version. I have come across the city of Padua in Venetia, Italy and while the German Wikipedia page would indicate that the German exonym is the same as the English one, the Hungarian wikipedia page and the German Wikitionary page for Padua state that Esten is also another of its exonym in German. Is this correct and is there any reliable source backing this up? 70.95.44.93 (talk) 01:42, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Esten in German means "Estonian", I'm pretty sure. 173.228.123.207 (talk) 02:15, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly a confusion with the nearby town of Este, Veneto, from which came the House of Este. --Wrongfilter (talk) 07:06, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. Apparently Padua is not the only place in the area to have an alternate unrelated German name. Vicenza has Wiesenthein and Cimbria. --87.18.64.165 (talk) 07:36, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Padova or Padua (Latin: Patavium, , German Padua (historically: Esten)) is a city and Province in the Veneto Region of northern Italy" Italia Outdoors - PADOVA | VENETO REGION, although Wikipedia could easily be the source for this.

The same question was asked on Talk:Padua#Ancient german name: Esten in December 2013, which says; "Is there any source for Esten as the historical (until when?) german name of Padua? The only reference I can find with Google is de.wikipedia, itself without any external source. I am italian, I do not live in Padua but I have never heard of such a name". But answer came there none. Alansplodge (talk) 14:23, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It was also asked at the German reference desk in 2015: de:Wikipedia:Auskunft/Archiv/2015/Woche_19#Angeblicher_alter_deutscher_Name_der_Stadt_Padua. The editors reach the same conclusion Wrongfilter did: Confusing Padua and Este (formerly Ateste) which aren't identical. Pinging Florian Blaschke because he asked the question at the time, and may have more to add. ---Sluzzelin talk 16:13, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

87.18.64.165 -- "Cimbria" is derived from the name of the Cimbri (not to be confused with the Cumbrians or Cimmerians)... AnonMoos (talk) 17:02, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That is not so clear. There are (more accurately: were) pockets of speakers of the Cimbrian language, a German dialect, around Vicenza. These people, the de:Zimbern, may have been named after the Cimbri, but it seems also possible that the name is cognate with timber and the similarity of names is a coincidence. Was the city ever named after these people? This page says the name Cimbria for Vicenza was a legend created by some humanists from Vicenza. I guess we would need to dig quite a bit deeper into the history of the region to come up with solid facts. --Wrongfilter (talk) 17:37, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect the page is right. For the name of the Zimbern, see Cimbrian language § History. I can't vouch for the timber etymology, but it is reasonably plausible; in that case, the connection with the Cimbri may be due to learned pseudo-etymology by humanists, again. Zimbrisch/Cimbrian is a strikingly conservative and also deviant form (more precisely group of dialects), influenced by surrounding Romance dialects, of Southern Bavarian (Tyrolese/Carinthian etc.), with numerous traits reminiscent of Middle High German and even Late Old High German. There's no connection to the ancient Cimbri (who may actually have been Celtic- rather than Germanic-speaking). Vicenza is close to the traditional settling areas of the Zimbern, as can be easily verified on the map.

@Sluzzelin: I don't really have anything to add. I still think the conclusion that Este(n) properly refers to Este, Veneto, is probably right. The modern German exonym of Padua is Padua, indeed, and I don't know any other one. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 04:22, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Wrongfilter: and @Florian Blaschke:, can I ask what you (and the linked Italian-language article) mean by "humanists" in this context? It doesn't seem to be my (British English) understanding of the term (see Humanism). {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.123.24.56 (talk) 18:21, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See Renaissance humanism. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 18:33, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

August 19

Remainder vs. Remainer

I was reading the lead of the article Fortnite: Save the World and it says "the sudden appearance of a worldwide storm causes 98% of the world's population to disappear, and zombie-like creatures rise to attack the remainder. As English is not my native language, I was wondering if that is a typographical mistake or it is a valid word to use. © Tbhotch^™ (en-2.5). 23:42, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Remainder" is correct.[5] There is no such word as "remainer". Although it might have been better if the author had said, "...the remaining population," ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:55, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there is such a word as "remainer" now: it's a name used for the opponents of Brexit. But as Bugs said, "remainder" is the right word in the question we were asked, and "remainer" would be wrong there. --76.69.116.4 (talk) 00:08, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It makes sense that "remainer" would be a word coined for opponents of Brexit, as "remainder" wouldn't quite work in that case, or perhaps would be seen as condescending. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:00, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks. I might have seen "remainer" in these Brexit-related articles and keep it in my mind. © Tbhotch^™ (en-2.5). 01:46, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably the opposite of "leaver", if that's a thing. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:45, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Do the Remainers need reminders that the remainders are Leaver lever lovers who used the polls at the bequest of the pols who convinced them to leave the Poles, among others ? SinisterLefty (talk) 04:26, 20 August 2019 (UTC) [reply]

For those that don't live here, voting is simply a matter of marking an "X" in the appropriate place on the ballot paper and then folding it up and posting it through the slit on top of the ballot box. 2A00:23C5:3186:E600:3D9B:C5C7:2662:1431 (talk) 14:20, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Don't live where? Planet Earth? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:17, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

August 20

What is the french word for table.

Wbat is the french word for tale. -- 15:33, 20 August 2019 Tablecloth1389

See wiktionary:table#English and wiktionary:table#French, where you will see that the French pronunciation is different, even though the word is spelt the same. (I assume you meant table and not tale where the French would be conte or histoire or even nouvelle, depending on context.) Dbfirs 15:47, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wearing a trottoir

This is from Main Street. The protagonist Carol, stuck in Gopher Prairie, is fantasizing about visiting the East Coast.

"She pictured herself looking at Emerson's manse, bathing in a surf of jade and ivory, wearing a trottoir and a summer fur, meeting an aristocratic Stranger."

What is meant by "trottoir" here. Thank you in advance! ---Sluzzelin talk 15:35, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It must be a misspelling or a typo; a trottoir is a sidewalk in French, and a trattoria is a sandwich shop in Italian, and I can't think of a similar word that would be used for an article of clothing. Google is turning up nothing useful for me. --Jayron 32 15:51, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My OED gives trotteur (and also Anglicized trotter) as a term for "a short, neat walking dress". Perhaps trottoir is an error for that (and maybe on Carol's part rather than Lewis's). Deor (talk) 16:29, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, both of you! Deor, that looks very likely. "Trotteur" hadn't occurred to me, but I wouldn't have recognised its dressiness anyway: up until this moment, a "trotteur" signified a baby walker to me! Thanks again. ---Sluzzelin talk 17:24, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is that toddler wearing a corset ? Never too young for internal organ damage ? SinisterLefty (talk)

Alphabetical order when using numbers

If you are alphabetizing, say, a film named 12 Years a Slave, would that be alphabetized as the number "12" and placed before the letter "A" alphabetical items? Or after the letter "Z" items? Or would you alphabetize the title as if it were spelled out "Twelve" Years a Slave? Where is the Wikipedia rule or policy about this? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:53, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

General article is collation... AnonMoos (talk) 18:25, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's one ... then there's alphabetical order and there's lexicographical order. --76.69.116.4 (talk) 21:24, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia rules in Help:Alphabetical order. --Wrongfilter (talk) 18:29, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's mainly related to the order in WP categories. If there were an article containing an alphabetical list and I wanted to insert 12 Years a Slave into the list, I'd insert it in the t's, as if 12 were spelled out. I believe that's the traditional practice of indexers. Deor (talk) 19:13, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. But, is there any Wikipedia rule/policy about that? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 21:11, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any mention of alphabetization in WP:MOS, and that's where I'd expect it to be if there is one. --76.69.116.4 (talk) 21:24, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

August 21

"advocated for"

Just noticed in today's featured article the expression "Clinton advocated for", to my (British) mind this should read be "Clinton advocated", is "advocated for" an Americanism, or have I just led a sheltered life?...GrahamHardy (talk) 11:06, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In US English, at least, my take is that they aren't the same. You "advocate" a cause, while "advocating for", meaning "on behalf of", a person or organization. So, you can "advocate" women's rights and "advocate for" the National Organization of Women. Of course, it is also often misused. SinisterLefty (talk) 11:16, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Hilary Clinton article has "Clinton advocated for healthcare reform" and "Clinton advocated for medical benefits for first responders", which do not look right, should they be changed to "Clinton advocated healthcare reform" and "Clinton advocated medical benefits for first responders" ? GrahamHardy (talk) 12:06, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would say yes, for the first case, but no for the 2nd, since there she was "advocating for" first responders. You might also change the first usage to "supported", just to avoid the repetition of "advocated". SinisterLefty (talk) 12:24, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Clinton advocated medical benefits for first responders" - it is 'advocated for'. --TotallyNotSarcasm [lɨi̯v ə me̞sɪ̈dʒ] [kɔnt͡ɹ̠̝̊ɹ̠ɪ̈bjɨʉ̯ʃn̩z] 15:07, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's used in Britain. "Brooks Newmark: tweeting Tory who advocated for more women in party" (Guardian, 2014). And one can be an advocate for whatever, not only an advocate of it: in the same article, "a prominent advocate for widening Conservatives’ appeal to women". (Though again in the same article, he "advocated a flat tax across the board" and "advocating mentoring of young women who wished to progress in politics".) -- Hoary (talk) 12:38, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the big OED has nine cites for this usage with dates ranging from 1607 to 1983, including two by Daniel Defoe. Dbfirs 13:51, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 207: / Line 207: @@
 :::I would say yes, for the first case, but no for the 2nd, since there she was "advocating for" first responders. You might also change the first usage to "supported", just to avoid the repetition of "advocated".  [[User:SinisterLefty|SinisterLefty]] ([[User talk:SinisterLefty|talk]]) 12:24, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
+::::"Clinton '''advocated''' medical benefits '''for''' first responders" - it is 'advocated for'. --[[User:TotallyNotSarcasm|TotallyNotSarcasm]] [[User talk:TotallyNotSarcasm|[lɨi̯v ə me̞sɪ̈dʒ]]] [[Special:Contributions/TotallyNotSarcasm|[kɔnt͡ɹ̠̝̊ɹ̠ɪ̈bjɨʉ̯ʃn̩z]]] 15:07, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
 :It's used in Britain. "[https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/28/brooks-newmark-tory-profile Brooks Newmark: tweeting Tory who advocated for more women in party]" (''Guardian'', 2014). And one can be an advocate ''for'' whatever, not only an advocate ''of'' it: in the same article, "a prominent advocate for widening Conservatives’ appeal to women". (Though again in the same article, he "advocated a flat tax across the board" and "advocating mentoring of young women who wished to progress in politics".) -- [[User:Hoary|Hoary]] ([[User talk:Hoary|talk]]) 12:38, 21 August 2019 (UTC)