Welcome to the language section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

Select a section:

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.

March 28

Revolver in a person's sleeve

In Western and crime stories, persons sometimes have small revolvers hidden in their sleeves. Are there English sayings and idioms related with this situation? --KnightMove (talk) 04:16, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing up my sleeve! —Tamfang (talk) 10:04, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just to be clear, that expression is probably referring to playing cards, not revolvers. I think of it being used by a sleight of hand magician to demonstrate to an audience that the card he's going to make appear isn't simply going to slide out his coat sleeve. Matt Deres (talk) 18:19, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How do you play revolvers? ;-) Dismas|^(talk) 07:34, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, it's more likely to be a derringer (single-shot pistol) than a revolver. —Tamfang (talk) 18:24, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A small hidden gun carried by the police is some times known as a throw down hotclaws 00:31, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But do they carry it in a sleeve? —Tamfang (talk) 01:18, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You talkin to me?—eric 07:27, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've known several policemen in my personal life and have never known any of them to literally have a gun up their sleeves. Nor has it ever been mentioned as something that they would do. Dismas|^(talk) 07:34, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You talkin to me?—eric 07:27, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the saying came from Taxi Driver, as much fun as it is to quote it. Livewireo (talk) 13:30, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Faspa

I have checked both German to English and Russian to English for this word found here, without success. Can anyone give me a translation? It is making a red link in the article. // BL \\ (talk) 21:01, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See this page. -- Wavelength (talk) 21:54, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This page uses the spelling Vaspa. -- Wavelength (talk) 22:40, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

At first I was guessing that it had a derivation from words meaning "fast break", but now I am guessing that it has a derivation from the Latin word vesper (meaning "evening" or "supper"). -- Wavelength (talk) 22:45, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From vesper are derived vesper bat and vespers. -- Wavelength (talk) 22:08, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

March 29

This needs polishing

In Jan Piwnik, it says his noms de guerre were "Ponury ("Gloomy"), Donat". What does "donat" mean? Clarityfiend (talk) 07:21, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe from one of the saints named Donatus? The first thing I thought of was St-Donat, in Quebec. Adam Bishop (talk) 07:57, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Would that make them holey saints ? :-) StuRat (talk) 16:06, 29 March 2009 (UTC) [reply]

It doesn't mean anything in Polish. Like Adam said, it's just a Christian name. — Kpalion^(talk) 19:30, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See http://www.20knames.com/male_d_names_3.htm, number 427. -- Wavelength (talk) 19:50, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As per user:Wavelength: Some Googling indicates that it is a derivative of the Latin donare, which means "to give". Donat would be the 3rd person singular of the indicative, "he (she/it) gives" or "He gives", ie equivalent to "gift of God". We have an article on the name Donatus. There is also Donatello, the artist and the turtle. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 21:26, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and a lot of early Christian names are just Latin (or Greek) calques from Hebrew. People were not normally called "Donatus", but it was a reasonable translation of "Nathan". (Another interesting one is Deusdedit, the Latin equivalent of Jonathan.) Anyway, "Donat" here is not the third person indicative verb, but the etymological evolution of the name from the original Donatus. In this case, French, and Polish I guess, lost the -us ending (and in French, at least, the T is silent). In Hungarian, for example, the ending was not lost, and the name is spelled Donatusz. Adam Bishop (talk) 04:30, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And talking about Latin and Greek Christian names from Hebrew, one is Χριστός itself, the Greek translation of Messiah (anointed). However, they started writing it as Χρήστος, with eta in place of iota, with similar pronounce but totally different meaning ("the best"). Maybe because the religious use of anointing people to bless them was after all less comprehensible to the Greek tradition? As to "Donat" I agree with Adam Bishop. The venetian dialect also has a truncated form, "Donà". Note however that there are many Christian names from Hebrew in form of sentences with a third person indicative verb; besides the mentioned Deusdedit another nice Latin one is Quodvultdeus, "What the Lord wants". --pma (talk) 16:30, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

March 30

What modifiers modify

Is there a word meaning "the word or phrase that a modifier modifies"? I mean every preposition has its object and every pronoun its antecedent, so does an adjective or adverb get some kind of foobar?—PaulTanenbaum (talk) 00:51, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The word is modificand. -- Wavelength (talk) 01:04, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I made a quick search through http://wordover.com/ for other English nouns derived from Latin gerundives, and I found the following words: analysand, confirmand, deodand, distilland, doctorand, duplicand, graduand, honorand, integrand, ligand, magistrand, multiplicand, operand, ordinand, proband, provand, radicand, summand; addend, adherend, augend, distribuend, dividend, faciend, legend, minuend, provend(er), reverend, subtrahend, unreverend; gerund; addenda, corrigenda, counterpropaganda, credenda, definienda, delenda, memoranda, mutanda, notanda, propaganda, pudenda, reddenda, referenda, videnda. -- Wavelength (talk) 03:14, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That term, however, is not particularly common. One also encountered just modified (e.g. the X modified). Personally, I find modifiee is a better as it parallels employer/employee and this -ee is fairly productive (you may not find this in print though).

In linguistics, the most general term for relations between the elements of a phrase is head and dependent. The term that covers modificand is head although the meaning of head is more general. There is the following:

within noun phrase: head = noun, dependent = modifier (adjective, relative phrase, etc)
within prep. phr.: head = preposition, dependent = object (or complement)
within verb phr.: head = verb, dependent = noun phrases (i.e. subject, objects), prep. phrases
within adjective phr.: head = adjective, dependent = modifiers (adverbs)
within adverb phr.: head = adverb, dependent = modifiers (other adverbs)
(perhaps more theoretical: complement phrase: head = complement, dependent = sentence)

The relation between a pronoun and its antecedent is a little different. (The antecedent can be outside of the sentence containing the pronoun; it may even be distanced from the pronoun by thousands of sentences or, in fact, it may never be uttered at all.) – ishwar (speak) 01:34, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Two questions from above

Two questions based on topics far above:

About Will/Bill for William, and Rick/Dick for Richard, how in the world did "Rip" become a nickname for "Richard"? (See for example Rip (Richard) Hamilton, Rip Van Winkle)

I was reading over the shall/will discussion (I can't feel much of any difference between the two words, and when reading the shall and will, I can rationally find a difference (shall being more of a command and will - sometimes, at least for me - being less so). Part of the difference I think, is that I think "shall" just isn't used very much where I'm from (urban, midwest US). My question is about "should" - how is it related to "shall"? Etymologically? In strength?

zafiroblue05 | Talk 01:05, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Rip" is close to "Rick", another short form of Richard that is not a direct contraction. Similarly "Kit" is short for Christopher (e.g. Christopher Marlowe). In some dialects of English it's common to glottalise unvoiced consonants in casual speech which will mean /p/, /k/, and /t/ sound similar or identical. Also, nicknames often arise from attempts by small children to pronounce complex words, in which case you may get the first consonant and a vowel but not much else. The entry Nickname describes some other methods of formation; it says letter swapping is common. --Maltelauridsbrigge (talk) 11:07, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is "Rip" even a nickname for Richard? Neither Rip Torn nor Rip Taylor is named Richard, and I don't think Rip Van Winkle ever says he was named Richard either. With Rip Hamilton the similarity could just be coincidence.

—An gr 11:49, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So is Rip a "real" name (i.e., originally not a nick-name)? zafiroblue05 | Talk 02:23, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

there is a theory, first proposed in George Wetzel: Irving’s Rip Van Winkle, in the Explicator 10, 1954, that Rip's name stands for Rest in Peace. --Janneman (talk) 11:36, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

etymologically, "should" is the past tense (including past subjunctive) of "shall", just as "would" is the past tense (including past subjunctive) of "will". —An gr 11:50, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Translation into German

Please could someone translate the following sentence into German for me: "If I had not telephoned you, would you ever have responded to my email?" Many thanks. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 04:49, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My suggestions: Wenn ich dich nicht angerufen hätte, hättest du überhaupt auf meine E-Mail geantwortet? (informal) or Wenn ich Sie nicht angerufen hätte, hätten Sie überhaupt auf meine E-Mail geantwortet? (formal). —Daniel Šebesta {chat | contribs} 05:29, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say "jemals" instead of "überhaupt" ("überhaupt" would be "at all"), otherwise I completely agree with Sebesta. -- Ferkelparade π 09:11, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Jemals" is a more literal translation of "ever", but I think "überhaupt" better expresses the exasperation of the original English. —An gr 09:15, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks all. Just as a follow-up, could you guys parse the tenses for me? I'm a little surprised that both parts of the sentence use "hätte/hättest". Since the first one is pluperfect and the second is conditional perfect, I would have expected the auxiliary part of the verbs to differ from each other. No? --Richardrj ^talk ^email 09:28, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's just a fact of German grammar that both clauses of an irrealis conditional are in the conditional (in this case, the conditional perfect), whereas in English the "if"-clause is in the past subjunctive (which here looks identical to the pluperfect indicative since English doesn't distinguish between indicative "had" and subjunctive "had"). —An gr 09:48, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note that this would be phrased as a statement in spoken German rather than as a question: "Wenn ich Sie nicht angerufen hätte, hätten Sie wohl überhaupt nicht auf meine E-Mail reagiert." (Not sure about the puctuation. May need a questionmark, too.) 76.97.245.5 (talk) 17:22, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what you mean. I asked for it to be translated as a question, not as a statement. You've translated something completely different. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 14:17, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As a statement, it ends with a period, not a question mark, and it sounds like an accusation, especially with that wohl in there. —An gr 18:04, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

word pronunciation

what is the correct pronunciation of the work chaste? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.184.47.16 (talk) 21:01, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chay-st. Exactly the same as "chased". (Although, people who are chased, romantically, may not remain chaste for long.) -- JackofOz (talk) 21:13, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps why it's called "falling" in love. Jay (talk) 14:05, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article plays on the words chase, chased, and chaste. -- Wavelength (talk) 05:35, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See (and hear) chaste and chastity; see (and hear) chaste and chastity. -- Wavelength (talk) 18:21, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rhymes with baste, haste, paste, taste, waste but not caste. —Tamfang (talk) 06:01, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

March 31

Hebrew grammar/translation help please

See Talk:Gush_Etzion#.22literally_bloc_of_Etzion.22 --Dweller (talk) 10:44, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For good or bad?

Does the idiom "for good" have a negative connotation? I found someone asking the same question [1], but there were no answers. The meaning in "He left for good." would be "permanently", but does it also mean "good riddance" which has a negative tone to it? Jay (talk) 13:26, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would say there are no negative connotations to the phrase. It just means "forever", but is perhaps rather more emphatic in its statement of permanence. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 14:15, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The expression "for good" can have other meanings besides "permanently". See http://www.forcesforgood.net/.

-- Wavelength (talk) 16:23, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Wavelength for the references, but they don't really relate to the usage I was talking about and which Richardrj has rightly replied. Is there an informal dictionary of slangs or colloquial usages? Perhaps I can get the usages there. Jay (talk) 08:31, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can investigate several dictionaries at http://www.dmoz.org/Reference/Dictionaries/World_Languages/E/English/Slang/. -- Wavelength (talk) 00:40, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good links. I went through every one of them but could not find "for good". Perhaps it is too formal to be included in slang dictionaries. Jay (talk) 11:38, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My dictionary says the original expression was "for good and all", but I've never heard or read that anywhere else. It has shades of "for the good of all", and that could have a somewhat negative connatation (in the sense of Wilde's "Some cause happiness wherever they go; others, whenever they go".) -- JackofOz (talk) 12:34, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The correct spelling is connotation. -- Wavelength (talk) 14:09, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Settle in"

According to wiktionary:settle in, to "settle in" means to get comfortable or established. Can it be used together with "in some place", such as "I had just settled in in my favourite chair" or "I later settled in in Helsinki"? It's this double "in" that seems incorrect. Can a native English speaker clarify whether this is OK or not? JIP | Talk 19:20, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

From my perspective (native BrE Speaker) the double negative's fine. However, I'd use 'I had just settled into my favourite chair', but not in the latter case. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 19:26, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's perfectly fine, but of course it's not a double negative. One "in" is an adverb or particle and the other is a preposition. --Anonymous, 20:20 UTC, March 31, 2009.

I mis-typed. Of course it isn't a double negative. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 16:52, 1 April 2009 (UTC) [reply]

"Settled in in Helsinki" is possible, but only after you'd already made it clear that you'd settled there (as in, moved there from another place), otherwise it would appear to be a typo (which could unsettle some editors to the point of making them want to change it). In other words, you first settle there, then you settle in. -- JackofOz (talk) 20:06, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This use of "settle" meaning to move there certainly exists, but I think it's relatively uncommon, perhaps especially so in North America. If I read the original sentence I would read it as intended and not expect a typo. --Anonymous, 20:22 UTC, March 31, 2009.

If this wording is used, a comma after the first occurrence of in would help (1) to clarify the meaning, (2) to indicate that there was not a typographical error, and (3) to indicate to someone reading the words orally that this is a place/time to pause. The pause in oral reading would help to clarify the meaning to someone hearing the words being read. -- Wavelength (talk) 20:39, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wavelegth's point is also made in the style manual Words into Type, which says (in the "Comma" section, under "Repeated words"): "Separate repeated words in the same construction by commas. Repeated words in different constructions often need separation by a comma for the sake of clearness." The examples given are "The mere knowledge of what this substance is, is of great value," "What money there was, was steadily drained away," and "A dosage was arrived at, at which each bird was found to maintain constant weight," the third of which is parallel to the "settle in in" construction. I have to say, though, that I've frequently seen such constructions in print with no commas used for separation. Deor (talk) 23:51, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would consider each of those commas erroneous except for the "at, at" one, which is optional. Even if you believe that commas are acceptable regardless of grammar if they indicate a pause, in the original sentence there is no pause. --Anon, 10:00 UTC, April 1, 2009.

No, there is a pause in each of those examples given by Deor. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 10:04, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think it depends on the speaker. I wouldn't say them with pauses, except for No. 3. How would you punctuate this: "What he said was, was "Was "was" a good word to use there?". -- JackofOz (talk) 23:49, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That appears to be ungrammatical: the second "was" has no function, and the quotation marks are unbalanced. I'm guessing that it's meant to be a transcription of an ungrammatical spoken sentence with a pause after the first "was", and with one more closing quote at the end. In that sort of usage I have no problem with the comma, but of course the nested quotation marks should be single at alternate nesting levels. So: "What he said was, was 'Was "was" a good word to use there?'". What else? --Anonymous, 08:14 UTC, April 2, 2009.

You're spot on about the quotes. Otherwise, though, "What I meant was, was that ..." and similar expressions are frequently found in speech. They may not be sanctioned by grammar books, but they have their own descriptive authority. So I can't agree that it's entirely ungrammatical. -- JackofOz (talk) 08:56, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Phesant = peasant?

I'm told that "pheasant" is an alternate spelling of "peasant". Is there any evidence to support this? Xenon54 (talk) 21:42, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When I was exposed to the word "pheasant" in the fourth grade, I thought it meant peasant. I must say, it made the hunting story I was reading a lot more interesting. — Æµ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 21:50, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The English word pheasant is derived indirectly from the Greek name of the Phasis River in the Caucasus. The English word peasant is derived indirectly from the Latin word pāgus (meaning "district"). -- Wavelength (talk) 23:01, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I remember a lass at my school coming out with the classic line "Bonnie Prince Charlie escaped from the battle and avoided his persuers by dressing as a pheasant." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.139.106.17 (talk) 23:47, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The correct spelling is pursuers. -- Wavelength (talk) 05:19, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One of the 'errata' in 1066 and All That reads "for 'pheasant' read 'peasant' throughout". --ColinFine (talk) 19:30, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if 'pheasant' was an alternative for 'peasant' in modern english, it would make the pheasant plucker tongue twister irrelevant, and I doubt anyone would allow that, unless they were Korean.--KageTora (talk) 16:08, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

KageTora's link refers to this. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 12:49, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

April 1

What does German media call Conficker

It seems Conficker is the kind of word that broadcast radio and TV in Germany will be loathe to say, at least before whatever counts as the watershed there. They have to be covering it, so what are they calling it? Dog Day Today (talk) 18:45, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, to answer my own question, at least Der Standard and Suddeutche Zeitung just call it Conficker; I guess it's not as rude-sounding as I'd imagined. Dog Day Today (talk) 18:49, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They're also not nearly as concerned with profanity on television as most English-speaking countries are in general. -Elmer Clark (talk) 03:13, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking for a book, but I don't recall the title or Author.

The book is an historical fiction based on the life of a young druid boy whose village is destroyed. The boy then embarks on a galley ship for several years until landing in a port to persue his own destiny. I don't remember many of the plot points, but I do remember several. One of his adventures involves a beekeeper whom the man helps, another involving him going to prison only to escape. If anyone has any information on this book, I would greatly appreciate any help. I haven't read this book since 7th grade, although the reading level is significantly higher. The book is between 600 to 1000 pages long. I've been searching for it for years to no avail. Ryanleckel (talk) 23:02, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The correct spelling is pursue. -- Wavelength (talk) 05:21, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This would not be The Druid King, would it? It is only about 400 pages, though. 75.91.80.59 (talk) 01:47, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

April 2

Decode this phrase from Francis Ormond

"With regard to opening the reading room of our library on Sundays, I am also of opinion that it would not be found to answer." - what does 'it would not be found to answer' mean?

ta Adambrowne666 (talk) 08:31, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This appears to be meaning 11 of 'answer' from the OED: 'intr. (ellipt.). To serve the purpose, attain the end, succeed, prove a success. Also (with suitable qualification): To turn out (well or ill).' He means that the Sunday opening would not solve whatever problem it is supposed to solve, or perhaps just that it would be a bad idea in general. Algebraist 11:27, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi-Hi and Tak-Tak (thankyou) > Icelandic

During a holiday in Iceland, I encountered people speaking English, but using the phrases "Hi-hi" for 'hello' (like on the telephone) and "Tak-tak" for 'thankyou' - anyone know anything about this? Thanks! ╟─Treasury Tag►contribs─╢ 14:44, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In Sweden people say "Hej hej," (pronounced a bit like English "Hey hey") and "Tack tack." It's a friendly way of saying hi or thanks. Maybe it's related? --Kjoonlee 14:57, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In Sweden you say "Tack hej," to say "Thanks and goodbye." You'll hear it a lot after you buy something from a store. --Kjoonlee 14:58, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See wikt:thank you and wikt:takk. -- Wavelength (talk) 15:00, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks, guys! ╟─Treasury Tag►contribs─╢ 15:08, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know whether it's the same type of reduplication, but in English we do say "bye bye". In some languages reduplication can emphasize the message. Two syllables also allow us to include more prosody in our intonation (friendly or other). Otherwise, we'd have to stretch the one syllable ("taa-aak"), if we wanted it to sound less terse or monotonous. Just a thought. No references. ---Sluzzelin talk 15:30, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Wikipedians by language has a link to Category:User is. -- Wavelength (talk) 19:44, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Using 을/를 in spoken Korean

Is it awkward to say 을/를 when speaking Korean? That is, if I were to say something that would always use 을/를 in written Korean, then should I include the verb-object marker in my utterance? Undercooked (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:36, 2 April 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Category:Wikipedians by language has a link to Category:User ko. -- Wavelength (talk) 19:42, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I checked Korean grammar#Nouns and I did a Google search for "을/를 spoken Korean verb-object marker", but I still do not know.

-- Wavelength (talk) 20:43, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is not necessarily awkward to mark each direct object with the accusative case marker, but you may sound more formal than colloquial. In the right context, it may be omitted as long as the meaning can still be conveyed properly. Experiment a little, but if in doubt I would recommend not omitting it without reason. Other case markers such as nominative and genitive are also often omitted in colloquial language as well. A fairly accessible reference is "The Korean Language" by Iksop Lee and S. Robert Ramsey, 2000; IBSN 0-7914-4832-0. Chapter 5: Phrase Structure may be useful, particularly pages 141-142 which briefly discusses this. Regards, Bendono (talk) 09:33, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let me add one more useful reference. "A Reference Grammar of Korean" by Samuel E. Martin, 1992; ISBN 0-8048-1887-8. Page 287 deals with this issue. Bendono (talk) 09:37, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Undercooked (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:31, 3 April 2009 (UTC).[reply]

April 3

period after first name?

Is there a method of writing the names with a period after the first name followed by an abbreviated middle name and then the last name? For example, Can you write Mohandas. K. Gandhi or Harry. S. Truman? --Sundardas (talk) 01:28, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No. I'm not aware of any situation where a period is used after the first name, except if the first name is abbreviated as in J. K. Rowling or J. R. R. Tolkien. Xenon54 (talk) 01:35, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Periods are used (in this context) to indicate abbreviation. "Mohandas" and "Harry" are not abbreviated, so there's no case for using a period. "K" is short for Karamchand, so a period is required. The "S" in Truman's name is not (despite appearances) short for anything: S was his full middle name, so no period is used in this case. -- JackofOz (talk) 01:43, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

S is his middle name but it does get a period. See Harry S. Truman#Truman's middle initial. Rmhermen (talk) 02:41, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I stand corrected; although it doesn't seem to be universal - even the official White House biography changed only last year. -- JackofOz (talk) 04:05, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If an e-mail address has the form forename.a.surname @hostname.tld, there is a period after the first name.

-- Wavelength (talk) 03:35, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.familytreeforum.com/wiki/index.php/Common_Forename_Abbreviations. -- Wavelength (talk) 03:44, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think a full stop can sometimes be used if the first name is abbreviated, e.g. Thos. (Thomas), Jas. (James). This type of abbreviation has a rather old-fashioned look, though. Just noticed that Wavelength's link has some of these.AndrewWTaylor (talk) 04:39, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

abbreviation "a.i."

I've come across the abbreviation "a.i." a few times after a person's name in business correspondence. I think it may mean that the person is only temporarily holding a position, but if so, what do the letters actually stand for? Thanks, --Richardrj ^talk ^email 08:11, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would suspect if it means temporary then it means Ad Interim. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 09:08, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that must be it, thanks very much. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 09:10, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wallpaper idiom

In Dutch we have a phrase: "Iemand achter het behang plakken" (pasting someone behind the wallpaper) to describe what many would like to do to someone who is particularly apt at driving you up the wall. Is there a similar phrase using the word wallpaper in the English language? - Mgm|^(talk) 10:19, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not that I'm aware of. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 10:27, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! In that case my upcoming article needs some additional explanation. If anyone else does know about it after all, don't hesitate to speak up. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:59, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You could somehow work in Oscar Wilde's reputed mot, in reference to a particularly ghastly wallpaper, "One of us will have to go". -- JackofOz (talk) 11:38, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... in the version I heard, his last words were, "Either that wallpaper goes, or I go." —An gr 14:03, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Abbreviations for first names

Following up on the thread "period after first name?" above, I'm curious about the practice of using abbreviations for first names, such as Thos. (Thomas), Jas. (James), Wm. (William) or Geo. (George):

When did this practice first appear?
What is its advantage over spelling out the full name, other than saving a few characters?
When did it go out of style and why?

--Thomprod (talk) 12:56, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was in widespread use in the 18th century - I think some signers of the US Declaration of Independence used such abbreviations. I couldn't tell you the advantages or why it went out of style, but I can tell you that most people today view such abbreviations as "old-timey" (for lack of a better word). However, some abbreviations such as "Ben" or "Theo" have become nicknames. The only current use of a forename abbreviation that I can think of is Jos. A. Bank Clothiers. Xenon54 (talk) 13:52, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Chas as in Chas and Dave? or Chas Chandler?--TammyMoet (talk) 14:29, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's a number of them fossilized in company names—Wm. K. Walthers, Inc., is another example. Deor (talk) 14:03, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For researching current use of language, there is Google News Search, by which I found these pages with Thos. used. -- Wavelength (talk) 14:31, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.star-telegram.com/metro_news/story/1296114.html (Thos. in paragraph 3)
http://www.blueridgenow.com/article/20090330/OBITUARIES/903299955/-1/NEWS05?Title=Mollie-Faigin-98 (Thos, in paragraph 8)
http://www.richmondregister.com/lifestylescommunity/local_story_083070736.html (Thos. in paragraph 3)
http://blog.mlive.com/pagesofourpast/2009/03/this_week_in_local_history_exc_3.html (Thos. in paragraph 1)

-- Wavelength (talk) 14:31, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Division or Department

I am having trouble with above mentioned words. Please have a look at following sentence: Foreign exchange division falls under export and import department and Foreign exchange department falls under export and import division Which one is correct?--114.130.8.52 (talk) 15:53, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]