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

April 20

Plural of French Nouns

I am given the following rules for forming plurals of French nouns:

• In general, the plural of a noun or an adjective is formed by adding s - example: crayon - crayons.

• If the noun ends in s, z or x or if an adjective ends in s or x, the plural of a noun has the same transcription as the noun itself - examples: bras - bras, voix - voix, nez - nez, bas - bas, and vieux - vieux. My question is if adjectives ending in z remain the same in the plural form or not, because the text specifically does not mention such adjectives (as above).

• Nouns and adjectives ending in au, nouns ending in eu, and a few nouns ending in ou, add x instead of s to form the plual - examples: couteau - couteaux, beau - beaux, jeu - jeux, bijou - bijoux, caillou - cailloux, and a few rarer nouns ending in ou. My question is how do you know which nouns ending in ou, add x rather than s? The other noun I know is genou - genoux. My other question is how is the plural formed for adjectives ending in eu? The text specifically excludes mention of such adjectives but what is the plural form of blue - bleu? Is it bleux or bleus?

• Nouns and the commoner adjectives ending in al change al to au and add x - examples: général - généraux, rival - rivaux, exceptions: bal - bals and a few rarer nouns (wavelength - I took your advice on the accents). My question is which are the rarer nouns? My other question is which are the commoner adjectives and which adjectives don't follow this rule?

• Lastly, are these all the rules I need to know?

Wikipedia has been a great help to me so far and I am very grateful for the help I have recieved. I am more than happy if I get any help, however minor. Thankyou. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.161.138.117 (talk) 03:58, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

I have just visited the top ten web pages in a Google SERP for "plural french nouns" and I suggest that you visit them also. At least one of them lists the only seven French nouns ending in ou which form their plurals by adding x: bijou, caillou, chou, genou, hibou, joujou, and pou. Much of the information is the same on those pages, but, by visiting them all, you can benefit by: (1) reinforcing learning by repetition, (2) learning from some pages what other pages omitted, and (3) learning, from preferably more pages, correct information that contradicts incorrect information (if there is any) on preferably fewer pages. You can research beyond the first ten search engine results. I very much doubt the existence of any French adjective ending in z.

-- Wavelength (talk) 05:10, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

I have corrected my comment by inserting the underlined text. Away from the computer, I was having doubts about whether I had remembered to include that detail as I had intended to do, and was hoping to correct it (if necessary) before anyone else mentioned it. -- Wavelength (talk) 05:46, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

[1] was helpful to me where all the exceptions were given. Thanks for that! I am still unsure of the plural of bleu - is it bleus or bleux? I am also unsure about how the plural is formed for adjectives ending in eu? Apart from that you have answered all of my questions - thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.161.138.117 (talk) 05:27, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

I suggest those 7 nouns are restricted to nouns that end in -ou. The words eau, gâteau and bureau, and some others ending in -eau, are pluralised by adding "x" too. -- JackofOz (talk) 05:34, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

I did a google search for "yeux bleus" and "yeux bleux". "Yeux bleus" is over 13 times more common than "yeux bleux", but "yeux bleux" itself gets 61,500 hits, so my guess is that "bleus" is the correct spelling and "bleux" is a very common misspelling. —Angr 05:38, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Thankyou! I did some searching and it seems that the correct plural of bleu is bleus so thanks for confirming that. Thankyou very much JackofOz for your comment but I am still a bit unsure what would be the plural form of adjectives ending in eu.

Would, "I am listening to the teacher." be translated as "J'écoute le maître." or "J'écoute à le maître."? Basically I am unsure whether the verb "écouter" has to be followed by "à". I know I'm asking questions as they come (!) and thankyou very much for your answers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.161.138.117 (talk) 06:14, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

You don't need "à" with "écouter," so your first option, "J'écoute le maître," is correct. -Elmer Clark (talk) 06:50, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

And it would have been "au maître" any way, as it is masculin. Lectonar (talk) 08:36, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

French adjectives ending in eu are extremely rare. The plural of bleu ("blue") is bleus. The plural of hébreu ("Hebrew") is hébreux. At least one web page gives the plural of peureu ("fearful") as peureux, but the singular seems to be incorrect because other sources give peureux for both singular and plural (masculine, of course). Incidentally, as a noun, bleu means "bruise", and its plural is formed in the same way that the plural of the adjective bleu is formed.

Some color adjectives have forms identical to those of nouns and are invariable for both gender and grammatical number: cerise ("cherry-colored"), orange ("orange"), olive ("olive[-green]"), marron ("brown"), crème
("cream[-colored]"), paille ("straw-colored"). Other color adjectives have forms identical to those of nouns but follow the usual rules regarding inflection for gender and grammatical number: écarlate ("scarlet"), mauve ("mauve"), pourpre ("crimson"), rose ("pink"). -- Wavelength (talk) 16:34, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Also, there are adjectives that do not change whether they are masculine, feminine, singular or plural, for example: chic, super, and sensass. ~AH1^(TCU) 01:19, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Are there any adjectives in –z? If so, never mind the masculine plural (which I'd bet is the same), what's the feminine singular? —Tamfang (talk)

A Good Pun?

Can anyone figure out a good pun for an advertisement poster on a new soccer boot? Maybe you could play around with the word "boot"?--220.233.83.26 (talk) 11:05, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Could be risky. I don't know how widespread it is, but "to boot" something can mean to make an error or misplay, which probably isn't the image you want. How about "The Pro Shoes the Pros Shoose"? Mmm. Maybe not. Matt Deres (talk) 13:52, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

This sounds suspiciously like homework. Or if you are in advertising, workwork. What do you need this for? Livewireo (talk) 18:27, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, I've always interperated "to boot" as being synonymous with "in addition". ~AH1^(TCU) 01:04, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

An empty soccer field appears with a player wearing your boots and running. The narrator says "With gear like ours, you can give your old equipment the boot", then he kicks a competitor's boot (instead of the ball) for a penalty shot into the goal. The goal-tender just misses it. (Don't forget to send me my royalties.) :-) StuRat (talk) 02:22, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

The name Jiverly

Where does the name "Jiverly" come from? Is it Vietnamese? Apparently Jiverly Wong was born "Linh Phat Voong" and changed his name to "Jiverly Wong" upon his naturalization as a U.S. citizen (source: [2]). Where did he get the name "Jiverly" from? Mike R (talk) 14:55, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

It looks like a misspelled form of "jewellery", doesn't it? pma (talk) 17:30, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Whatever it is, he used the middle name "Antares", which is also kinda weird. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 19:57, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

I know no Vietnamese, but I can tell you without fear of contradiction that it is not a Vietnamese word. They are all one syllable, and their alphabet does not contain J. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:46, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

It's common for people from East Asia with names that are difficult to pronounce by Western speakers (particularly English-speaking) to choose a more pronounceable name to go by. The selection of these names isn't always in harmony with English speakers' concept of an appropriate name. It's not uncommon recently for people to choose their 'English' names from World of Warcraft or other fantasy stylings (Dragonforce, Hania, etc.), combinations of names (I know someone who goes by Shukham, as he is a fan of Beckham), objects (Snow, Orange, Apple, etc.), and aesthetically pleasing combinations of sounds. Steewi (talk) 05:04, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

When I was in school I knew two brothers whose parents had immigrated from East Asia (can't remember where exactly now) and they had taken English names from the Old Testament. Now some OT names are unremarkable, like Adam, Seth, David, and Jonathan; but one of these boys was named Enoch and I can't remember his brother's name, but it was also a very unusual OT name that, like "Enoch", was likely to get him beaten up on the playground. But for people who didn't grow up in an English-speaking environment, of course it's almost impossible to get a feel for which Biblical names are customary and which are just downright weird. —Angr 05:30, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

A lot of my HK friends in Toronto had very old-sounding English names, most commonly recent royalty: Andrew, Harry, William and also a generous spattering of rarer sounding names like Rudolph, Constantine, Clement, Roderick, Frederick, Sherlock, Leslie (a guy), etc. All of them came to Toronto after they were born, or were born in Canada (on *holiday*) and then lived until high school in HK. We always assumed that when they arrived in Canada the customs officer gave them a chance to choose an English name to put on their passport, and handed them a really old name dictionary, which they opened up randomly to select a (usually archaic sounding) name. I know now that's not exactly what happens but I would be suprised if name dictionaries weren't to blame here. There were also girls "fresh" from HK in my school named Snoopy, Happy, Winnie (2 of them, actually), and Rainbow. No idea where Jiverly comes from though, hah. 124.154.253.25 (talk) 07:58, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

If I didn't know the person's surname was Wong, I've have said Jiverly sounds like a name an Indian might use. -- JackofOz (talk) 08:50, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

If I saw the name out of context I'd guess it's a French place-name. —Tamfang (talk) 22:03, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh you

Another editor has claimed that "humourous" is incorrect for British English. Is this right? Clarityfiend (talk) 15:35, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes. It is spelled humorous. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 15:39, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Usually. Nevertheless, various dictionaries list humourous as a possible (though rare) alternative: [3][4][5]. — Emil J. 15:45, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

That's what threw me. The dictionaries I consulted defined it, but didn't mention its rarity. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:53, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

That's a common flaw in dictionaries: they don't always tell you "but careful writers avoid this". —Tamfang (talk) 22:09, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

What is the word for that feeling in teeth..

Sometimes when we eat lemon, or probably any citric fruit, our teeth become "rough". This happens when drinking concentrated lemonade, or even raw mango juice. There is a strange feeling developed in the teeth, as if the friction between them increased a lot.. The feeling goes away on drinking water or after some time. Is there any word in english for that feeling in teeth? Thanks. --RohanDhruva (talk) 17:03, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Tea and red wine are well-known for containing tannins, which react with proteins in the mouth to produce a rough-feeling texture. The article suggests that tannins are also present in some other fruit juices, so that may be what you're experiencing. (I don't know of an English word for the feeling, specifically, but wines with lots of tannins are said to be "tannic".) -- Coneslayer (talk) 17:12, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

astringent mouthfeel? --Digrpat (talk) 18:25, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

(ec) astringent... Oh... you beat me, Digrpat.... Now I have a bad taste in my mouth... Pallida  Mors 18:28, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Otherwise known as "having clean teeth" :-) Matt Deres (talk) 20:16, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

They might be "clean" in a technical sense, but one of the best ways to remove the feeling is to clean your teeth with toothpaste. In other words, cleaning removes the "clean". Odd. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:44, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Don't know about English, but in my native Slovene, that morning-after-drinking-binge feeling is usually described as 'having hairy teeth'. Describes the feeling fairly accurately, don't you think? No? You freaking weirdos. TomorrowTime (talk) 22:48, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

We talk about having a mouth that feels like the bottom of a budgerigar/parrot's cage. Not sure how anyone knows what that feels like, but it seems apt. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:47, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

You've never had anything crawl in your mouth and die? 124.154.253.25 (talk) 07:37, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

I could write a book about "The Things I've Had in My Mouth", but they don't include the crap-infested bottoms of bird cages. -- JackofOz (talk) 08:47, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for all the replies! Hairy teeth is quite imaginative I must say ;) --RohanDhruva (talk) 19:28, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

As an American who lives in California, I would say "fuzzy teeth", a term that gets almost 1 million google hits.--Eriastrum (talk) 20:05, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

April 21

Santa Claus

Consider the act of a parent telling a child that Santa Claus (or the Easter Bunny or the tooth fairy, etc.) exists. Even though it's not the "best" word ... would the verb "lie" (in its literal sense) be accurate and applicable? That is ... technically / literally speaking ... are the parents lying to the child? Also, what are better words to use to accurately describe this situation? (A word from any part of speech is fine ... noun, verb, adjective, adverb, etc.) Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 05:52, 21 April 2009 (UTC))

Lie is fine. Other words off the top of my mind: deceive, trick, mislead, dupe, hoax. The fact that the parents wishes aren't necessarily deceitful doesn't change the truth that it is a lie. But honestly the whole Santa Claus thing probably teaches kids how to deal with "truth" itself, and hopefully they learn that you can't always take things at face value. They are going to get lied to a lot worse when they get older, so it's about time they got used to it. 124.154.253.25 (talk) 06:48, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Cajole? --59.182.39.66 (talk) 07:41, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't think that word means what you think it means.

"White lie" might fit, as it usually denotes a lack of malicious intent. It's not quite right, though, as it's usually about a trivial matter, not a big hoax like Santa Claus. --Sean 13:44, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

I'd rather say Santa Claus is a fable, though of low quality and soaked in consumerism. But saying that inventing stories is lying, recalls me too much of Vergerus, the severe bishop in Fanny and Alexander. Children like fables, and usually distinguish them from reality even better than grown-up people do! --pma (talk) 17:15, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

White lie wouldn't be accurate because that's a small lie that you tell to protect someone's feelings. The idea that there's a magical man who will give them presents is hardly small and, although fun and relatively harmless, is not designed to protect someone's feelings Lie to children might apply. Although that applies specifically to oversimplifying explanations to children in ways they can understand, you could argue that that's what Santa Claus is. Since it's designed to keep kids in line, it might even be called a noble lie. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 17:23, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Santa Claus is religion for children. The only difference is that the proselytizers perpetuate it from outside the belief system rather than from within it. Matt Deres (talk) 18:49, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback and the related links. This was helpful. Thank you. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 21:51, 23 April 2009 (UTC))

ESL "essential English phrases list"

Hi, I'm looking for an ESL "essential/most common English phrases list", something like the "most common English words" lists that start with "the" and "is" hanging around the nets. I assume it would start with phrases like "Nice to meet you" and "How are you", "How tall are you", and maybe harder phrases like "Where are you going?" and "Do you know him?". I basically need a lot of basic words in their most useful contexts, for lipreading practice and learning about how the pronunciation of words changes in different contexts. Thanks for any help! 124.154.253.25 (talk) 06:38, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Speaking vs. understanding

Why do people say "I don't/can't speak (language)" instead of "I don't/can't understand (language)"? The latter makes more sense in the context people use the former in. 58.165.23.195 (talk) 07:29, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

It may be possible to puzzle out languages that you can't speak. I can (with difficulty) read limited Spanish, but I don't know enough vocabulary/grammar/etc. to frame a decent sentence. Therefore, I "understand" but do not "speak." 168.9.120.8 (talk) 13:44, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

It's also sort of an idiomatic phrase. It's generally assumed that if you can't speak it that you also can't understand it (though as the above poster alluded to, language acquisition usually begins with a certain degree of understanding before production comes in to play. — Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 17:20, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Also, the positive form "I speak English", "Sprechen Sie Deutsch", etc, is often used to mean "speak and understand", probably because it's easier to understand than to speak (this again has a sort of idiomatic sense but it's idiomatic across a wide range of languages), so the negative "I don't speak X" follows from the form "I speak X". --Maltelauridsbrigge (talk) 12:08, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Use of parenthesis in quotes like "[W]hen blah blah..."

For example, in the following

[W]hen anti-Semitism is everywhere, it is nowhere. And when every anti-Zionist is an anti-Semite, we no longer know how to recognize the real thing--the concept of anti-Semitism loses its significance — Brian Klug

I don't get the [W]hen.. Why do we have transcriptions like these? Was Brian Klug saying hen here!!! I am naive ... I know it. --59.182.39.66 (talk) 07:37, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

He was saying "when" in lower case, because "when" wasn't really the first word in the sentence; there was some more before that, but (we're being assured) it didn't affect the sense of the portion quoted.

By the way, those are "brackets" or "square brackets", not parentheses. Parentheses are round brackets (this kind).

--Anonymous, 07:50 UTC, April 21, 2009.

Thank you! --59.182.121.216 (talk) 08:54, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

As to the use of brackets, the customary use in philology is: square to modify, angle to integrate, round to expand. Had the original a "hen", an overzealous wikipedian would have written "⟨W⟩hen" in the quotation. That said, I just think those square brackets are there after a typo. The original article in Nation, and all other quotations I found by googling the sentence, have just "when". PS. Now I've read better the anonymous post: he's right, the brackets were used to pass from lower to capital case (btw, then why not simply: "... when" ?) pma (talk) 09:27, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

... because it's weird to start a sentence with an ellipsis? --Sean 13:54, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

We weren't given the original context, but I expect the quotation itself must have come at the head of a sentence. Compare:

1. Lord Acton said, "Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely."
2. Lord Acton said, "absolute power corrupts absolutely."
3. "Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely", said Lord Acton
4. "absolute power corrupts absolutely", said Lord Acton.
5. "Absolute power corrupts absolutely", said Lord Acton.
6. "[A]bsolute power corrupts absolutely", said Lord Acton.

Here 1 and 2 are fine, and if you decide to lead your sentence with the quotation, 1 converts easily into 3. But if you want a shorter form, like 2, with the quotation at the front, then you can't write 4 because your sentence needs to start with a capital, you can't write 5 in a formal document because it's a misquotation, so you use 6. (However, in an informal context 5 would be the usual choice.) --Anonymous, 04:55 UTC, April 22, 2009.

When a comma replaces a period at the end of a quotation, it belongs inside the quot-marks. —Tamfang (talk) 22:25, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

That's the usual method of punctuation in North America and was formerly common in Britain also, but it is not Wikipedia style. --Anonymous, 23:38 UTC, April 23, 2009.

I'm entirely in favor of excluding the comma in most cases; but if Wikipedia style is contrary to the universal English convention for dialogue, then Wikipedia style is a ass. —Tamfang (talk) 20:50, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

There is no universal convention. --Anon, 04:05 UTC, April 26.

... a ass, Tamfang? -- JackofOz (talk) 05:35, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Dickens, Jack. Sadly, the Oliver Twist article gives the quote but omits the essential context. But remember the thread at WP:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2009 February 8#Avoidance of "an"? The item by AnonMoos there explains it properly. --Anon, 09:46, April 27.

Birds and animals

Why do people say "birds and animals" when birds are animals? 58.165.23.195 (talk) 09:06, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

I wasn't aware that they did. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 09:21, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

539,000 Google search results for "birds and animals". Jay (talk) 09:26, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

See Wiktionary's third definition of animal. —Angr 09:53, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

And 286 found on en:wikipedia! I suppose it's a non-scientific usage that's been around for a while: See also animal, the third definition, "any land-living vertebrate (i.e. not birds, fishes, insects etc)".

Yes, I just mentioned that. My pocket-size Merriam-Webster's 2nd definition of animal is: "a lower animal as distinguished from human beings; also : MAMMAL", which suggests some people may use "animal" even to the exclusion of reptiles like snakes and lizards. —Angr 10:09, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, Angr, I didn't notice your (new to me) post when I added mine to the bottom, without checking or previewing. ---Sluzzelin talk 10:12, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Of course birds are not happy with this old-minded biblical legacy. Google has also 353,000 s.r. for the ornithologically correct "birds and other animals", which hopefully indicates that things are slowly changing. --pma (talk) 10:14, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

We should also have a word with the US Fish and Wildlife Service. --Sean 13:58, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Why? There should be somebody keeping tabs on Lindsay Lohan and her ilk. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:43, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

German translation help needed

Click me for bigger picture.

I am wondering what the text side of the railroad car in this picture says. In the upper left I think it says "Trip to Paris" and below that "See you later on the boulevard", confirmation of this would be nice. To the right it says something about fighting something with the point of the sword, at least that's what the web translation page I used said, I can't make out the word after "Kampf mit". Also, if someone can make out the word that's partially obscured by the flowers it would be great.--Sus scrofa (talk) 14:08, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

"Trip to Paris" and "See you later on the boulevard" are correct. On the right it says "[???] in den Kampf" (probably "Ab in den Kampf" - "off to the fight") and "mir juckt die Säbelspitze" - "my sword tip is itching". —Angr 14:25, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Cool. Thanks for the help! :)--Sus scrofa (talk) 14:32, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

I can't see this picture. It makes me too sad... These guys are going into a trench to take bombs, and believe they are having a promenade. Somebody made them a very dirty joke : ( pma (talk) 20:53, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Minor note: I think it says "Auf, in den Kampf" (not "ab"), a very popular phrase, famously used in Auf, in den Kampf, Torero, the German version of the Toreador Song. It doesn't change Angr's translation though, in my opinion. ---Sluzzelin talk 04:56, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

You may well be right, except that I don't think there's a comma after "Auf". —Angr 05:41, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Oops. (Now that I "struck out" the comma, it looks really weird :). ---Sluzzelin talk 05:55, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

To pma's small, sad comment above, I offer this possible (and I believe likely) explanation: This is a form of black-humor-cum-bravado displayed by combat soldiers, as among many people who wisecrack when trying to make the best of a bad situation. I first encountered it on a summer 1976 visit to an isolated IDF position in a desolate part of the Golan Heights, where "Nice of you to come by!" had been painted prominently on a boulder beside the access road. I suggest this reading rather than taking it literally.-- Deborahjay (talk) 12:01, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

What is cum-bravado?68.148.149.184 (talk) 20:13, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Not to diminish the validity of Deborahjay's thoughtful point, but the German mood in 1914 seems to have been a special one, see also spirit of 1914 where the picture even might be added. Joachim Ringelnatz remembered and commented on the euphoria at the railroad stations in Als Mariner im Krieg, and he made it sound quite surreal, if I remember correctly. ---Sluzzelin talk 12:22, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Ah, so in this light, actual bravado. Good of you to provide the enriched context, Sluzzelin, and I've redacted my remark accordingly! -- Deborahjay (talk) 15:04, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Yea, in August 1914, not only Germany, but large part of Europe was pervaded by a crazy enthusiasm. Many people believed that the war was going to be comfortable and surgical; that it was going to last few months (everybody back home for Christmas), and that it would have reawaken the best qualities of men! --pma (talk) 15:40, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

What was the Onion headline in September 2001 – "Our Long Nightmare of Peace Is Over" ? —Tamfang (talk) 22:30, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Playing on/at/? a Steinway piano

This is regarding the text under a music file.

Is the text correct, or can't you say "... on a Steinway concert grand piano..."?:

"Sergei Rachmaninoff playing on a Steinway concert grand piano the first 4 minutes of Hungarian Rhapsody No. 2 composed by Steinway Artist Franz Liszt, recording from 1919."

Fanoftheworld (talk) 15:17, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

"On" is fine, although personally I would put commas (or brackets) around the "on a Steinway concert grand piano" bit. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 15:36, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. Fanoftheworld (talk) 16:10, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

'On' is the only word that would fit for me: you can sit, wait, or even compose at the piano, but 'play' either takes the instrument as direct object ('playing a Steinway grand'), or requires 'on'. 'On' is uncommon unless the music is mentioned, in which case it usurps the direct object place, and bumps the instrument to a prepositional phrase ('playing Für Elise on a Steinway grand'). But to put it a little stronger than Fanoftheworld does, the placing of the adjunct 'on a Steinway concert grand' before the argument 'the first four minutes of ... ' marks this sentence as almost certainly not by a native English speaker. --ColinFine (talk) 21:51, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

I suppose a more natural order would be something like: "Sergei Rachmaninoff playing the first 4 minutes of Hungarian Rhapsody No. 2 [composed] by Steinway Artist Franz Liszt, on a Steinway concert grand piano, recording from 1919." But that has a problem. They're wanting to mention that Liszt was a Steinway Artist, and having done so, it seems odd to also mention that the pianist was playing a Steinway piano. If he'd been playing a Baldwin or a Blüthner, that would be worth mentioning. Probably the best solution is Richardrj's suggestion, or even recast it as: "Sergei Rachmaninoff playing the first 4 minutes of Franz Liszt's Hungarian Rhapsody No. 2, on a Steinway concert grand piano, recording from 1919. Liszt was a Steinway Artist." -- JackofOz (talk) 23:32, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

'Playing at the piano' would be unusual, and would suggest a lack of skill or concentration, cf. 'plinking around', 'hammering away at', etc. LANTZY^TALK 16:38, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Longest word using specific letters

A bit of an odd question, but what is the longest English word that can be made using only the letters A, B, C, D, E, F, G, I, M, N, O, P, R, S, X, Y? Chaosandwalls (talk) 16:13, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Not all of them at the same time, one presumes. Copyreading and pyromancies, both 11 letters, will be hard to beat. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 16:41, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Saponifying is another 11-letter one. Deor (talk) 17:47, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and expediencies has 12. Deor (talk) 17:50, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Condescension: 13. Deor (talk) 17:57, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

coccidioidomycosis has 18 letters. Regex Dictionary FTW. My regex ("String" field) was:

^[ABCDEFGIMNOPRSXY]{17,}$

with "Not case sensitive" checked and "All" parts of speech checked. The number in the regex sets the minimum length that will be returned. -- Coneslayer (talk) 17:58, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but mine used each letter only once :) --Richardrj ^{talk email} 18:09, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but contrary to well-known advice, I ignore problems that can't be solved with (reasonably-sized) regexes! -- Coneslayer (talk) 18:12, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

This question could be related to cryptanalysis of a transposition cipher. -- Wavelength (talk) 20:00, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Also, Acidimicrobiaceae (17), Andreaeobryopsida (17), Coccidiodomycosis (17), Dermafibrosarcoma (17), Dibrompropamidine (17), Microdermabrasion (17), Acidaminococcaceae (18), Berberidopsidaceae (18), Micromonosporaceae (18), Micromonosporineae (18), Dysfibrinogenemia (19), Andrianampoinimerina (20), Andrianimpoinimerina (20), and Paracoccidioidomycosis (22). The longest such word on Wikipedia is Rabodoandrianampoinimerina (26), which is an Indian name, not an English word. Also, depending on your definition of "English word", you could have an arbitrarily long technical name. See Longest word in English. --Sean 23:14, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

The A/Effect of A on B?

I am really confused with the difference between affect and effect. I've had a look on a load of websites and the refdesk archives, but I'm not sure which to use in the following scenario:

Suppose the title of a paper is "Road Safety: The a/effect of speed on accident rates", which is correct?

I'm thinking that it is probably correct to use effect. However, the dictionary defines effect as "a change that is the result of something else" and "The change of speed on accident rates" doesn't make sense. Whereas affect is "make a difference to", and (slightly changing the sentence) "The difference made to accident rates by speed" seems more correct.

As you can probably tell I'm pretty confused, so your help would be very much appreciated! 86.142.117.156 (talk) 17:40, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

You want effect. The definition for affect that you gave above is for a verb, and the title of your paper needs a noun in that location. (Both effect and affect can be a verb or a noun, but affect as a noun has a very different meaning.) -- Coneslayer (talk) 17:46, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks for your help! 86.142.117.156 (talk) 17:52, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

It might be helpful to be aware that affect and effect both came from compounds of facio, like confect defect infect perfect prefect refect ... (do these suffice?). I see now that there are at least two (weird) neologisms trying to mix together effect & affect: this [6] and this [7] pma (talk) 19:39, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Proprietary names are a law unto themselves. As for the Urban Dictionary, is it just me or is the affect/effect confusion a relatively recent phenomenon? When I was at school (in the Dark Ages), we were regularly drilled on all sorts of potential problem areas; affect/effect was certainly mentioned, but it wasn't one of the main offenders. Most people seemed to understand the difference, and rarely confused them. But that's all changed now, apparently thanks to the monumental advances in teaching methods since then. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:07, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

See http://www.confusingwords.com/. -- Wavelength (talk) 01:16, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Korean word, quite notorious for beingn abstract/hard to translate

I remember reading about this a few years ago but can't seem to find it with google. If I recall correctly, lots (perhaps even whole books) have been written trying to explain its meaning.

Any ideas what it is? 86.133.35.168 (talk) 20:05, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

While you wait for an answer, why not enjoy mamihlapinatapai, "a look shared by two people with each wishing that the other will initiate something that both desire but which neither one wants to start". :) --Sean 23:20, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

I think you're probably talking about 한 - see Han (cultural). Taffy (talk) 04:04, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

If Han (cultural) is the word you are looking for, I think the meaning is similar to Ressentiment. Oda Mari (talk) 07:21, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Could it be 정 (jung)? Undercooked (talk) 03:03, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

funny sentences from an English language column

I find a few funny sentence in a newspaper's English language column here.

• "The young programmer was slouched over the computer."

What can this passive construction mean? Can that verb which apparently is an intransitive verb have a passive?

• She puts in an all-nighter, and then the next day she slouches about doing absolutely nothing.

Putting in an all-nighter? I can see what pulling an all-nighter would mean.

• Last night Sujatha slouched past me with her hands in her kurta.

Hands in her kurta? You put your hands in pockets. Do you put your hands inside the garment decently?--Sundardas (talk) 20:26, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Slouching means having poor posture so he's sitting hunched over the keyboard.

'putting in an all-nighter' means working all night, you put in hours of work or put in effort.

Not sure what a kurta is. RJFJR (talk) 20:32, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Wiktionary says a kurta is a long sleeved shirt. en.wiktionary:kurta You can pull your hands into your sleeves if it's cold out. RJFJR (talk) 20:34, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Your first example is not a passive construction. "slouched" in this context is a verbal - a verb acting as an adjective. "The programmer was slouched" parallels "The ball was green". You can say "The slouched programmer ..." like you can say "The green ball ...". In your second example, to "put in" is idiomatic, one "puts in" an eight hour work day - roughly, you submit your effort to the world. Yes, this means that "pulling an all-nighter" and "putting in an all-nighter" mean the same thing. (No one said English was consistent.) In your last case, as pockets are considered part of the garment, if you put your hands into your pockets you are also putting them into the garment. But you are correct in that just saying "in the garment" is ambiguous. Being more precise in saying "in her pockets", "in her sleeves", or "inside of her coat" would be clearer. This does not, however, mean that just saying "in her garment" is wrong. -- 128.104.112.117 (talk) 21:59, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

(after ec) These are good questions.

For the first, there is considerable variation in dialects of English as to how words for posture are used. Where I live now, in the North of England, it is common to say things like 'I was sat there waiting' or 'They were stood there for hours', where other dialects, and more formal English, would prefer 'I was sitting there' and 'they were standing there' (See [8] for example). Separately some past participles such as 'hunched', 'curled up' 'stretched out' can be used as verbal modifiers as in 'he lay stretched out on the bed', or 'he sat hunched over the heater'. I think this example is a blend of these two constructions - but I don't think many English speakers would find it odd or objectionable.

As RJFJR suggests, the use of 'putting in' here definitely implies that what she is doing overnight is work or duty. Contra 128.104, to me 'pulling' would not have this implication: it could be, but it could equally mean that she is partying all night. --ColinFine (talk) 22:16, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

April 22

Italian translation

Can anyone translate the text on this unusual item pictured on the Commons. It has been suggested that it is written in Venetian dialect? Rmhermen (talk) 03:32, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

First, here is the file, copied to the Language Reference Desk.

-- Wavelength (talk) 04:12, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

"Secret denunciations against anyone who will conceal favors and services or will collude to hide the true revenue from them."

-- Wavelength (talk) 04:21, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

It's not really Venetian dialect, just Italian of some centuries ago. Here there is another picture. --pma (talk) 09:56, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I gather from the linked article that these are called "lion's mouths" and that the text indicated which kind of accusation it collected. From this text, can we tell if this box would have been for accusations of tax fraud against any businessman or perhaps specifically related to public officials? Rmhermen (talk) 15:50, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't know but indeed it seems specifically related to public officials, like tax collectors, the ones that could be in a position to steal part of the public entries resulting from gratie ("pardons", which is maybe more precise than "favors" here) et officii (duties? I guess it's in any case about a form of taxation). --pma (talk) 20:13, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

English to Arabic

How do I say "Parkinson's disease" مرض باركنسون? How does it sound? Kittybrewster ☎ 14:11, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Your translation is how I would say it. --Xuxl (talk) 16:15, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

How does it sound? par-kin-sens? Kittybrewster ☎ 19:55, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

An Arab speaker encountering the name for the first time would say it "Bar-kin-soon", but if familiar with English would say something close to the standard English pronunciation. --Xuxl (talk) 20:25, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Programmatical

Resolved

Can anyone correct the grammar used in the following from our article on Adolf Hitler? Per this discussion[9] "Programmatical" isn't a word. I think the correct word would be "programmatic" but I'm not sure.

"Encouraged by this early support, Hitler decided to use Ludendorff as a front in an attempted coup later known as the Beer Hall Putsch (sometimes as the Hitler Putsch or Munich Putsch). The Nazi Party had copied Italy's fascists in appearance and also had adopted some programmatical points, and in 1923, Hitler wanted to emulate Benito Mussolini's 'March on Rome' by staging his own 'Campaign in Berlin'." A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 14:34, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Then the interesting (IMO) question is: where does this word "programmatic" come from? It seems to me a bit of political jargon, and not older than the 20's, although I could be completely wrong. But can't one say: "..some points of their program"? pma (talk) 15:26, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Program seems to be the German equivalent to political platform. Whilst the National Socialist Program does stem from 1920, the term was in use earlier. The German WP mentions the Erfurt Program (the platform of the Social Democrats) from 1891, which was based on an earlier program from 1875. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 16:02, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, I realise this is OR but (despite the claims in the discussion you linked to) 'programmatical' is in the OED. It claims that it is equivalent to 'programmatic' as you suggested. Martlet1215 (talk) 22:53, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

I'd make it and adopted some points of their program(me), anyway. —Tamfang (talk) 22:35, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, certainly much more lucid. Bessel Dekker (talk) 12:52, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

What does the word sativus mean?

Sativus? 78.146.109.34 (talk) 21:16, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

wikt:sativus. Algebraist 21:27, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

The word sativus means "sown" or "cultivated". -- Wavelength (talk) 21:30, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

(ec) It's an adjective, "that is sowed", as opposed to silvester, wild. Maybe you know the word sator, sower (like in the sator square) --pma (talk) 21:32, 22 April 2009 (UTC).

Many cultivated plants, as for instance oat, belong to a genus in which there are many more (usually silvester) species (cf. avena). The binomial nomenclature of such cultivated plants usually bear the adjective sativus/sativa as the second name. Pallida  Mors 13:30, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Quick translation of German phrase

wo man sich ständig mit den Armen abstützen muss

Google gives me "where you are constantly with the poor must shore"..... 147.9.235.231 (talk) 23:23, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

That's "shore" as in "shore up", or "support", not "shore" as in "sea". "Arm" can translate as "arm" (as in "limb with a hand at the end of it") and also in the plural "poor people", from the adjective "arm" meaning "poor"). Google has chosen the wrong sense of "Armen".

"Where you must support yourself constantly with your arms" is a probable translation (having found the source of the sentence). Tonywalton ^Talk 23:42, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

And my MacBook's Sherlock translation channel, which uses Systran says "where one must constantly push away with the levers". Just goes to show that online translation can really get confused without context. Tonywalton ^Talk 23:49, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes , that does make sense. Thanks. 147.9.235.231 (talk) 00:25, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Tony's (human, non-machine) translation, "Where you must support yourself constantly with your arms". —Angr 05:39, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

April 24

fish vs fishes

Can I have all the possible definitions of "fishes"? More specifically, i suppose, can 'fishes' be used as a noun?

Thank you! 216.165.25.53 (talk) 02:49, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, fishes can be used as a plural noun, but rarely. It (like peoples) is mainly used to express the fact that what's being referred to is a plurality of kinds or divisions of the creatures rather than just an undifferentiated mass of them—so one might title a book about the various species of them "Fishes of the World" rather than "Fish of the World." (And my Merriam-Webster Collegiate informs me that Fishes [capitalized] is used as an English equivalent of the constellation name Pisces.) Deor (talk) 03:07, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Very true. In addition: "the zero plural is te more common to denote hunting quarries, eg: We caught only a few fish, whereas the regular plural is used to denote different individuals, species, etc: the fishes of the Mediterranean. (Quirk et al.); so the plural also may indicate individuals if we wish to differentiate among them. Bessel Dekker (talk) 12:39, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

The English word fish can be compared with the German word Wort ("word"), which has two plural forms, Worte and Wörter.

See http://german.about.com/library/definitions/bldef07b_0103.htm. -- Wavelength (talk) 16:16, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

True, and the same goes for Land. There is a difference with English, though: these German words do not have zero plural. There are, of course, English words where there are two distinct forms, both morphologically plural: isthmuses - isthmi etc., which, however, seem to have the same meaning.

A difference in meaning is found in such pairs as indices ("subscript or superscript numbers") - indexes ("word lists, part of the end matter of a book"). Bessel Dekker (talk) 20:32, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, there are a few of those. Stadiums (venues for sporting events) and stadia (ancient units of distance) also come to mind. Deor (talk) 22:54, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

'Fishes' tends to be restricted as Deor and Bessel have suggested, but it is not quite so narrow as they imply, especially in older use. I am quite surprised to find that the WP article feeding the multitude refers to the event as 'the miracle of the loaves and fish', because in my experience 'of the loaves and the fishes' is much more common. The OED gives examples of 'fishes' up to 1842, and none of the quotations seem to mean 'kinds of fish'. On the other hand it does date the collect. sing. used for pl. back to 1300. --ColinFine (talk) 23:15, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

French Translations: 4

I am stuck on the following translations and any assistance would be much appreciated:

a) "In this picture there are four children" - would it be "En ce tableau il y a quatre enfants" or "Dans ce tableau il y a quatre enfants" or "Ce tableau il y a quatre enfants"? I am mainly unsure of what French preposition should take the place of "In" in the given context.

b) "Three of the children are picking up pebbles on the shore of the lake" - would it be "Les trois des enfants ramassent des cailloux au bord du lac"?. Mainly I am unsure of:

i) The use of the definite article for "Three of the children"

ii) The translation of "on the shore of the lake". In English, we could write "by the shore of the lake" also, so are the two translations the same (with "by" or "on")?

c) "The master is relating the story of the generals to the pupils" - would it be "Le maîte raconte l'histoire des généraux aux élèves"?

d) "Show me the pupil who is not listening" - would it be "Montrez-moi l'élève qui n'écoute pas"? The other thing I am unsure of is how to say "show me a pupil who is not listening". Should the indefinite article be masculine or feminine in this case, if it was a general statement and the pupil described is not known?

As usual, I greatly appreciate the help I get and always recommend the reference desk to anyone I know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.161.138.117 (talk) 04:24, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

• a) Dans ce tableau il y a quatre enfants
• b) Trois des enfants ramassent des cailloux au bord du lac
• c) Le maître raconte l'histoire des généraux aux élèves
• d)

• Montrez-moi l'élève qui n'écoute pas - show me the student
• Montrez-moi un élève qui n'écoute pas - show me a student
• when gender is unknown or mixed, always use the masculine form

--Ianare (talk) 06:21, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Just to chime in here: for case d): if you are talking to just one person, if would obviously be 2nd person singular, so: "Montre-moi l'élève qui n'écoute pas" etc. Lectonar (talk) 07:50, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Modulo T-V distinction, of course. —Tamfang (talk) 21:12, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Name

1. What's the name given to a surname that is the surnames of both of someone's parents, such as "Walsh-Moloney"?

2. Which name comes first in such a surname: the mother's surname or the father's surname? 58.165.23.195 (talk) 07:13, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

It's called a double-barreled name, although those can have other origins than the surnames of the individual's parents. Which comes first depends on the parents' choice; I've encountered both. —Angr 07:40, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Not sure how common the practice is around the world, but here in Slovenia there's also a lot of cases where the double surname in the case of women is 'maiden name' 'married name' (granted, they don't use hyphens, so it's slightly different). One of the reasons, I am told, is in the case of a studied woman not wanting to loose the connection to the various articles they might have written before marriage. There are apparently also cases where husbands also take the wife's maiden name for consistency. TomorrowTime (talk) 10:17, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

But in those cases, surely maiden name or married name does not refer to both elements, but only to the element representing the lady's original surname? Or am I mistaken? Bessel Dekker (talk) 12:43, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I think you're right. Frédéric Joliot-Curie was born Jean Frédéric Joliot, but added his wife's surname, Curie. She also became a Joliot-Curie. His mother's maiden name never came into it. There are examples of a man changing his surname completely to be the same as his wife's surname, the exact reverse of the usual tradition, but can't bring one to mind right now.

Btw, not all double-barrelled surnames are hyphenated. Ralph Vaughan Williams's surname was not Williams, but Vaughan Williams, for example. These are called "unhyphenated double-barrelled surnames". -- JackofOz (talk) 19:08, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't know of a case of a famous man (or the husband of a famous woman) taking his wife's name upon marriage, but a former roommate (flatmate) of mine did that. Before he married his girlfriend, they flipped a coin to see whose name they would use, and she won. —Angr 20:11, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Our article on Married and maiden names suggests that Jack White of the White Stripes is another. Karenjc 21:00, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

In certain periods in history, if a man inherited a landed estate from his mother's family, or came into it through marriage, and it was bigger and richer than anything else he owned, then it wasn't at all unsual for the man to add his mother's maiden name or wife's surname onto his own, or in some cases to even use that surname instead of his paternal surname (it's a plot point in Humphrey Clinker, for example). AnonMoos (talk) 03:01, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

See Man wins right to use wife's last name | Stuff.co.nz. -- Wavelength (talk) 14:56, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

As to which goes first, it varies. In Britain usually the last element corresponds to the first quarter of a coat of arms, which is almost always paternal. But for counterexample the fifth duke of Marlborough (who inherited the title through a daughter of John Churchill, the first duke) changed his surname from Spencer to Spencer-Churchill, and put the Churchill arms first. —Tamfang (talk) 21:08, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Latin phrase

Here's one for the the Latinists: cum puella incedit minore medio corpore sub quo manifestus globus, inflammare animo. If they could tell me what that means then I would be grateful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kitefox (talk • contribs) 07:15, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't require a Latinist, since it's Latin only in the loosest sense. As one can easily find out by Googling, it's a bit of Dog Latin that is intended to translate the lyrics "When a girl walks in with an itty-bitty waist and a round thing in your face, you get sprung" in the song (?) "Baby Got Back." Deor (talk) 13:21, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

It starts out fine with the first three words, but then goes downhill... AnonMoos (talk) 16:18, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

PC

Why do people say "Macs or PCs" when Macs are PCs? 58.165.23.195 (talk) 07:27, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Macs are Apple Macintosh computers, whereas "PC" is short for "IBM Personal Computer", clones of which were produced during the 1990s cheaper than IBM could do it for and thus became more widely available. See Influence of the IBM-PC on the PC market. The distinction was found useful and continues to this day. I wonder why nobody cloned Apple Macs?--TammyMoet (talk) 08:32, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

There have been various Mac-compatibles (some officially approved by Apple at one point), but most were driven off through lawsuits or bought off by Apple. The current effort in that direction is Psystar... AnonMoos (talk) 09:24, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Quibble: the term personal computer and its abbreviation PC existed, and were applied to Apples among others, before IBM claimed them (to the irritation of – well, at least me). —Tamfang (talk) 21:00, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Once upon a time, Macs were different enough from the IBM-PC standard (a 'PC'), mainly the CPU archictecture (powerPC instead of x86) to be in their own category. Now that they use x86 chips and other regular IBM-PC compatible parts, it's just out of habit. You're quite right that there is no difference between them anymore. --Ianare (talk) 14:05, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

US

Why do people say "US state" instead of "United State"? 58.165.23.195 (talk) 07:27, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Because there's no such thing as a United State. The adjective "united" in the name "United States" doesn't mean that there are a bunch of states, each of which, taken individually, is united; it means that there are a bunch of states which are united to each other (i.e. it refers to unity among states, rather than unity within states). This can be seen clearly when the country is referred to as the Union, as in Civil War contexts. Therefore talking about a "United State" is nonsensical, because it doesn't follow at all from the name of the country. Thus, taking a given state, its distinguishing characteristic is not that it is internally united, but that it belongs to an entity called the United States or the US - therefore it's called a US state. --Lazar Taxon (talk) 07:59, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Occasionally people do say "a state of the United States", but Lazar Taxon is right... AnonMoos (talk) 09:27, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Would "one of the United States" be acceptible? Bessel Dekker (talk) 12:45, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

If it's good enough for the 11th Amendment, it's good enough for me. --Sean 16:18, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

United-to-the-others-of-the-bunch State? --pma (talk) 14:47, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

A case of RAS syndrome? Livewireo (talk) 17:48, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

No, not really. "U.S. state" is no more a RAS than "Australian state". -- JackofOz (talk) 18:55, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Demonstrably true: at least, I would read "United States state" rather than "United State state", so that there is no repetition, hence no redundancy. Thanks for the interesting 11th Amendment reference! Bessel Dekker (talk) 20:37, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I think most people would say "yoo ess" state; some might go so far as to say "United States state"; but I can't see any case for "United State state". -- JackofOz (talk) 20:50, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Except that "United States state" sounds perishingly close to "United State state" if you don't enunciate carefully (e.g. "I bought this compack disk in a United State state"). -- JackofOz (talk) 05:35, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

This reminds me of reading something that began: "I always wanted to be a Three Stooge." —Tamfang (talk) 21:14, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Name for party noisemakers

Okay, maybe I've lived in a non-English-speaking country too long, but I cannot for the life of me remember the name of the little noisemakers found at children's birthday parties and New Year's Eve parties that you blow through and a little tube of paper unrolls and it makes a noise like a kazoo. What are they called??? —Angr 11:50, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Google suggests "Party blower". Nanonic (talk) 12:08, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I've wondered about this for a while as well, and I've lived in an English-speaking country (England) all my life. A "Party blower" is a fairly generic term, including those little cardboard trumpets. I think Angr is looking for a specific term for those springy things that shoot out, amusingly go "wwwwaaaapp" then roll themselves up again when you stop blowing. My late father, born a Geordie, referred to them as a "hadaway-come-back" ("had away" is Geordie for "go away") which while descriptive would be incomprehensible much further south than the Wear. Tonywalton ^Talk 16:12, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that's exactly what I'm talking about. I'm sure we had a name for them when I was growing up, but unless it was simply "noisemaker" (and that article doesn't even mention them) I can't remember what it was. —Angr 16:31, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

wiktionary has party puffer —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.56.110.74 (talk) 16:31, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Online party supply retailers, such as Amazon and Party City, call these "blowouts," though the term was not in any dictionary I saw. John M Baker (talk) 21:10, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Name vs. username

On the Internet, why do people say "name" instead of "username"? Saying "name" makes it sound like the person's username is their real name. 58.165.23.195 (talk) 12:31, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

In context it should be clear enough. —Angr 12:33, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Mr. gr Matt Deres (talk) 14:29, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

A name is simply what you call something. A username is a type of name - it may be different than a person's legal name, but it's still a "name". As Angr points out, which name meant (legal, user, nickname, stage name, regnal name, devotional name, nom de plume, nom de guerre, etc.) should be apparent from context. -- 128.104.112.117 (talk) 15:01, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Sometimes peoples' usernames are their real names. Tonywalton ^Talk 16:05, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

So name is the hypernym. Bessel Dekker (talk) 20:39, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Gender in cables, pipes, etc.

While helping a friend shop for computer extension cables, we found ourselves wondering about the use of 'male' and 'female' in terms of plugs, connectors, sockets, and the like. I've been trying to find out how old these terms are in this non-biological context...I've seen them applied to pipes and other connectors, but haven't been able to find any information on when or how this form of naming originated. Now my curiosity is piqued, so any information would be appreciated. Thanks! Kufat (talk) 21:55, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, with plugs, the male end has something to stick into the female end... Adam Bishop (talk)

Yeah, the symbolism is obvious...I'm more wondering when people started using it. I can't imagine it being used for plumbing during the Victorian era, for example...but I have no evidence either way. Kufat (talk) 22:01, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

We have an article on Gender of connectors and fasteners, maybe there's something about the history of the metaphor there. —Angr 22:41, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I have no evidence either, but I'd suspect the metaphor goes way back before the Victorian era; it's just too obvious to have gone un-noticed for thousands of years until RS-232 was invented. Think stonemasons and carpenters making mortise and tenon joints some thousand years ago in Romanesque cathedrals. Then there are the pin and socket constructions on the Stonehenge sarsens and various socketed constructions in the masonry of the Pyramids, dating back millennia before that. Tonywalton ^Talk 23:07, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

The OED gives examples of male (6) - this meaning - from 1588: "The Trepan is of two sortes, one male, and the other female." --ColinFine (talk) 23:28, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

latin question on accusative and infinitive

How would you translate a sentence like "He said he likes himself" into Latin, using the accusative and infinitive? I've read that they always used the accusative and infinitive construction in the classical period, whenever it was correct to do so, so I'm assuming that's the form to use here, but it seems awkward. You can either go "Is dixit se amare se," with one "se" for the accusative "subject" of the infinitive, and one for the object, or leave one of them out, when the meaning doesn't seem so clear. Also, if you do need two "se's," can you say "Is dixit se se amare," or do you have to separate the "se's"? thanks, It's been emotional (talk) 23:35, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

I would probably go with "Dixit se amare seipsum" to avoid the confusing repetition of "se". —Angr 00:01, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Or perhaps "Dixit se sibi placere". Iblardi (talk) 00:09, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

He said he knew he remembered hearing himself announcing that he wished that he had taught himself to barber himself.

Sẽ tondẽre sẽ docuisse sẽ cupĩre sẽ nũntiãre sẽ audĩvisse sẽ reminĩscĩ sẽ scĩre sẽ dĩxit.

-- Wavelength (talk) 02:50, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

[I changed sapere to scĩre. -- Wavelength (talk) 03:05, 25 April 2009 (UTC)]

You could also use "sese" or "semetipsum" (although that would also make it rather emphatic). A native speaker would obviously not use a dozen "se"s in a row, they would just reword the sentence to make it clear, just like we can do when we have a confusing sentence in English. There are other verbs to use, like Iblardi's example which cleverly avoids the double accusative. In this case you might even want to give up and use a relative clause, which is not entirely wrong in classical Latin, and perfectly acceptable post-classically - "dixit quod se amat". Adam Bishop (talk) 03:10, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much to all. Adam, do your sentences become "Is dixit sese amare" and "Is dixit semetipsum amare"?? Wavelength, by our logic, you are missing one "se" or you need to put in a "sese" at the beginning. But I don't imagine any Romans would have still been listening by the end of such a sentence anyway :) ta to all again, It's been emotional (talk) 04:30, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

They would be the same as Angr's sentences - dixit se amare sese/semetipsum. Adam Bishop (talk) 13:21, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

In my example, the English sentence contains eight explicit third-person singular personal pronouns and one implicit one (the subject of the gerund "hearing"). The Latin sentence contains eight explicit ones and one implicit one (the subject of the verb dĩxit). Incidentally, that subject could be either is (he) or ea (she). -- Wavelength (talk) 05:52, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

I was looking through a Latin composition book (Bradley/Arnold/Montford) to see if there were any examples of this, but there weren't; checking other composition books might help. It's possible that they just avoided writing sentences like this, because there was no separate word for "himself" like we have. I mean, there are lots of things that can't be translated literally into Latin (or from Latin into English) because the necessary construction doesn't exist. Another possibility, however, is "inter se", although that is usually used for "each other" ("inter se amant" - they love each other). Adam Bishop (talk) 16:53, 25 April 2009 (UTC)S

Thanks again, It's been emotional (talk) 01:10, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Dying of "aspiration"

I read a report in today's paper of a man who died of a drug overdose and "aspiration". That's what the caption on the photo said. I thought they must have meant something else, but this "aspiration" was repeated in the article. I imagine they really meant pulmonary aspiration or aspiration pneumonia. Aspiration, by itself, is an activity we all engage in all the time - it's a synonym for breathing. Has this become recognised medical jargon for either of the conditions I mentioned? It doesn't seem to bode well for young people, who are encouraged to have aspirations for a successful life, and who may have second thoughts if they discover it can kill them. -- JackofOz (talk) 05:45, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

In medicine "aspiration" can refer to the inhalation of foreign substances which then reduce the function of the tracheobronchial ducts. It seems that drugs, dust, but also "harmless" objects like chewing gum can then lead to sudden death. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 07:16, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

In a drug overdose, the aspiration was most likely vomit, so would be aspiration pneumonia. "Aspiration" is also used for needle biopsies, where something is removed for analysis with a needle (eg bone marrow aspiration, aspirating a cyst etc).KoolerStill (talk) 08:36, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Jack, could we say that aspiration-as-breathing is an intransitive verb, and the other, transitive? -- Deborahjay (talk) 12:50, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

I see what you mean, Deb. Of course, "aspiration" is a noun; the verb is "aspire". **(Light goes on)**

And that brings me to the source of my confusion. There are 2 verbs: "aspire" means to seek some goal; "aspirate" has a range of meanings, in medical, linguistic and other contexts. The noun from both verbs is "aspiration", but the meaning differs correspondingly. From now on, I will aspire to understand this. I'm aspirating more freely now. Thanks. -- JackofOz (talk) 19:31, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

April 25

French Translations: 5

How would I translate, "The brothers to whom I speak are my brothers"? Would it be "Les frères à qui je parle sont mes frères"? Thanks for the help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.161.138.117 (talk) 07:50, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

I dislike your first use of "brother". A person is not a "brother" to the general public. He's a brother only to his own brothers. You may say: "The men whom I spoke to are my brothers." -- Toytoy (talk) 08:48, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

A couple of quibbles with that, Toytoy. They could be children, or a mixture of boys and adults. "The people I spoke to were my brothers" would be the best way of saying it. You could use "... to whom I spoke", but that's a little formal. "... whom I spoke to" is a mixture of formality and ... something else. -- JackofOz (talk) 10:19, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Bear in mind that the OP wanted help with translating the phrase into French, not a critique of the original sentence. The double use of brothers would make perfect sense in the following contexts:

a) He's been speaking to a pair (or more) of brothers, perhaps twins, and wants to clarify to a third party that he is also related to them.

b) He's been speaking to monks, who are also, as it happens, related to him.

c) He's speaking jive to express solidarity with people to whom he is also related.

The translation would, of course, vary depending on which of these senses was intended. Malcolm XIV (talk) 10:29, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

See Relative clause#French. -- Wavelength (talk) 14:33, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

You could say "...sont les miens", "(the brothers) are mine", although that doesn't really repeat "brothers" the second time, if that's what you're going for. Adam Bishop (talk) 16:41, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

It is just made up. I would appreciate a "yes" or a "no" to my question if that is not too hard. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.161.138.117 (talk) 02:36, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I'd say "Vous, à qui je parle, sont mes frères." (You, to whom I speak, are my brothers) The Jade Knight (talk) 13:18, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Apart from all the other concerns raised, I think auxquels is better than à qui. —Tamfang (talk) 22:32, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

How do you call this?

Let's say Jean speaks two languages: French (native, perfect) and English (acquired, "fluent"). He doesn't know some particular frequently used words in English. Whenever he needs to use one of them, he says the corresponding French word in a "faking" manner (e.g., beef -> boef). In school, he could never pass an English test. In life, he could usually make it. How do you describe this level of bilingualism? Is he truly bilingual? -- Toytoy (talk) 08:43, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Seems odd that he wouldn't know particularly used words. I think you would say he had 'conversational' English. FreeMorpheme (talk) 10:10, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

If he didn't know certain frequently used words like beef, then his English wouldn't be fluent. Malcolm XIV (talk) 10:16, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

I don't know what the situation would be called, but I can give you a more plausible scenario, one that is in fact very frequent: When Chinese learn to speak Japanese, they will often use unnecesarily high-level language. This is because a large amount of the Japanese language is Chinese loanwords, and the Chinese speaker need only find the correlating Chinese word, figure out how it's read, and use that, and in many cases they can make themselves understood this way. Of course, since this doesn't cover the many simpler native Japanese words, in practice this means that many beginning and middle level Chinese speakers of Japanese use excesively convulted and unnecessarily high brow language - instead of telling a guy that he's fat, they will tell him that he is corpulent. TomorrowTime (talk) 21:26, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Ha! True! I found that with a lot of the Chinese I knew in Japan. Half the time people were scratching their heads wondering what they were blathering on about. In any case, it all depends what you mean by 'fluent'. It either means being able to make yourself understood, being able to speak quickly (i.e. fluidity of language (hence the very word 'fluent'), or speaking as well as a native speaker (many of whom have great difficulty making themselves understood or speaking quickly), so it's quite a grey area.--KageTora (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 03:32, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Brother, where art thou?

The HSBC Building, Shanghai has been called "the most luxurious building from the Suez Canal to the Bering Strait". Eight words are on the octagonal entrance hall:

ALL MEN ARE BROTHERS WITHIN THE FOUR SEAS

http://www.chinapet.net/bbs/viewtopic.php?p=25652850

200903013750_nEO_IMG.jpg

See the upper left and right corners of "London".

Is this sentence originally translated from the famous Chinese proverb "四海之內皆兄弟"?

• 四: Four (si4)
• 海: Sea(s) (hai3)
• 之內: Within (zhi1 nei4)
• 皆: All (Are) (jie1)
• 兄: Elder brother (xiong1)
• 弟: Younger brother (di4)

In English, people usually say seven seas. "Four seas," is a common Chinese saying, e.g., "五湖四海" "The Five Lakes and the Four Seas" (the traditional lands of Chinese-speaking peoples). "四海為家" "I can live anywhere within the Four Seas" (homelessness).

Or was it also an original English proverb? -- Toytoy (talk) 09:35, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm guessing it's based on the quote from the Analects: 論語˙顏淵：「君子敬而無失，與人恭而有禮，四海之內，皆兄弟也。」 Aas217 (talk) 17:23, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Out of question, which 5 lakes is this 4 Character Idiom referring to? And which 4 seas is the Chinese custom?68.148.130.72 (talk) 03:58, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Leave, never to return

Is there a word for someone who leaves their home town and never comes back? 80.229.160.127 (talk) 10:09, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

There are words for the adverb - permanently, forever, for good - but no special word for "leaving forever", afaik. -- JackofOz (talk) 12:34, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

How about abandon or vacate. --Thomprod (talk) 12:37, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Not a single word, but saying that someone is shaking the dust of <place> from his or her feet at least implies an intention never to return. There's an example of the usage in the first sentence of the book description here. Deor (talk) 17:14, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

That usage has a particularly hostile connotation, given its context in the Bible. It carries a bit of a "leave to rot & good riddance" sort of connotation. The Jade Knight (talk) 13:21, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

One could abandon a place, but still return to it later. Vacate normally refers to leaving particular premises, not an entire town. -- JackofOz (talk) 19:18, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Ex-patriot?--KageTora (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 04:35, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

That means "traitor". "Expatriate" wouldn't do either, as that refers to someone who lives in a country other than their own, not just one who's left the city of their birth. -- JackofOz (talk) 05:03, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

How interesting. I actually thought 'ex-patriot' was the spelling. I thought that all my life. And considering I am one, it's quite a shock to find out that I've been spelling my own status wrongly for years.--KageTora (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 05:26, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I get around the problem by considering myself an immigrant rather than an expatriate. —Angr 06:13, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Well that presents a small problem, because you'd be an 'emigrant' on the way out there and an 'immigrant' on the way in.--KageTora (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 13:17, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I've often wondered at which exact point does someone moving to another country cease to be an emigrant and start to be an immigrant. Is it the half-way point between the 2 places? Or is this just another of my characteristic off-the-planet ideas? -- JackofOz (talk) 05:30, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

You don't change from being one to the other; you're both, depending on point of view. From an American point of view, I'm an emigrant. From a German point of view, I'm an immigrant. —Angr 05:54, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Touting one's own works (figurative expression)

What figurative expression, slightly sarcastic, would we use in English to describe someone making (questionable) claims for his own work, for which no outside corroboration is provided or available? This occurs in an academic article, so I can't use "if they do say so themselves" (the subject being plural). The Hebrew expression in the source text, translated literally: "as the baker testifies to his batter" (כפי שמעיד החנתום על איסתו). -- Thanks, Deborahjay (talk) 10:42, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Possibly brag, boast, "blow one's own horn", crow, gloat, "pat oneself on the back" or showboat. --Thomprod (talk) 12:35, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, but I need something understated, even oblique - like "by their own admission" or "soi-disant" (though these aren't quite it). Ideally it would be an illustrative phrase like the "baker:his batter" expression in the original; I just can't recall whether there's a familiar equivalent in English. -- Deborahjay (talk) 12:42, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Self-styled? Malcolm XIV (talk) 13:12, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Blowing one's own trumpet?--TammyMoet (talk) 18:10, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

The expression about not blowing a trumpet was originally used in relation to gifts of mercy.

(Matthew 6:2, World English Bible) "Therefore when you do merciful deeds, don't sound a trumpet before yourself, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may get glory from men. Most certainly I tell you, they have received their reward." See http://parallelbible.com/matthew/6.htm -- Wavelength (talk) 18:33, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Self-proclaimed? According to himself/themselves? I think "blowing one's own trumpet" is the most familiar expression used in English, but it's inherently not the understated words you seek, because it's not possible to play the trumpet pianissimo. -- JackofOz (talk) 19:15, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

"Self-styled", "self-defined", along with JackofOz's "self-proclaimed" all contain that hint of doubt about the appropriatness of any claims. I can't think of anything like your example from Hebrew that deals with praising something because it is your own, and not solely on its merits. // BL \\ (talk) 19:28, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, the adage from Erasmus "Suus cuiusque crepitus bene olet" ("A person's own farts smell good to him") seems to convey something of that idea, but I'm pretty sure that it's not an appropriate tag to use in this case. Deor (talk) 04:51, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

If you give us the rest of the relevant sentence we might get better ideas. —Tamfang (talk) 22:43, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Poetry and pop music

Isn´t it strange that many people like pop music (a form of poetry, sometimes quite simple) but don`t have the minimal interest for poetry? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.57.67.37 (talk) 12:20, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Maybe they like the parts of popular music that have little to do with poetry. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 12:30, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps there are some poets or forms of poetry that are similarly accessible, hence appealing, as pop lyrics. -- Deborahjay (talk) 12:47, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

While both e.e. cummings and Dr. Seuss wrote poetry, there are many fans of the latter which don't enjoy the former - different tastes. Also, poetry is often presented in a snobby, elitist fashion, ("You don't appreciate Leaves of Grass? You barbarian!") so people may instinctively dislike anything labeled as "poetry", despite its independent merits. -- 75.42.235.205 (talk) 20:30, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Enjoying music whose instrumentation includes voices is not the same as enjoying poetry, even if the voices are uttering verse. (This reminds me of a conversation with my boss many years ago: "You don't like Leonard Cohen? But the words are so great!" "Doesn't change the sad fact that he can't sing.") —Tamfang (talk) 22:47, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Japanese vocabulary

1) Why do the Japanese use "shaberu" as their word for shovel? Were shovels forbidden during the Edo period or something?

2) About Japanese "pasu" for "pass" in a board game context: What would Edo-period go players have called this action? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.44.12.221 (talk) 20:48, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

See Japanese language#Vocabulary. -- Wavelength (talk) 00:04, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

1) The word shaberu is a recent loan word. Early citations are c. 1869. There are many older words such as fukushi (c. 759).

2) The word pasu is heavily associated with modern (foreign) games such as basketball, volleyball, and poker. Edo-period people would not be playing these games. Perhaps if you rephrase the question is could be readdressed.

Regards, Bendono (talk) 03:29, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Shovels were not forbidden during the Edo period. Words get replaced over time, even by loan words from other languages, which take on specific meanings. Take the case of 'guardian' and 'warden', both of which are loanwords from French, and loanwords from the same word! but meaning two different things in English. 'Shaberu' was taken into Japanese from English to specify a particular type of spade (and actually, what the Japanese would call a 'shaberu' I wouldn't call a shovel - very common with loanwords into Japanese - take the case of 手紙 which means 'letter' in Japanese, but 'toilet paper' in Chinese - hilarious when you write a letter to someone in China saying 'thank you for your letter' and you get a reply back saying 'I did not send you any toilet paper'). As for 'pasu' with Edo period Go, I would have no idea. I only play shogi.--KageTora (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 03:26, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

As for shovel, it is a word for Western style shovel introduced in Meiji period and it could be translated as 丸匙. The word for a traditional Japanese shovel/spade is suki/鋤 . See [10] and [11]. As for pasu, as far as I know, there was no particular expression in Japanese. It could be translated as 'Yasumi/休み' or (Ikkai/一回)Yasumu/休む in today's Japanese. Oda Mari (talk) 07:17, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

"shear deformation"

What is shear deformation?68.148.130.72 (talk) 21:08, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Shear deformation is a deformation state of the material which occurs when a shear force is applied on it. By the way, this question should go RD/Science. - DSachan (talk) 22:39, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Shearing (physics) may also be of help. Deor (talk) 22:40, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

How do you write with a southern accent from the 1900 in Alabama?

How do you write with a southern accent from the 1900 in Alabama?

Specifically I am looking for how too write a letter, with a southern accent of an african american, possibly not the greatest educated, female, living in Maycomb Alabama in the 1930's. I know this is not a real place but I am doing an assingment for my Language arts class on " To kill a mockingbird", so i would really appreciate it if someone could help me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iluvgofishband (talk • contribs) 23:01, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

See Eye dialect. -- Wavelength (talk) 23:15, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

April 26

strange different forms of the passive in English

Take the following English sentence: "I showed this to him." Now put it in the passive voice: either "This was shown to him" or "He was shown this." So the sentence actually has two passive forms, using either the direct or the indirect object from the active sentence as the grammatical subject. Do other languages have this feature (two possible subjects allowed when turning actives into passives)? It's been emotional (talk) 01:02, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

According to http://grzegorj.w.interia.pl/typen/morfosynt.html, Polish can form the passive voice in contexts involving direct objects, indirect objects, and prepositional objects. Halfway down the page is the paragraph which begins with the words "Unlike English".

-- Wavelength (talk) 01:48, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I think you misread it, Wavelength. It actually says, "Unlike Polish, English likes the passive voice very much, and the passive transformation is possible in practically all instances of objects without prepositions, both direct and indirect ones, as well as in some instances of prepositional objects." So it's English that is special in this regard and Polish is a counterexample. "He was shown this" would be impossible in Polish. — Kpalion^(talk) 23:30, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

You are correct, Kpalion; I did misread it. Thank you for pointing that out. -- Wavelength (talk) 02:00, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

You can do that in Latin. "Hoc ei monstravi" --> "Hic ei monstratus est" --> "Hoc monstratus est". (It seems like you should be able to do it in French too but I can't think of the particular syntax at the moment.) Adam Bishop (talk) 02:59, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure you know more Latin than I do, Adam. However, my resources show no sign of the dative-based passive example you have shown. Was that a common practice in Classical times? Pallida  Mors 18:31, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I just put "ei" in so the sentence would have an indirect object ("this was shown to him"). It could also use an ablative agent ("a me" or whoever). A dative agent would be necessary in a gerundive construction ("hoc ei monstrandum est" --> "this should be shown by him" or "he should show this"). Is that what you meant? I think I may have completely misunderstood. Adam Bishop (talk) 19:10, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Japanese has it, although it's not used much. The translations of the two above would be 「これは彼に見せられた」 and 「彼はこれを見せられた」. Any language with a passive would be able to do this.--KageTora (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 04:23, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the answers. Actually Adam I'm not so sure it can be done in French, because an indirect object is preceded by "a" (I've lost my international character tray that used to be at the bottom of the wiki pages; I want a-grave), and anything with that form apparently cannot be turned into the passive. But I may have this wrong, and it may be only for intransitive verbs; perhaps transitive verbs with direct and indirect objects can be done this way. More info requested... It's been emotional (talk) 08:58, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

It should work fine - "je lui ai montré ceci" --> "ceci lui a été montré" --> "il a été montré ceci". You can add "à moi" to the last two (although "il a été montré" usually seems to be impersonal, "it has been shown (that)", according to Google, so maybe you can't really do this). Adam Bishop (talk) 13:07, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm rather dubious about the French, and also about the Latin. To me the second and third Latin tags are structurally identical (except one has an expressed dative), though one has a masculine, the other a neuter subject. Which do you claim translates "he was shown this"? --ColinFine (talk) 22:48, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Colin. —Tamfang (talk) 22:51, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah this does seem kind of dubious the more I look at it. I was trying to make the third one "he was shown this" (as "hoc" can also be an accusative object). I'm still pretty sure all these sentences can work in Latin but I guess I'm not doing it right. Adam Bishop (talk) 00:24, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Actually, hoc can't be the subject of the third one, because then it would have to be "hoc monstratum est". But still, there must be a better way to explain this. Adam Bishop (talk) 03:12, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Interesting sentence

My grammar teacher wants us to write a 4 page paper on the syntactic analysis of one sentence. I can do the syntactic analysis, but I'm having trouble finding a good, long, complex sentence to use. Any help? 69.16.93.243 (talk) 01:51, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

How good, how long, and how complex do you want the sentence to be? -- Wavelength (talk) 02:43, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Off the top of my head, there is a book entirely composed of one single sentence and goes on for hundreds of pages. It would take a while to write out a syntactic analysis of that, but I think your teacher might be impressed at your effort. I can't think of what the book is called, though, so I can't help any more than this. Googling 'one sentence book' just gives me book reviews about books, but in one sentence.--KageTora (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 04:32, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Even if our Good News is veiled, it is veiled in those who perish, in whom the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving, that the light of the Good News of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not dawn on them.

[I italicized the sentence. -- Wavelength (talk) 05:47, 26 April 2009 (UTC)]

(2 Corinthians 4:3, 4, World English Bible) (I changed a semi-colon to a comma.) -- Wavelength (talk) 05:34, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

See Longest English sentence. -- Wavelength (talk) 05:36, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

French Translations: 6

How would I translate, "The men to whom I speak are my brothers"? Would it be "Les hommes à qui je parle sont mes frères"? Thanks for the help. Note that I am posting this question again with an additional change. I would appreciate a "yes" or "no" answer rather than a link, because I am on a certain lesson in a book and don't want to go outside the bounds of my knowledge. Thanks again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.161.138.117 (talk) 02:40, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Correct. Equendil Talk 02:46, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

It is difficult to say either Yes or No, because that is one correct answer but not the only one. Another correct answer is Les hommes auxquels je parle sont mes frères. It is difficult for me to know whether the second answer is outside the bounds of your knowledge.

-- Wavelength (talk) 02:52, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I like that translation better than the given, actually. Seems more natural to me. The Jade Knight (talk) 13:30, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

"The men to whom I speak are my brothers" sounds like something out of the Bible. Why not translate it as 'the men I am speaking to are my brothers'? Or does that make it harder to think in French?--KageTora (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 05:35, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

That would actually be the exact same in French: "Les hommes à qui/auxquels je parle" = the men to whom I speak/the men whom I am speaking to. The Jade Knight (talk) 13:30, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I do understand that. I was pointing out the old-fashioned English, and making a point that English word order is different from French when we speak in a more usual style. 'The men to whom I speak' is modelled on French, therefore making it easier for English speakers to get used to speaking French. Obviously Les hommes je suis parlant à sont mes frères would be ridiculous.--KageTora (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 13:42, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

United Kingdom

Why don't we call the United Kingdom the United Queendom, considering we don't have a king yet until Lizzy pops her clogs?--KageTora (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 05:03, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Is there such a word as "queendom"? Ah yes, I see it refers to the position or dignity of a queen. "Kingdom" is a synonym for "monarchy", and applies whether there's a king or a queen on the throne. The payback is that the wife of a king is a queen, but the husband of a queen is not a king. -- JackofOz (talk) 05:09, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that is also something I never understood, and keep getting asked by my students and Japanese friends. Why isn't Prince Phillip king? When a king marries a woman she becomes queen, but when a queen marries a feller, he ends up 'prince', which sounds like he's her son.--KageTora (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 05:21, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

It's because there are 2 varieties of queen: Queen Regnant (such as Elizabeth II), and Queen Consort (such as her late mother, the Queen Mother, who was plain Queen Elizabeth, but not numbered, because she was merely the wife of King George VI). But there's only one variety of king: King (Regnant). It's the same deal with the wives of lords and knights - they're ladies, whereas the husband of a lady or dame in her own right is not a lord or a knight, just plain Mr. Unless they happen to have a separate title in their own right, as baroness Margaret Thatcher's husband did (he was Sir Denis Thatcher; whereas, Dame Joan Sutherland's husband is plain Mr Richard Bonynge). -- JackofOz (talk) 06:22, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I know it's completely off-topic, but I find it an interesting reminder of old-fashioned gallantry and male-female roles. The inference one can take from this age-old system is that a man should always make himself, but that a woman can be made by whom she marries. I can imagine that, in history, a man who took on a title simply because he married well would be looked down upon by his fellows, especially those who had either earned or been born into their respective titles. Women, on the other hand, were expected to gain and benefit by a well-chosen union and it was considered a mark of pride for a man to make a woman "his lady", in title as well as in name. Just a deeper application, I think, of men giving up their seats on buses. Maedin\^talk 07:33, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

It's not off-topic: that's the basic answer to both of Givnan's questions. It's all about sex roles. It used to be assumed that the normal state of things was that the country would be ruled by a king, and the vocabulary is skewed in that direction. Jack's answer is not a reason why, it's just another consequence of the same basic cause.

In some countries It used to be law that only a male could inheerit the throne. In the UK, obviously, a female monarch is allowed, but only if she has no brothers (who are eligible to inherit; Roman Catholics would also be excluded). Otherwise the oldest brother inherits. (There has been talk in recent years of changing this law, but that's a subject for a different reference desk.) So despite the long rule of Queens Victoria and Elizabeth II, the "normal" state of things in the UK is that the monarch is a king. --Anonymous, 21:12 UTC, April 26, 2009.

It is my understanding that Philip retained his Greek title when he married Princess Elizabeth and then became her Queen's Consort. --TammyMoet (talk) 18:47, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

In 1947 Philip was naturalized as British (though naturalization was technically redundant), adopted the name Philip Mountbatten and renounced the title(s) Prince of Greece and Denmark. Shortly before the wedding, the king gave him Royal Highness, a knighthood and a dukedom, but not the title of Prince; his wife gave him that in 1957. So for about nine years he was (anomalously) HRH but not any kind of Prince – though some monarchists contend that his renunciation was invalid. —Tamfang (talk) 23:04, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

The name of the country doesn't change, but the "King's Bench" courts become "Queen's Bench" "His Majesty's Ship" becomes "Her Majesty's Ship", and the prayer for the ruler in the Book of Common Prayer is rewritten with appropriate pronouns. AnonMoos (talk) 20:27, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you all for your answers. They are all very relevant. The reason I mentioned this was because, as in AnonMoos' comment above, certain things do actually change, like our national anthem, for example. Sometimes it's 'God Save The King' and sometimes 'God Save The Queen'.--KageTora (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 22:30, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

'Kingdom' isn't a name, it's a common noun. Furthermore, there are two radically different things that it might mean, on the face of it ('the state of being a king' and 'the domain of a king') but in practice it means the second of these. It is always risky to try and import logic into arguments about language, but one might argue that the domain is unchanged when the king is replaced by a queen. --ColinFine (talk) 22:54, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Some other things that do change depending on the sex of the monarch are Queen's Counsel/King's Counsel, and the Master of the Queen's Music/Master of the King's Music. Conversely, "the King's/Queen's English" can be used interchangeably, regardless of who's on the throne, but that's not a formal title or anything, just an expression -- JackofOz (talk) 00:18, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Do you speak Chinese? How come - both: "I want" and "I think" - are translated as 我想 ?

Or rather, let's put this way: What's the semantic difference between:

我要

我覺得

我想

HOOTmag (talk) 12:16, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

我要 + noun = I want [something]. 我要 + verb = I am going to do something. 我覺得 = I think (in the sense of having an opinion). 我想 + noun = I would like (or I miss). 我想 + verb = I would like [to do].--KageTora (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 13:11, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

So why does Google translate "I think" as 我想 ?

See here

HOOTmag (talk) 13:26, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

It means more like 'I feel', than 'I think', but it can be translated that way.--KageTora (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 13:37, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, Google translates "I feel" as: 我覺得 , and translates 我覺得 as "I think".

However, I didn't ask about 我覺得 but rather about 我想 . Google translates "I think" as 我想 , so do you say now that 我想 is translated as either "I'd like", or: "I feel", or: "I think"? I hope you see my point...

HOOTmag (talk) 13:57, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I do. It's more of a mild desire or feeling. Also, beware of online translators like Google, because they are not human. If you want to test one, try translating a simple sentence like 'My father ran away and stole my bike' or something into one language, then again into a few other languages, and then back into English, and you will most probably see a totally different result from the sentence you started with. Best to stick with human translators, and there are some good websites with people staffing them 24/7, and for free.--KageTora (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 14:22, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure you've seen my point. First of all, what do you refer to when you say "it's" (in the beginning of your second sentence)? Do you talk about 我覺得 or about 我想 or about both words?

Also, could you please connect now all three meanings ("I think", "I feel", "I'd like") to both words discussed above (我覺得 , 我想)? which word means what?

Also, is there a clear-cut chinese word for "I want" - not to be confused with "I think" nor with "I feel"? and a clear-cut chinese word for "I think" - not to be confused with "I want" nor with "I feel"? and a clear-cut chinese word for "I feel" - not to be confused with "I think" nor with "I want"?

Thank you in advance. HOOTmag (talk) 17:30, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

"It's" was referring to the subject of your question, i.e. 我想. And the meanings of the words have been supplied above. When you are learning a foreign language, you should never think that each word in your own language corresponds to a single word in another or vice-versa. There are nuances for many words, giving numerous translations in other languages.--KageTora (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 18:46, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

To sum up:

1. There's no clear-cut chinese word for "I want" (not to be confused with "I think" nor with "I feel").
2. There's no clear-cut chinese word for "I think" (not to be confused with "I want" nor with "I feel").
3. There's no clear-cut chinese word for "I feel" (not to be confused with "I think" nor with "I want").

Is that correct? HOOTmag (talk) 20:13, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

It is totally obvious to Chinese speakers which meaning would be meant. As I say, it's best not to think of a language in the context of your own native language, as they will have concepts totally alien to you. This is part of the fun of learning a foreign language, because it opens your mind to a different way of thinking. I work as a translator (actually Japanese, not Chinese - although I am semi-fluent in Chinese) and I think it's great being able to express yourself in other ways, albeit only to people who speak whichever language I am talking in at the time. Anyway, if you read through my explanations above again, you may see that there actually is a clear cut way of saying things and meaning things. Google just can't be arsed translating stuff properly.--KageTora (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 22:24, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Regarding the OP's apparent exasperation with "clear cut" definitions, I feel that it is important to emphasize, as KageTora has already repeatedly stated, that there is not necessarily going to be a one-to-one correspondence between words and concepts from one language to another. Translating Chinese into English, or English in Chinese, necessitates navigating between two modes of expression that do not have exact equivalents for every term. It might be helpful to remember that each individual character has a semantic meaning that is both partially fixed and partially indeterminate, e.g. 想 has a broad range of meanings that encompass thought, desire, and belief, but in specific contexts, or when paired with certain other characters, has a meaning that is less ambiguous.

Modern Chinese, although vastly different from Classical Chinese, still retains many of the ontological assumptions that influenced the logic and grammar of Chinese during the formative stages of its development. These assumptions differed drastically from those which provide the basis of Western thought and language. To assume that every Chinese character has just one solitary, authoritative fixed meaning, and to further assume that such a fixed meaning has a direct cognate in English, is a futile effort that will only lead to more frustration. This is especially true for such fundamental terms as wanting and feeling, these critical terms were developed in such radically different cultural and philosophical environments that conveying their meaning in English requires not just translation, but exposition as well. Aas217 (talk) 04:54, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

American English problems (for me)

I read Cracked a lot because it's hilarious, but some of the phrases in it are difficult to understand, so retelling the stories to British mates can be hard, as I have to either guess what it meant, or change it to something else. For example, what does 'on the lam' mean?--KageTora (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 13:07, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

It means you are running from police (or some other authority I suppose). On the lam actually redirects to fugitive. Adam Bishop (talk) 13:12, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. That actually makes sense in the context. --KageTora (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 13:19, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I didn't even realize that it was an Americanism. Incidentally there used to be a wonderful word, 'lamster', which has fallen out of use. It's so much better than the word 'fugitive'. LANTZY^TALK 16:42, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I can readily imagine Archie Goodwin saying lamster, giving his boss something to scowl at in quiet distaste. —Tamfang (talk) 01:38, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Off tangent: Interestingly, our article implies that it is an "Icelandicism". Any Wikipedians from Gimli on this desk to supply the full list of Icelandic loanwords? I remember reading that amERICa the Red (who was on the lam from the law of the Old Norse) is the obvious one. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 18:57, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians by language has a link to Category:User is. -- Wavelength (talk) 19:27, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Odd etymology. Two sources (Chambers 21st Century Dictionary and Apple's built-in Oxford American Dictionary) give a Norse source - "lemja: to make someone lame" and "lamme: paralyze". Both of these seem to lack the essential "running away" element of "on the lam", and the (unsourced) etymology in the fugitive article just seems weird. Tonywalton ^Talk 22:37, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, Urban Dictionary's definition doesn't give the etymology, but the definition there seems to tie up with Adam's account up above. I'd be interested if it was actually from Icelandic, though.--KageTora (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 23:02, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

[12] has this : ""flight," as in on the lam, 1897, from a U.S. slang verb meaning "to run off" (1886), of uncertain origin, perhaps somehow from the first element of lambaste, which was used in British student slang for "beat" since 1596; if so, it would give the word the same etymological sense as beat it.""--KageTora (영호 (影虎)) (talk) 23:07, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I remember a silly movie from the 60s with Bob Hope and Phyllis Diller, called Eight on the Lam. When I first heard people talking about it, I assumed it was something to do with eating lamb. -- JackofOz (talk) 00:09, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Call me mint jelly, 'cause I'm on the lam! Adam Bishop (talk) 03:09, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Frong

What is a drug front?68.148.130.72 (talk) 18:08, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

See front, the one but last meaning in the first list. A front is something that is in front of something else. Which can mean it hides the other thing. So the term is also used to indicate that something is set up to hide what is really going on. In this case the suggestion is that the restaurant merely serves to cover up the fact that there is (illegal) drug dealing going on. This is often said about busineses that don't seem to be very profitable but miraculously stay in existence for a long time. A front organisation is something similar. DirkvdM (talk) 19:23, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Unless you meant drug use associated with one of these. -- JackofOz (talk) 00:04, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Commission or order a building?

I want to mention somewhere that Peter Schunck told an architect to build the Glaspaleis. Now that doesn't sound very eloquent, but what would be a better way to say it? Commission a building appears to mean something completely different. Did he 'order the building'? That sounds more like something one does in a restaurant. DirkvdM (talk) 19:15, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

He contracted an architect... --VanBurenen (talk) 19:53, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

He commissioned a design from an architect. Architects don't build buildings, so the architect (or more likely a project manager) contracted one or more firms to build it, according to the designs. These firms probably subcontracted other firms or individuals for detailed work. Tonywalton ^Talk 21:45, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

(Further) there are several marginally different meanings for the verb "to commission". See for instance the Chambers Harrap dictionary, which has (among others) to place an order for something, eg a work of art, etc./to prepare (a ship) for active service.' The meaning under Building commissioning is the "prepare for active service" meaning (which applies to more than ships, in fact; buildings, power stations etc. are all "commissioned" in this sense). An architect (or interior designer, and so on) is also given a commission, or "commissioned" to produce a design, under the "place an order" meaning. Tonywalton ^Talk 22:23, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

"In 1933 (or whatever) Peter Schunck commissioned Frits Peutz with the design of the Glaspaleis" seems perfectly correct to me. The above mentioned "... contracted ..." seems equally acceptable. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 22:25, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. "Ordered the building" would look odd; as Dirk says, more like ordering a pizza. Tonywalton ^Talk 22:29, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Schunck commissioned Peutz to design ... —Tamfang (talk) 01:40, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Initials at the end of names

There is a practice of putting initials attached to a name at the end of a name rather than at the beginning. In some parts of India this is the common practice as can be seen here [13] I suppose these initials in such contexts are still called by that name. My questions are: 1. Is such a way of writing names prevalent in other parts of the world? 2. Is there a punctuation guide available in naming of this sort? Do you put a full stop at end of the name and before the initials? To show that the name and initials are separate units, is there the need of that dot or would a mere space would do? --Drumstickmajor (talk) 19:54, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

This reverse order is common in lists of names as people usually search by surname. The conventional punctuation is:

Obama, Barack H.

Roosevelt, F. D.

I tried checking this in WP:MOS but couldn't find an example for Wikipedia use. I am sure there is one. // BL \\ (talk) 20:28, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people)#Middle names and abbreviated names

and Wikipedia talk:Lists#Alphabetization and collation. -- Wavelength (talk) 22:03, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

In the outside world, I've never seen a surname end with a full stop in any circumstances, except where it's the last word in a sentence. -- JackofOz (talk) 00:02, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

5 vowels for operatic Italian?

I've seen some IPA transcriptions for Italian opera that use [ɛ(:)] and [ɔ(:)] for all instances of <e> and <o>, and I've heard some performances that seem consistent with this, using uniformly open values for the two vowels. Is this standard or common for opera? Does it have any other uses? (It certainly bears a certain attraction for me, a lazy aspiring polyglot, who's found the open-close contrasts one of the few annoying things about the language.) --Lazar Taxon (talk) 23:49, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

From my Google search for "italian opera open closed vowels", the first result is

http://italianoperadiction.com/english/librettoinfo.asp?emne=tryksvageeo. -- Wavelength (talk) 01:32, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

It may have something to do with the relative difficulty of singing certain vowels at the highest pitches. —Tamfang (talk) 01:34, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Italian vowels seem easier for Anglophones than English vowels for Italophones. [14] -- Wavelength (talk) 05:05, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

See Dizionario d'ortografia e di pronunzia. -- Wavelength (talk) 05:40, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

April 27

We want wikipedia pages in Bengali

hi, I know you have wikipedia pages in about 65 languages. I want to know under which conditions or requirements you will make wikipedia pages in Bengali? For your information, more than 180000000 people speaks Bengali, as their first language.

Thanks.