Welcome to the language section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

Select a section:

WP:RD/L

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

How can I get my question answered?

Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
Note:
- We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
- We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
- We don't do your homework for you, though we'll help you past the stuck point.
- We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.

May 14

Praise of self-subsisting

What would the expression "the praise of self-subsisting" mean?--LordGorval (talk) 12:20, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could you give the context? For example, it could mean that self-subsisting is itself a type of praise, or it could mean that something or someone elsewhere in the sentence is praising self-subsisting. Or is it that you want to know the meaning of self-subsistence? Again, the exact meaning will depend on the context. For example, it is often used to mean Self-sufficiency. 86.180.48.37 (talk) 13:29, 14 M--LordGorval (talk) 20:56, 14 May 2010 (UTC)ay 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In Saint Matthew it says "It was first published in Judea in Hebrew for Hebrew Christians." Looking up "Judea" under List of Biblical names it has the meaning of " the praise of Jehovah" and "Jehovah" has a meaning of "self-subsisting". I just put the two together to get "the praise of self-subsisting" assuming it has another meaning other than the territory.--LordGorval (talk) 13:50, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The word Judea in that sentence just means the territory. In the context of the list, it just means "the praise of Jehovah", as in "the praise of God". I don't see any reference in the list to support the claim that the name Jehovah (or however the tetragrammaton should be represented) means 'self-subsisting', nor is it mentioned in either of the articles I've linked. In fact, our article on Judea says it means "praised, celebrated": I wouldn't trust anything on that poorly sourced list. It says that "most" of the names are sourced from a 19th century book, but doesn't mark which ones, meaning we can't tell which names are completely unsourced. On top of that, it says that a possible meaning has been given, even when "[m]eanings of the names are not (...) definite or clear". Again, these dubious meanings are not marked in any way.

Even if Jehovah is derived from words meaning self-subsisting, that would just mean that God had been given a name that meant he was self-subsisting: that is, he exists entirely independently of everything else. Like when he tells Moses I AM THAT I AM. That's doesn't mean you should substitute the derivation of the name.

To make this clearer:

The name Lucy means light, but you can't subsitute that meaning into the sentence "Lucy entered the room with a bag over her shoulder.". Changing that to "Light entered the room with a bag over her shoulder." doesn't make sense.

In the same way, you can't just substitute the proposed 'meaning' of the name Jehovah where it is used in phrases and sentences: it won't make any sense. 86.177.125.182 (talk) 14:46, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First off, the form "Jehovah"[sic] never existed in Hebrew, and has absolutely no meaning whatsoever in Hebrew. However, the Tetragrammaton YHWH (of which "Jehovah"[sic] is an incorrect derivation) clearly has some connection with the Hebrew consonantal verb root H-W-Y and/or H-Y-Y, which has a basic meaning of "to be" (sometimes "to become"). This has led to speculation that YHWH might possibly have meant something like "He who causes to be", but that's merely speculation. The Bible itself seems to connect the tetragrammaton with the phrase "I am who I am" (Hebrew Ehyeh asher ehyeh) in the famous passage Exodus 4:14. It would really be best to avoid assuming that any English phrase is an exact "translation" of the tetragrammaton. As for the name Judah (Hebrew Yehudah), it's quite unlikely that this contains any form of YHWH at all... AnonMoos (talk) 18:11, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am what I am, I am my own special creation... DuncanHill (talk) 20:32, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Mr. DuncanHill. Very good explanation.--LordGorval (talk) 20:56, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Use of the word "Allah"

Allah is, as I have understood it, the arabic name of the almighty God in islam, christianity and judaism. But is the word Allah also used for the word "god" in general? take for example this sentence: "Odin is considered the chief god in Norse mythology". Would this sentence, if translated into arabic, use the word allah for "god"? /Marxmax (talk) 12:55, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Look at the link to be certain, but as I recall, the name "Allah" essentially means "the only God". So if they even gave any thought to Norse mythology, they would likely come up with a different word. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:09, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article called God is also interesting, and leads to other articles on the subject. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:15, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As the article Allah says: The term Allāh is derived from a contraction of the Arabic definite article al- "the" and ʼilāh "deity, god" to al-lāh meaning "the [sole] deity, God". 86.180.48.37 (talk) 13:23, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)The Wiktionary entry god, in which the lower-case is crucial, gives the Arabic translation as إله ilah, which I assume is a different word from the same root as Allah. ar:إله links to our article deity, also. +An gr 13:24, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I had wondered if the ilah part was etymologically connected with the Hebrew elohim, and apparently it is. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:31, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Arabic wikipedia describes Odin as "أودين كبير الآلهة في الميثولوجيا النوردية", "Odin is the greatest of gods in Nordic mythology". آلهة is the determined plural of إله. Thor is labelled as إله as well. Do note that Arabic Christians refer to God as Allah, see pic on the right. --Soman (talk) 15:03, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For those of us who can't read Arabic, what word are they using for "gods"? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:48, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Ilaha", plural of "ilah", as Soman said (well, with the Arabic). Incidentally, since it hasn't been mentioned, this is also the word for "god" in the shahada, which has both the general "god" and the specific "God" ("la ilaha illa Allah"). Adam Bishop (talk) 04:10, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So in some sense it's understood (as with English) that you have "gods" and you have "THE God". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 08:26, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, grammatically at least. Theologically there is only one God, although other religions are understood to have more than one (including Christianity sometimes). I guess the shahada really refers to the numerous pre-Islamic gods, especially the ones worshipped in Mecca. Adam Bishop (talk) 12:57, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually the plural of إله ʾilāh reads as آلهة ʾāliha. The Shahāda has the inflected form ʾilāha, which is a singular accusative (-a being the case ending). --BishkekRocks (talk) 13:06, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ack, that's right, oops. Adam Bishop (talk) 21:03, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Word for "Small Talk"

There is a single word in the English language that describes talk that doesn't convey much information, but, rather, merely has the purpose of being social, or polite. E.g. a quick conversation about the weather. I can't remember the term, and it's driving me nuts. Thanks.

Alfonse Stompanato (talk) 19:02, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps "pleasantries"? Less likely: "filler"? Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 19:11, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at synonyms for small talk, which to me fits the description if not the one-word limit. Suggestions: banter, blather, chatter, chitchat, gab. I don't recall ever hearing someone say "persiflage" with a straight face. --- OtherDave (talk) 19:26, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks—but these aren't it! I remember it was one of those words that was difficult to say with a straight face—and I think it did begin with a "p"—but it wasn't "persiflage." Alfonse Stompanato (talk) 16:36, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

prate?, prattle?, palaver? --NorwegianBlue^talk 18:42, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I got it! It came to me spontaneously in the car. Phatic. Thanks for the help though! Alfonse Stompanato (talk) 03:25, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note that phatic is an adjective, whereas small talk, chit-chat, persiflage etc are all nouns. One might deduce that phat is the noun synonymous with "small talk", but it is not. Mitch Ames (talk) 10:20, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Wie Hunde bellen" - German Help?

I'm struggling to understand the last part of this passage here, in particular the last line "Die wie Hunde bellen". To me this means "they bark like the dogs" - is it some kind of idiom?

"Um die Kassen wieder zu füllen, greifen sie auch zu ungewöhnlichen Maßnahmen: von der "Sex-Steuer" bis hin zu städtischen Mitarbeitern, die wie Hunde bellen. " Source: Deutsche Welle

I've understood "städtischen Mitarbeitern" to mean civil employee, or civil servant. Can anyone explain that last bit to me in a different way? Thank you very much for your help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.111.10.52 (talk) 20:06, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is not an idiom. Officials in Köln have begun to go around and collect registering fees from people who have not registered their dogs. If they suspect you have an unregistered dog they will ring your doorbell several times. If the dog does not respond the official will literally begin to bark like a dog. In post cases the dog will respond, therefore forcing the owner to pay up. Xenon54 (talk) 20:13, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, wow! I hadn't thought it would have a literal meaning, thanks for explaining it to me. The passage is a bit clearer now :) --88.111.10.52 (talk) 20:36, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just one small note on grammar: In your example, the word "die" is a relative pronoun. "... die wie Hunde bellen" means "who bark like dogs". If you wanted to say "they bark like dogs", using "die" for "they", the correct word order would be "die bellen wie Hunde". ---Sluzzelin talk 21:39, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

However, I've noticed that relative clauses often use the main-clause word order in German. One example I remember is anti-fur billboards from several years ago that said Es gibt Ziegen, die sind tatsächlich blöd ("There are goats that really are stupid", referring to women who wear fur). If I had written that in my university German class, I would have been marked down and the sentence corrected to Es gibt Ziegen, die tatsächlich blöd sind. But real live native speakers get to do whatever they want, including using this "incorrect" word order. +An gr 22:29, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

<squeeze>That particular word order has to do with emphasis. There are goats that are really stupid., pointing out the "in reality" part, as opposed to the figuratively "stupid goat", a common insult similar to "bitch", though less offensive. -- 78.43.60.58 (talk) 12:24, 16 May 2010 (UTC)</squeeze>[reply]

Lol, leave it to you to catch these little annoyances, Angr. For some weird reason, I have no problem with the Ziegen example, but "bis hin zu städtischen Mitarbeitern, die bellen wie Hunde" just sounds wrong as a relative clause. Maybe it has something to do with the "es gibt". Will think about this some more when I am not editing under the influence. ---Sluzzelin talk 22:42, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there are definitely times when non-native learners know more (at least at the conscious level) than native speakers. And I agree with you about the städtische Mitarbeiter sentence; my non-native intuition also says the main-clause order wouldn't work there, but I'm not sure why. Maybe because the Ziegen sentence is in a more informal register than the städtische Mitarbeiter sentence? Or maybe it's something syntactic/pragmatic. I dunno. +An gr 22:49, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Heh. I think these are two distinct phenomena, in fact. Real main clause order in relatives, acccording to my intuition, is very common for presentational contexts (things like "there are X that...", "I have an X that...", "I once knew an X that..." – about the same types of contexts where some English varieties would be most likely to allow zero relatives.) The "bellen wie Hunde" example would still work for me, but for a different reason: I can parse it as regular verb-final relative clause order combined with extraposition of the PP to the right. But I wouldn't expect that in the formal written register. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:37, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just on a side note, hounds can bell in English. Is this cognate with the German bellen? DuncanHill (talk) 23:01, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- They can? My dictionary indicates that only stags or bucks can bell (i.e. make a particular cry at rutting time), and indicates that that verb is related to bellow. My German etymological dictionary says that bellen and bell (in the animal sense) are indeed related. +Angr 23:14, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Indeed they do - see [1] for a few examples. In a minute I'll get off my arse and look it up in my own distionaries! DuncanHill (talk) 23:20, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - OED has it has to roar or bellow, and if you've ever heard the hounds in full voice "bellowing" meets the sense. DuncanHill (talk) 00:18, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Belling is the only 'barking' that beagles can do. It is halfway between a bark and a howl, a sort of extended bark without, as it were, closing the mouth. Caesar's Daddy (talk) 10:46, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What is the right situation to use these

What are the differences between: border conflict, border skirmish, and border clash. Qajar (talk) 20:32, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To me, it's a matter of nuance (meaning, others will have other opinions). I would say a skirmish is brief and usually with few if any casualties. A single day, perhaps, or a few consecutive days. A clash to me implies larger numbers of troops and possibly heavier weapons--so, more intensity, and possibly over a longer period of time (weeks instead of days). A conflict to me implies hostilities that endure over a longer months instead of weeks). There may be periods of calm, but the tension doesn't drop that much. Take the relationship between India and Pakistan as an example. We have Indo-Pakistani wars and conflicts, which in turn refers to the Siachen Conflict. The latter article says the conflict began in 1984, with a ceasefire in 2003.

In ordinary usage, when speaking of military engagements, skirmish and clash are close to one another; conflict implies something larger than the other terms.

--- OtherDave (talk) 22:08, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I essentially agree with OtherDave, though I might also use "border conflict" in the sense of a non-militaristic border dispute. That is, the "conflict" may be taking place between politicians rather than soldiers. I wouldn't use "skirmish" or "clash" in that sense. Matt Deres (talk) 22:12, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

translate

whats going on in this vid http://www.nothingtoxic.com/media/1273711451/Indian_Cop_Punches_The_Spit_Out_Of_Woman —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tom12350 (talk • contribs) 23:33, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't speak Portuguese, but I do speak enough Spanish to understand some of it. It's something like "A 26-year-old woman who belongs to a lower caste of Indian society was accused of killing her husband. During her interrogation...official... beats the woman...again. The policeman was suspended." 82.124.231.13 (talk) 02:22, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

May 15

ne'er cast a clout 'fore May is out

I'd like to know where this expression came from and have I spelt 'clout' correctly. I think clout means something like a singlet or vest which is not to be taken off the body until the May bush is out in the northern hemisphere> Can anyone give me an explanation? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.213.166.163 (talk) 06:29, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For 'clout' read winter clothing and the argument is always whether the expression means the end of the month of May or the flowering of the Hawthorn (or May) bush, apparently there are similar phrases in both French and Spanish[2]. Mikenorton (talk) 08:12, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's very interesting. Just from the phrase (which I hadn't heard before), I would have assumed the meaning was not to start planting until May. That is, "There's no sense digging out clouts of earth (for a garden) before May is over because late frosts will kill the plants." Matt Deres (talk) 14:04, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See also Clootie, for a Scots version. Mikenorton (talk) 14:21, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I always thought a clootie was a kind of dumpling. DuncanHill (talk) 15:47, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And so it is, a dumpling cooked wrapped in a cloth (or cloot). Mikenorton (talk) 23:52, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Further to Mikenorton's correct explanation, it's sometimes rendered as ". . . the may . . ." when the flowering tree (named of course for the month in which it flowers) is intended, which I think is more likely the original version. Note however that English May Day celebrations used to be referred to as "bringing in the May", so that "the May is out" could be a reference to those celebrations having been concluded in early May. Depending on how old it is (I suspect very old), the change from the Julian to the Gregorian calendar may have either restored or diminished the saw's accuracy, as may future global warming effects (which currently in the UK seem to be extending the duration of cold weather further into the year.) 87.81.230.195 (talk) 15:44, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For anyone wondering, the may-flowers came out this week in southern England and it's been bloody freezing (frost at night, 12 degrees Celsius daytime max) so the proverb is right. I think the May Day thing with may-flowers must have been before the change in calenders. It warmed up a bit today, so I threw caution to the wind and cast a few clouts. Alansplodge (talk) 23:31, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the first May-blossom I saw this year was last Saturday, 8th May. That was just north of Devil's Dyke in Sussex. DuncanHill (talk) 23:34, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quoting speech of a book/movie character

When you quote something a character in a movie or a book says, what is the convention and style for the attribution? Do you attribute the quote to the character or the author? Also, in a movies, if one character is speaking, the camera cuts away in the middle of it and another character speaks, and the camera cuts back to the first character, who continues what he/she was saying, do you insert an ellipsis to mark the interruption in the middle of the quoted speech? If a story is released both as a movie and as a published script, and the lines differ in the two version, do people usually quote the movie version or the script version? --173.49.14.197 (talk) 15:19, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just my opinion, but here goes. Attribution would depend on the context; if you were describing the plot, I would credit it to the character, but if you were discussing the writing, I'd choose the author. I'd also go with the movie version unless you were specifically talking about the script. Finally, an ellipsis makes sense. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:44, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Your comment about context makes sense. It seems to me that attributing to the author is appropriate only when a quote is treated as a sample of the author's writing. The dialogs in a movie or book are written for the characters involved, and reflect their viewpoints and moralities, which are generally not those of the author; it would seem inappropriate to attribute them to author. --173.49.14.197 (talk) 14:42, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes it's impossible to know where the words originated from - the author, the translator(s) or the screenwriter(s) - without reading the original book, any relevant translations, and the screenplay. For example, one of my favourite quotes is:

You make me sick with your heroics! There's a stench of death about you. You carry it in your pack like the plague. Explosives and L-pills - they go well together, don't they? And with you it's just one thing or the other: destroy a bridge or destroy yourself. This is just a game, this war! You and Colonel Nicholson, you're two of a kind, crazy with courage. For what? How to die like a gentleman ... how to die by the rules - when the only important thing is how to live like a human being

from The Bridge on the River Kwai, spoken by Commander Shears, the character played by William Holden. I'd love to know whether these words appeared in Pierre Boulle's original book (English title The Bridge over the River Kwai - in which case do we attribute them to Boulle or to whoever the English translator was?), or whether they were created by the screenwriters, Michael Wilson and Carl Foreman, for the movie. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 21:21, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell from Google Books, it's not in the English translation of the book. I searched on "heroics", "stench", "human being", and "L-pills"; none of the hits resembled this passage. --Anonymous, 21:58 UTC, May 15, 2010.

Thank you. So, it's down to the screenwriters, eh. Very good. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 07:33, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar

Is there a flaw in any of the sentences below: 1) I am bad at Math. 2) I am bad in Math. 3) I am yet to receive the card. 4) I have yet to receive the card.

59.182.16.75 (talk) 18:36, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(1) and (2) are fine, bu there is a subtle distinction. (1) implies that you are bad at math in general, while (2) may imply that you are bad in a math class. (3) is just wrong; you can't form the compound past like that in Modern English. (4) is fine. 76.229.218.70 (talk) 18:42, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(3) is fine, indeed "I am yet to receive" is almost a stock phrase. DuncanHill (talk) 20:42, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In what language? Everard Proudfoot (talk) 04:05, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

English. It sounds unusual, but take the yet out and it becomes clear. To be to + verb is a sort of future tense formation. -- the Great Gavini 12:56, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you're talking about your mathematical ability in general, you wouldn't capitalise "math". But if you were referring to a particular class you're attending (say, Mathematics 202, informally known as "Math"), then you might have "Math". It obviously makes no difference either way in speaking, but in writing you could give the wrong impression by using the capital M where it's not required, or vice-versa. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 20:39, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I have some more:

1) I haven't received the card yet. 2) I haven't yet received the card.

Thats all for today :P 59.182.16.75 (talk) 20:08, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think both of them are OK, but the second one maybe is a little more formal (I am not sure though). At least here in Britain I think it is. Chevymontecarlo. 20:15, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, one might say (informally) "I haven't received the card yet", but one might write (or say) (formally) "I have not yet received the card". (3) above would be correct with commas if you meant "I am, nevertheless, to receive the card", but it sounds odd (perhaps stilted, rather than strictly wrong) in the sense you meant. Dbfirs 20:23, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, 'I am yet to receive the card' works just fine, and carries the intended meaning. 'Yet' doesn't mean 'nevertheless' in this context; it's a preposition of time, as in 'not yet'. AlexTiefling (talk) 21:49, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okies! Thank you all! BTW, with regards to the original post viz. (1) and (2), can I conclude that one is usually bad at something than bad in something. Like, "John is bad at writing poems" rather than "John is bad in writing poems".

Yes, similarly, one is good at something (though one exception is ".... in bed") Dbfirs 20:41, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Because "good in bed" is a euphemism for "good at lovemaking", which is usually done "in bed" rather than "at bed", although anything's possible. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:33, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's always the spacious back seat

Of our roommate`s beat up Chevrolet. PhGustaf (talk) 23:08, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, yes, the time-honored Chevy chase. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:17, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

MY CHEVY IS BAD IN ALL WAYS POSSIBLE! Say what? Say what? Hehe 59.182.47.98 (talk) 07:48, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I needs some words

Wiktionary is not cooperating with my computer for some reason! If you guys don't mind, I would like a list of words/terms related to these words. Im writing a story, you see.

Universe (besides mandala, astral plane, and the cosmos)

The Earth (besides Terra and the ground)

Celestial things in general (besides galaxies)

Macabre things in general (besides doom, dread, nightmares, and death)

Again, I appreciate any help submitted. Thanks 64.75.158.195 (talk) 23:45, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:Wikisaurus. -- Wavelength (talk) 23:55, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since Wiktionary isn't working for the OP, he or she may want to try Roget's Thesaurus. Just enter universe or whatever into the "Search full text" box. (For some reason, macabre doesn't appear in the work, but I got some useful results by entering gruesome, horror, and such.) Deor (talk) 03:19, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the website, but Roget's Thesaurus is a little... disorganized and slow on my system. I usually perfer individual people giving me words for some reason. Also, i need words that are also related to the original by definition, not just synonyms (like how "mandala" is a symbol of the universe)

Oh, and three more words: Insanity (besides psychopathy and dementia), heavenly places (besides paradise and utopia), and dystopia. Thanks! 64.75.158.195 (talk) 04:35, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Universe – heavens, the last frontier, outer space Earth – home world, third planet Celestial things in general – solar system, spiral arm DOR (HK) (talk) 08:51, 17 May 2010 (UTC) Earth - Third rock from the sun —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.212.189.187 (talk) 13:44, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some words which refer to the Earth begin with "geo" (geography, geology, ...). -- Irene1949 (talk) 19:05, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

May 16

Hebe Camargo

What is the translation of the name "Hebe Camargo" for the Uyghurche language? --Gustavo1997 (talk) 02:16, 16 May 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.76.192.18 (talk) [reply]

This was added to WT:RD but was moved here Nil Einne (talk) 11:58, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology of Romanian "dragostea"

What is the etymology of the Romanian word for "love", "dragostea". It sounds neither Romance, nor Slavic. There is some resemblance to Finnish "rakastaa". Is that pure coincidence? 82.103.139.67 (talk) 18:51, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wiktionary says that it comes from Slavonic dragostĩ. Compare Croatian/Slovene drag, Czech/Slovak drahý, Russian dorogój, Polish drogi (all means dear). Hungarian (another non-slavic language) word drága (dear) has also the same etymology. The Finnish counterpart seems unrelated: From Proto-Finno-Ugric. Compare Hungarian rokon, or alternatively a borrowing from Proto-Germanic *frakaz.--151.51.20.38 (talk) 19:12, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

dragostea is the definite form (the enclitic definite article "a" is postfixed), the actual noun is dragoste, which doesn't sound that similar to rakastaa anymore. You can also translate love with iubire, another borrowing from Slavic (ljubiti). Rimush (talk) 19:36, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Finnish word sounds closer once you know that they don't allow consonant clusters, and their standard procedure when adopting a word from a foreign language is to keep only the last of the consonants in the cluster. I'm a bit hazy on the details (what exactly is forbidden, and where), but it seems like this would mean that "dr" would turn into "r". (The example I (think I) remember of this is "strand" (the English word, meaning beach) turns into "ranta".) Ctourneur (talk) 23:27, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

May 17

L'Internationale in Chinese

Resolved

– Intelligentsium 20:53, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, everyone. This is a question I have been meaning to ask for a while now, but have never got around to. In The Internationale in Chinese, third stanza, last line, is "鲜红的太阳照遍全球" an intentional reference to Mao Zedong? Thanks, Intelligentsium 00:05, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As your citation says, the translation was in 1923. Mao Zedong wasn't that important at the time. DOR (HK) (talk) 08:53, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, of course! I suppose that's what I get for not reading through the article carefully enough. {{resolved}}, then. Intelligentsium 20:53, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

'Meaning' of Sushi

Does the word for a Japanese type of food, "Sushi", (寿司, 鮨, or 鮓?), have a transleatable meaning in English? --220.101.28.25 (talk) 10:50, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure: sushi, which is also an English word nowadays. According to our article Sushi#History, the word originally meant "it's sour" in Japanese. +An gr 11:12, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is a lexicalized form of the adjective 酸し (sushi) "the taste of vinegar (su), sour", which is 酸い (sui) in modern Japanese. As with all verbs as well, the conclusive (終止形) and was overtaken by the attributive (連体形). Hence, susi (conclusive) > suki (attributive). Finally, the medial -k- drops out resulting in sui. This is a regular formation seen in all regular adjectives such as atsushi / atsui, samushi / samui, ooshi > ooi, etc etc. The kanji are just ateji. 180.11.43.110 (talk) 11:35, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So, bascially "the taste of vinegar (su), sour", is correct? FYI This orginates from an edit to sushi by a new account. (I've been 'patrolling' wp:User creation log last day or 2.) Among other changes, they said it meant "balance". AGF, I just wanted to check that it wasn't 'kosher'. Sad to see so many first edits by new accounts are "unconstructive". ~~Many thanks.~~ Arigato Gozaimasu. --220.101.28.25 (talk) 12:41, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, 'arigatou gozaimashita' would be better here, because the problem has been solved. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 15:55, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A guy running a sushi bar once told me it meant "health". That might have been sales hype. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:20, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speed of writing in different systems

I was wondering if anyone has researched the speed of writing in different scripts and systems. A friend of mine told me that there is no need to learn shorthand if you write in Urdu as it is much quicker than writing in English, and it certainly looks quick with its simple connected lines, and of course omission of consonant markers when taking notes. I think that this would apply to all languages written in the Arabic script. This got me thinking, are languages that use ideographs faster or slower to write, you would have fewer graphemes but they are more complex. Indic scripts like devanagari look as though they would be the slowest to write, with no cursive form, but on the other hand some words become very compact with combining forms. Has anyone looked into how fast proficient people can write in different systems? -- Q Chris (talk) 11:13, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I s'll search no more, but ask here instead.

In Aaron's Rod, the author puts the phrase "I s'll" (presumably equivalent to "I shall") in the protagonist's mouth, except when he is speaking to more upper class people. Examples: "I s'll never break my heart." or "I s'll be alright in the morning." I guess this represents a dialect of the Midlands, Derbyshire perhaps, spoken in the 1920s. Our article on East Midlands English mentions examples such as "We sh'll ay to do it ussens." (We shall have to do it ourselves), but uses "sh'll" instead of "s'll". How should "s'll" be pronounced in the sentences I quoted? Using a voiceless postalveolar fricative, an alveolar fricative, or something else? Thanks in advance. ---Sluzzelin talk 11:30, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know those terms, but when I've heard similar expressions used colloquially in the USA, the "s" is like a "z". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:46, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Off the top of my head, I can say that this may be still used in the West Country, and as far as I can tell, the 's' is pronounced as a 'z', as per BB's answer above (in the West Country 's' is very often pronounced as a 'z' anyway, not just here). Hope this helps. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 20:01, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

While I agree about the hard s in West Country speech (though in Bristle s tends to be soft), I'm not so sure about the construction "I s'll", which doesn't sound like any dialect I've heard. DuncanHill (talk) 11:53, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Having paid quite a bit of attention lately to various English dialects spoken on the British Isles, also thanks to some answers I received here a while ago, I didn't expect this pronunciation, and do not recall having consciously heard it. Thanks, Bugs & KägeTorä. ---Sluzzelin talk 10:43, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Polish word "westchnąć"

Google says "westchnąć" is Polish for "sigh". Is that correct? How do you pronounce it? I tried to read a few pronunciation guides, but they are long and hard to understand themselves. 24.3.225.136 (talk) 16:16, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, sigh (as a verb, not a noun) is correct. It's pronounced [ˈvɛstxnɔɲt͡ɕ] (approximately "vestkhnonch").—Emil J. 16:36, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Correct. The verb (infinitive, "to sigh") is westchnąć; the noun ("a sigh") is westchnienie. The Venetian Bridge of Sighs, for example, is known as Most Westchnień in Polish. Approximate pronunciation would be, as Emil wrote, VEST-khnonch, where "kh" is the same as "ch" in Scottish "loch". Not easy, I know; you may omit the T in a relaxed pronunciation. — Kpalion^(talk) 09:15, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and if you're just looking for the Polish sighing onomatopoeia, that would be simply ech or ach. — Kpalion^(talk) 09:18, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chicken Curry/Curry Chicken, Curried Chicken?

I was just curious to one of postings having written it's "chicken curry"? (Title of the search is Curry Chicken, yet it starts off chicken curry) Isn't it usually the verb before the noun? I know curried chicken is correct but why do people call it barbecue chicken, I know the proper pronunciation is barbecued chicken! Does the spice usually come before the noun it's on? Why is it in this case it's reversed? I know curry is used as a verb when used with an object so wouldn't the object be the chicken? Please keep me informed about your take on this or any opinions or clarifications you maybe have!

Thanking you in advance, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.240.99.212 (talk) 18:16, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think there's a difference between Chicken Curry and Curried Chicken. Chicken Curry is an honest-to-goodness curry that just happens to use chicken as its main meat ingredient. Curried Chicken is a way of preparing chicken that just happens to use curry as its main flavouring. Depending on the origin of the recipe, the "curry" in Curried Chicken may be an authentic combination of ingredients, or just some powder sprinkled from a jar or packet. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 21:42, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

While English may normally work that way, part of me feels that chicken curry and curried chicken are the same thing. See also: chicken vindaloo. Paul Davidson (talk) 01:55, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Curry is a sauce. "Chicken curry" is a sauce with pieces of chicken in it, "curried chicken" is a chicken with sauce (or, in fact, some other method of spicing) on it. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:00, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

May 18

Asian names

Why do Asians put the family name first? --70.134.48.174 (talk) 00:10, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(I believe you mean "East Asian names"—you are referring to names in countries that have been part of the Sinosphere, that is to say China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, etc. Places such as India and Russia are also in Asia, but their names have the given name first.)

As for your question of why they have the family name first...why not? It's no more weird or arbitrary than putting the family name second. For more information you can see Personal name#Name order, as well as Chinese name and similar articles. rʨanaɢ (talk) 00:21, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's not confined to "Asian" names. See for instance the articles on the Hungarians Béla Lugosi or Leó_Szilárd, at the top of which are mentions of name order, together with an interesting link to this. Then of course there's Neville Neville, who avoids the question entirely. Tonywalton ^Talk 08:30, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of Romanians will tell you that Hungarians are Asian too :P I'm not one of them :D Rimush (talk) 09:52, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps related or not, dates and addresses in Chinese, Japanese, and Korean tend to go in the order of 'larger unit first/smaller unit last'. Names also follow the same rule. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 21:55, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When sorted, we tend to list last name first ("Smith, John") or year-month-day as noted above, so in a sense the Asian system is superior. I would imagine the European approach came about because the concept of a surname is relative recent, and was tacked on ("Leif the Lucky" vs. "Leif Ericsson", i.e. "Leif, Eric's son"). ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:31, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there's the thought that those cultures which put the surname first may put more value on family than on individuality. Of course, this assumes that the more important thing is always listed first, and this isn't always the case. StuRat (talk) 16:36, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some Asians have only one name (see Indonesian names). Zoonoses (talk) 00:07, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For Japan, the history of names may provide a hint. Historically, names were of the form "A no B", where A is a family or clan name, B is a given name, and no is the genitive case particle. For example, Minamoto no Yoshitsune is "Yoshitsune of the Minamoto [family, clan]". This medial no eventually disappeared, but the order did not change.

There has been a long debate on whether the order of Japanese names should be switched in non-Japanese contexts. At present, if a foreigner immigrates to Japan, their name will officially be recorded in surname, given name [middle name] order. I am of the opinion that it is language matter, not one of culture, though. But it is difficult to separate Japanese language and Japan the culture. 114.167.196.41 (talk) 04:55, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

May 19

Japanese: Why they tell Cohii with H (coffee) when they got F?189.233.31.11 (talk) 00:26, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I've been wondering this for a while now. Japanese transliterated Coffee as Cohii, and not Cofii.

The Japanese probably got the word from Arabic, which pronounces the word with an 'h' sound. The English got the word through Turkish, which pronounces it with a 'v,' which became an 'f.' Wrad (talk) 00:30, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Because Japanese does not have [fi]. The [f] in Japanese is only the form /h/ takes before /u/. So it could be [kofui], but not *kofii. In fact, the only way to even write "kofii" as a foreign pronunciation would look a lot like "kofui".

[edit conflict] (I doubt they got it from Arabic. Probably from Dutch koffie.) — kwami (talk) 00:32, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Arabs were trading in the far east centuries before the Europeans. Why wouldn't the word come from Arabic? Coffee is an Arab drink. Arabs invented it. Wrad (talk) 00:51, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They never had any direct contact. If anything, they could have gotten it from Chinese, who could have gotten it from Arabic, but even then Chinese is more likely to have borrowed something indirectly through Persian or a Turkic or Indian language. And as mentioned, words like that usually came to Japanese from Dutch (or Portuguese). Adam Bishop (talk) 02:16, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well... most Japanese don't even really pronounce ふ /hu/ with an [f], but instead a [ɸ]. So you could say Japanese doesn't really have an F in the first place, so cohii is just as good (especially when /hi/ ひ is often pronounced [çi] with a fricative anyway). -Andrew c ^[talk] 01:23, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In Japanese, there is a consonant that has several contextual variants. One is like English h and another is like English f. The former appears most of the time while the latter appears before the /u/ sound (close to the vowel English boot or cook). This loanword (which is most likely to come from English since many words pronounce the final vowel with an e like sound [as in pet] rather than an ee like sound [as in beet], which Japanese romanization transcribes as ii) implies that Japanese speakers hear an f before ee and, trying to fit it into their native phonology, classify it as this particular sound even though the nearest phonetic equivalent doesn't appear in that context. In other words. You say /ˈkɔfiː/ and Japanese speakers are likely to hear /kohii/. — Æµ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi]} 04:19, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just to add, a theoretical or original *fi or *fei would become 'hi' in Japanese. Note Chinese　非 'fei' - in Japanese this is 'hi'. I believe the Japanese word 'ko-hii' came from Dutch, but even if it had come from Chinese (as mentioned above), the 'f' in the Chinese word for 'coffee' - 咖啡 'kafei' - would still be pronounced 'h' (actually, Japanese uses these two kanji for 'coffee', but still pronounces it with the unrelated pronunciation 'ko-hii'). --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 14:30, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The word was borrowed from Dutch koffie and is found quite frequently in Rangaku books. Usually Rangaku words were imported only from their spelling and not by pronunciation.

Historically, until the 18th century, は, ひ, ふ, へ, ほ was [ɸa, ɸi, ɸu, ɸe, ɸo]. That is why the Portuguese romanized this sound as f in Vocabvlario da Lingoa de Iapam, Arte da Lingoa de Iapam and other texts of the time. Gradually this weakened to [h] and [ç]; [ɸ] only remains before -u. But now the phoneme is recognized as /h/ with [ɸu] merely being an allophone. Native speakers will often unconsciously write it as "hu".

It is only recently that Japanese has reintroduced [ɸ] in foreign loanwords. This may be written as ファ [ɸa], フィ [ɸi], フェ [ɸe], フォ [fɸ]. As such, it is still quite rare and has not been fully integrated into the language yet.

The kanji 珈琲 is ateji and did not become popular until the early 1900s.

By the way, early coffee shops began around 1886 (洗愁亭 in Nihombashi). Around the 1910, coffee shops were also called カフェー (kafee) for a time, but this is not very common anymore. 124.214.131.55 (talk) 15:50, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Estadio corazón (embriogénesis vegetal)

Do we have an article on this phenomenon? Although I can't understand Spanish, I just encountered it at es:wp (someone had also posted the article in Spanish here, so I encountered it because it was up for an A2 speedy deletion as a foreign-language-article-at-a-foreign-language-Wikipedia) and was made rather curious by the Google translation. Nyttend (talk) 02:41, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could you link the Spanish article you found? There's no article in there under the name you provided. MBelgrano (talk) 02:54, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

w:es:Estadio corazón (embriogénesis vegetal). DuncanHill (talk) 02:58, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A heart stage is mentioned in the penultimate paragraph of Plant embryogenesis#Seeds (and Heart stage is a redirect to that article). Deor (talk) 04:23, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

french

Hey guys (and girls)! I'm reading a Sherlock-Holmes style mystery novel, and there is a main detective guy who knows all this stuff. And there is a chapter where there is a woman who speaks with a heavy French accent, but the detective figures out she is not French from the start because she said "I do not speak well the English". Apparently the author thought this required no further explanation, but I am still confused. When I was in school I took latin adn spanish as my two required foreign languages, so no hablo frances! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.199.169.28 (talk) 03:04, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are you reading one of the Maigret stories? (Just curious.) "I do not speak well the English" sounds like a direct translation from French (since in proper English it is "I do not speak English well"). So, it would probably make a difference if you reading it in translation or in French...maybe the author is using bad English to mirror the original bad French? Adam Bishop (talk) 03:37, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The detective heard "I do not speak well the English" and concluded that she is NOT French ? That definitely would require the author to have explained, because that would be typical of what a poor English speaker would say if he/she is from France. --Lgriot (talk) 05:28, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But if you're reading a translation, and the book was originally written in French then we can surmise that the meaning is "she doesn't natively speak the language we are speaking right now." I had a similar confusion when I read Planet of the Apes until I figured out that it was a translation. — Æµ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi]} 07:16, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't make sense, Aeusoes1 and Adam, the woman had a heavy French accent. She can't have had a heavy French accent when she was speaking French because you don't usually say that of a native speaker and if I am wrong here, why would the detective conclude that she was not French? .So the character was speaking English, and was either French or impersonating someone French. --Lgriot (talk) 10:49, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The translator could have been attempting to give the impression of non-native speech. — Æµ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi]} 18:59, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It would help us to answer if you were to identify the book, so that we do not have to guess whether or not it is a translation, its original language, etc. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 12:07, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

IIRC, French is not one of the languages which uses the definite article for language names: "Je ne parle pas anglais", not "*je ne parle pas l'anglais". So "the" suggests that the woman's main language is something other than French. --ColinFine (talk) 18:55, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vous avez raison, ColinFine ("you're right"). For example: Parlez-vous anglais? ("Do you speak English?") Typically, l'anglais would mean "the English (man)" in ordinary conversation. You can use the article, though that's often as we do in English: to indicate the language as a language (avec le français du Canada, with Canadian French; traduit de l'anglais, "translated from the English"). --- OtherDave (talk) 22:54, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am French and I know a lot of people who say "Je ne parle pas l'anglais". That is not what I say myself most of the time, but it is definitely not wrong, and it is used. --Lgriot (talk) 03:39, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Arabic translation

I'm trying to figure out a word or phrase that apparently means "inseparable" in Arabic. It sounds sort of like "Joe's Villows" to me. (I need the transliteration. Arabic characters won't do me any good.) Thanks! Kirs10 (talk) 05:06, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure it's Arabic? Arabic doesn't have a V, and I can't imagine one word having that sequence of consonants. (For "inseparable" I would suggest "mulazim" or "multazim" but that doesn't sound anything like what you have.) Adam Bishop (talk) 05:15, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They're saying it's definitely Arabic, but I may be hearing it wrong. It's the name of a restaurant in Tel Aviv, if anybody is familiar with it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kirs10 (talk • contribs) 05:20, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently there is a restaurant in Tel Aviv called "Shalvata", is that it? That's presumably Hebrew and Google Translate says it means "accompanied by", which is another translation for the Arabic words that mean "inseparable", so maybe that's it (hopefully someone who knows Hebrew will stop by and help). Adam Bishop (talk) 05:41, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Found it. It's Joz Ve Loz, apparently not a direct translation but a saying. Thanks for working on it, Adam! Kirs10 (talk) 06:11, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Aw man, I was looking at lists of restaurants in Tel Aviv and never saw that one. Oh well! Adam Bishop (talk) 06:12, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, according to this, "Literally Joz and Loz are the Arabic names of two different kinds of nuts, but they're used colloquially to mean something like "quite a pair."" ("Luz" is an almond in Arabic but I don't know what "juz" is off the top of my head.) Adam Bishop (talk) 06:16, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What's "Ve"? The Yiddish equivalent of German "wie"? Rimush (talk) 10:59, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More likely Hebrew ו / Arabic و "and". +An gr 11:39, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And "juz" is a walnut, apparently. Adam Bishop (talk) 13:26, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

According to Wiktionary, "walnut" and "almond" in Arabic are جوز jauz and لوز lauz respectively. I'm pretty sure that /au/ becomes /o:/ in many spoken varieties of Arabic, so that would give us jōz and lōz. I don't know about juz and luz, though. +An gr 06:37, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I don't know, I was going by the Arabic spelling without diacritics, I didn't realize they were diphthongs. Adam Bishop (talk) 12:31, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Account with m-w.com

Resolved

Good day, I have a question, I hope it's allowed here: does anyone have an acccount with Merriam-Webster? I need to look up one word (journo) for my paper, I know there's a fourteen-day free trial but somehow my Visa wasn't accepted as appropriate. Thanks in advance! --Ouro (blah blah) 08:55, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not Merriam Webster, but I have access to the OED, which is usually considered the ultimate English dictionary. For journo, it says that it is a colloquial term originally from Australia and is an abbreviation of journalist. It defines it as "A journalist, esp. a newspaper journalist." Early citations are from 1967. 124.214.131.55 (talk) 13:16, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"[U]sually considered the ultimate English dictionary"? Looks like there'll be another "War of the Dictionaries" on the Language Reference Desk... ;) -- the Great Gavini 13:53, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, great, a dic-waving contest. I think it's safe to say that 124.214.131.55's is the biggest. -- Coneslayer (talk) 15:24, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! OED works great for me. Actually, as it turns out, in my paper (which, by the way, is in German about German press) I am already using two Oxford dictionaries (Concise and Advanced Learner's), and a German one by Langenscheidt. A third Oxford will not hurt. Thank you! --Ouro (blah blah) 17:38, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Minimal pairs distinguished by stress

In English, the two terms French téacher (teacher from France) and Frénch teacher (teacher of French) are distinguished only by stress. Likewise German teacher, Chinese teacher, and any other such formulation. I'm curious to find other examples of English minimal pairs distinguished only by stress. LANTZY ^TALK 16:20, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Insult" (noun) and "insult" (verb) are distinguished by stress only. --Tango (talk) 16:48, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard pattern with certain pairs of verbs and nouns taken from Latin, such as 'project' (vb. and n.), both pronounced the same except for stress. I cannot possibly give you the full list of these, as there are probably hundreds of them. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 16:57, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt there are hundreds - I think it's a quite small, unproductive group.

But it's a different case from the OP's, which I think is a general observation where an item could be attached to the phrase at two different points. In the "French teacher" case, "French" can be an adjunct or a complement (see X-bar theory) - in the latter case it is in the N', and takes the stress, whereas as an adjunct it is unstressed. Similar are the cases where a morpheme might be an adjunct or incorporated as part of a word: "black bird" vs "blackbird"; "green house" vs "greenhouse". --ColinFine (talk) 19:08, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Colin, that's more what I was interested in. I was curious about the role of stress at the phrasal level, not so much at the level of individual words. Your comment is very illuminating. LANTZY ^TALK 19:14, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Initial-stress-derived noun. -- Wavelength (talk) 21:52, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(But that's about the thing that Lantzy just said s/he was not so interested in.) rʨanaɢ (talk) 21:54, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I missed that comment by Lantzy, because I was so busy in looking for that article. -- Wavelength (talk) 22:31, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting nevertheless, Wavelength. Thanks for drawing my attention to that article. LANTZY ^TALK 00:59, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This sounds like something that depends partly on context and may be, in a sense, as limitless as the semantic field. Playing with it can get into some weird meanings, though. Try saying, "this is some good áss chocolate" (as opposed to "this is some góod-ass chocolate") and see if your friends notice. More acceptably, "that's a big-ass hole" differs from "that's a big asshole." — Æµ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi]} 05:28, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finnish has some cases where some, more or less complicatedly, inflected words end up having the exact same appearance of an unrelated compound word. One example which comes to mind is what I added to an article about the Finnish language earlier: puunaama means "wooden face" when it's a compound of puu "wood" and naama "face", but "which was cleaned [by such-and-such]" when it's an inflection of the word puunata "to clean (laboriously, like scrubbing)". In Finnish, the stress is always on the first syllable of the word, but in compound words, each of the original words gets this first-syllable stress. So the first meaning would be pronounced púunáama and the second púunaama. However, stress is not a factor in Finnish grammar, it's just the way of pronunciation people are used to. Misusing stress isn't strictly a grammatical error, it just sounds weird. This is particularly why Finns think Swedish-speakers from Sweden (rikssvenskor) sing when they talk, as opposed to Finnish-Swedish speakers, who speak Swedish normally. JIP | Talk 18:52, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Learn polish

I'm going to Wikimania in Poland in July and would like to learn a little Polish before I go. I don't require much ability, just basic pleasantries and enough to order food in restaurants, ask direction in the street, ask what something costs in a shop, that kind of stuff. I'm thinking that language teaching software is a good solution, but I have no idea which programs are any good. I found one program available for £5 that will teach you 35 languages and had some pretty good reviews - would I be right in guessing that that is too good to be true? Can anyone make any suggestions on how to learn a little bit of language quickly on a fairly low budget (I'm not going to spend £150 on Rosetta Stone, for example)? Is software the right way to go? Thanks. --Tango (talk) 16:23, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you are just planning to learn some basic stuff with no intention (yet) to take it further, why pay anything when you can get plenty of stuff for free? Try BYKI. I used this for learning basic Korean before I went to Korea, and it's pretty decent (it'll even get you up to a fully conversational level if you work at it). --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 16:53, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't aware there was good free stuff. Thanks for the recommendation, I'll take a look. --Tango (talk) 17:29, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See (and hear) http://www.bbc.co.uk/languages/other/quickfix/polish.shtml. -- Wavelength (talk) 17:42, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's interesting, I listened to every phrase I could at that site (the first eight) and found that very nearly all of them sound like they would do if I were to pronounce them in Finnish. I had expected them to sound very much different, as most Slavic languages are entirely foreign to native Finnish speakers, looking like they're almost all consonants, and what vowels they have have strange alien diacritics on them. But with only a few exceptions, I found that the correct pronunciation is close to what I would have attempted myself. I am going to Poland myself in the middle of July, but I don't intend on learning very much Polish just for that case. At least when I was in Prague, I found out that Czech people understand English very well. I only ever had to use one Czech word, dobrinem or something (I can't spell it properly), it's a basic greeting. JIP | Talk 20:09, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer not to just assume that people in a non-English speaking country speak English and to make an attempt to speak their language. I'm perfectly happy for that attempt to fail very quickly and to have to resort to English, it's more a gesture than anything. --Tango (talk) 20:31, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your impression is interesting. The first time I was exposed to Polish, I didn't recognize it as such and instead assumed it to be Russian spoken by a German with incredible fluency but putting no effort into losing his accent. 84.46.28.68 (talk) 21:27, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Damn it! I just realised that since I'm going to Poland in July anyway, I could visit Wikimania while I'm at it. But the schedule doesn't allow it, because the conference is held too early. I'm also going to visit the World Bodypainting Festival in Austria, and Wikimania and the festival are held too far apart, in terms of time. There is no way I could fit both into an InterRail pass with ten days' validity, and I don't want to spend extra money on a pass with longer validity. And furthermore, my sister (who is temporarily living in Denmark) has invited me to visit her just the previous week, and I would very much want to stay the full week while I'm there. Only the actual vacation (July 5 to July 25), visiting Kraków along the way, and attending the festival are set in stone yet, the trips between them haven't even been bought yet. But it's really the InterRail pass's validity that's the limiting factor here. JIP | Talk 19:19, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

La ciudad más bailadora

(1.) I came across this Spanish phrase: "la ciudad más bailadora del mundo." I'd be tempted to translate it as "the dancingest city in the world", but would that be accurate, both literally and in the tone it conveys? (2.) I have the impression that a lot of words ending in "-dor" can be used as an adjective, often a gerund-ish adjective, but just how universal is this process? I know that I can say "el tipo más luchador", or "el tiburón más comedor", or even "el toro más matador", but I don't think I can say "el político más senador". Can anyone enlighten me on this matter? What is the "-dor" rule of thumb, if any? LANTZY ^TALK 19:36, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The obvious way in which senador is different from the other -dor forms you mention is that senador is not derived from a Spanish verb. (Senator may or may not have derived from a Latin verb, but if it did, the verb does not occur in Spanish.) Now, my Spanish isn't good enough to say whether all -dor forms derived from Spanish verbs can be used as verbal adjectives, but certainly forms unrelated to Spanish verbs cannot be used that way. Marco polo (talk) 20:04, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be curious to know which city the OP is referring to. In any case, bailador/dora can be used to mean "dancer" (masc./fem.), although the proper term is bailarín/ina. Bailado is used metaphorically to indicate "good times", according to my Spanish dictionary. In English we use a similar metaphor from time to time. As for senador/dora, it does mean "senator", and Senado is used for "Senate", i.e. the U.S. Senate. The Latin is senatus and senator, so the Spanish comes from that usage. There is no verb, "to senate". According to my Webster's, the root is senex, which means "old", and is the source for terms such as "senior" and "senile". So the "dor" suffix derived from a noun instead of a verb is a bit unusual in Spanish, but it's them Romans' fault. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:25, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) The -dor suffix can build vebal adjectives (or nouns). In the present case, we use -ador to build from bailar bailador/bailadora. -edor and -idor appear when building verbal adjectives on verbs from the second (i.e. oler) or third (i.e. descubrir) conjugation scheme. As Marco Polo suggests, many words ending in -dor have of course another derivation. For instance, senador derives directly from the original latin senator, which in turn is an etymological derivation of senatus, word related with the latin word senex, i.e. old. [By the way, the -tor suffix has a connotation more or less similar to the Spanish counterpart. Pallida Mors 20:42, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, for example the word for "spectator" is espectador, which not only has the dor suffix but also the bonus of the e prefix, as words that would start with an s followed by a consonant typically also have an e prefix in Spanish. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:49, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, a prosthetic (or epenthetic) e. Pallida Mors 21:26, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I put that expression into Google, and the first page that came up allowed for translation, resulting in "The dancer's world city", which in the writer's opinion refers to Havana, Cuba. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:28, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"The dancer's world city" is perhaps loosely interchangeable with the original, but it's not really a translation. It doesn't even sound like idiomatic English. A much closer approximation seems possible. La ciudad más bailadora del mundo is clearly "the X-est city in the world", where X = whatever bailadora means. You could be boring and translate it as "the best city in the world for dancing." I intuitively went for the jocular "dancingest", but I'm not totally sure of the full connotation of bailadora, which may be used more loosely to refer to revelry and festive mirth in general. LANTZY ^TALK 01:18, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The city that dances the most in the world.82.124.231.13 (talk) 10:10, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As an idiomatic, nonliteral translation, how about "the dancing capital of the world"? +An gr 10:51, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What is the correct tense in this situation?

This situation came up again today. I was speaking to a friend about my father's parents. One of them is still alive, the other is dead. What tense am I supposed to use? Neither "my grandparents are" or "my grandparents were" felt right. Is there any logic, rule, or guideline about what tense should be used in this case? JIP | Talk 19:59, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Give us the whole sentence, please. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:10, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Unlike my father, who is a graduate from a technical university, neither of his parents (what?) even high school graduates." JIP | Talk 20:12, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is fine to use the past tense (were) in this case. You could have used the past tense for your father as well, even if he is alive. He is a graduate, but he also was a graduate right after he graduated. It would not be quite right to use the present tense in this case when referring to two people, one of whom is dead. Marco polo (talk) 20:16, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. My father is still very much alive, but only one of his own parents is. I just feel it's natural to use the present tense for living people and the past tense for dead people, but when speaking about a group including both, I felt using either tense was awkward. JIP | Talk 20:20, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that "were" is best in that sentence. You can get around the problem by saying "neither of his parents even graduated high school". That way you are talking about an action rather than a state of being, so it is unambiguously in the past. --Tango (talk) 20:28, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Were" works, and Tango's alternative phrasing takes away any ambiguity. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:31, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is an interesting question, but in this particular case, you could get round the problem by rephrasing it to "Unlike my father, who is a graduate from a technical university, neither of his parents even graduated from high school." --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 20:48, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I already suggested exactly that. --Tango (talk) 00:50, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

were is not appropriate in this sentence. It should be neither of his parents was even a high school graduate. Everard Proudfoot (talk) 21:00, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

True, determiner phrases headed by "neither" should take the singular, but it is such a common mistake that we probably have to accept it as part of the language now. --Tango (talk) 21:25, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Now"? You mean, like when Dr Johnson wrote "Neither search nor labour are necessary" in 1759? Fowler (3rd edition) says "There are historical precedents for the use of a plural verb in such circumstances, but what was acceptable in the 18c. and 19c. may still become questionable in the 20c." - or as I would prefer to put it, some time in the 19th century somebody made up a rule requiring the singular so that they could browbeat people with it. --ColinFine (talk) 22:05, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so it was correct in the 18th and 19th centuries, incorrect in the early-mid 20th and then correct again from then on. It's ridiculous, but I don't see any reason why it can't be true. --Tango (talk) 00:50, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to mention that 'was' should be used, but it didn't matter with my rephrasing of the sentence. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 23:03, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously, do you want him to say "Neither of his parents was even high school graduates"? I think "Neither of them were graduates" is fine. It means "Both of them were not graduates". However, if you want to follow the (hypercorrect) rule (ignored by most native speakers) that neither requires a singular verb, then it has to be "Neither of his parents was even a high school graduate." Marco polo (talk) 00:00, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't seriously think that, if you'll look at my comment above, you'll see that that was what I said. And what makes it hypercorrect, vs. just correct? Everard Proudfoot (talk) 00:28, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't really matter except in very limited contexts (mainly high school English assignments). See prescriptive vs. descriptive linguistics. rʨanaɢ (talk) 00:47, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't hypercorrect. Hypercorrect means you've tried to correct it and gone too far and ended up with something wrong. In this case, you've just ended up with something equally correct. --Tango (talk) 00:50, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Marco Polo, be careful with "both ... not" constructions. In fact, don't use them, because they're inherently ambiguous. The negation of "Both of them were graduates" could be either "Only one of them was a graduate", or "Neither of them was a graduate" (or "Neither of them were graduates" is OK too). However, "Both of them were not graduates" doesn't tell you which meaning is intended, so it will be interpreted variously and not necessarily the way you meant it. (JackofOz =) 202.142.129.66 (talk) 01:09, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Same with "all ... not": Does "All of the people in the room were not Dutch" mean that there were no Dutch people in the room, or that there were some Dutch people there but also some who weren't Dutch? Impossible to tell. "Some ... not" is easier to navigate: "Some of the people in the room were not French" pretty much means what it says - some were not French; but by implication some others were French. No such implication is available for "both ... not" or "all ... not". -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 09:22, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

'amigos llamantes'

I heard this in a song and can't understand what it's trying to say. Calling friends? The only other part of the lyrics I remember is 'diga lo que diga seguiremos adelante', but I can't find a song on google with that line. 70.162.12.102 (talk) 22:09, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if by chance you heard amigos y amantes instead? But I can't find anything hitting that target, either. Pallida Mors 22:34, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"amigos y amantes" = "friends and lovers". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:51, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

amigo is from the Latin amicus, and amante appears to connected with amator. It all comes from the root verb amare, "to love" (amar in Spanish). English cognates range from "amiable" to "amateur" to "amorous". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:58, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Amity, as you know, means friendship. LANTZY ^TALK 05:05, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, hence the built-in irony of The Amityville Horror. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:18, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

May 20

stymie

What is the etymology of stymie?174.3.123.220 (talk) 02:07, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's from a Scots word (originally spelled stimie) whose original meaning was "to obstruct a golf shot by interposition of the opponent's ball" (Merriam-Webster's Collegiate). As for the origin of the Scots word, my copy of The Concise Scots Dictionary says "obscure". Deor (talk) 02:23, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here's EO's elaboration on it:[3] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:37, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above two sources give the etymology as "obscure"; for at least a guess at its etymology, see Century Dictionary here, which refers it to stime, itself supposed to be related to OE scima "light". -- the Great Gavini 05:43, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the OED agrees in guessing as you do that the derivation is via Golf from "not able to see a styme" (a glimpse) (this word goes back to 1300, so the origin is lost, but it might be related to the Icelandic "skíma"). Dbfirs 07:08, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Doodah

What is the etymology of doodah?174.3.123.220 (talk) 02:34, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

EO says it's from the "Camptown Races" song[4] which is not overly helpful. I always assumed it was just a nonsense phrase, as with its use in the song "Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah" from Song of the South. Here's the context of that song:[5] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:38, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The OED agrees with EO (see Camptown Races), citing first use (outside the song and without the "h") by "H. ROSHER" in 1915. Dbfirs 06:58, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

southern's lovers passion

What is "southern lover's passion"?174.3.123.220 (talk) 03:32, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably the passion of some lovers from the south. Judging by the context, it seems to be an allusion to some other poem that the author is comparing this poem to. rʨanaɢ (talk) 03:39, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The clue is in the entire sentence from which the phrase "Southern lover's passion" is taken. The author is making a comparison between Slávy Dcera (The Daughter of Slava by Ján Kollár) and the work of Petrarch, the latter being the "Southern lover" referred to. Presumably the author has Petrarch's passionate poems inspired by his unrequited love for "Laura" in mind. He concludes that the two sets of work are comparable, although Kollár's Lutheran influence and Slovak surroundings were very different from the Italian Renaissance milieu in which Petrarch wrote. Ka renjc 09:19, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Which language of former Yugoslavia is this?

This text, a translation from the German by Günther Schwarberg appears on a 1983 poster titled Kindermord about the Bullenhuser Damm incident. Beside the German text are translations to Polish, Italian, and what's likely a language of the former Yugoslavia (or possibly Czech/Slovak?). Is it possible to identify the latter from this passage?

Do danas se nije moglo năci traga iz rodbine ovih ubijenih deca. Ko zna nesto o njima? Ko je video njih u Birkenau ili u Neuengamme? Ko zna nešto o njihovom poreklu?

If the above is inconclusive, I can provide more text. -- Thanks, Deborahjay (talk) 07:56, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The -ih ending makes it look like Serbo-Croatian to me (and in 1983 it was still Serbo-Croatian), but the ă is very worrisome, as that letter doesn't occur in Serbo-Croatian. The only language in the vicinity that uses ă as far as I know is Romanian, but the text isn't in Romanian. Are you sure that letter is right? The gs make it unlikely to be Czech or Slovak. I suppose it could also be Slovene; the only test I know for distinguishing Slovene from Serbo-Croatian is that Slovene doesn't use the letters ć and đ, but this text is short enough that their absence doesn't prove anything. If either of those letters occurs elsewhere in the text, it pretty much has to be S-C. +An gr 08:13, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Based on your [outstanding] diagnostic discrimination, we may have nailed Serbo-Croatian with the presence of the word đarske. In context: "...i preneta su zajedno sa jednom lekarkom i apotekarkom iz ma đarske i sa nekoliko bolničkih sestara iz poljske..." Other diacritics in this text occur in the words: dečaka / devojčica / bolničkih / bolničara / tačno, and živi, though these aren't the distinguishing letters you've noted. Confirm? -- Deborahjay (talk) 09:05, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The "ă" doesn't occur in any Slavic language that uses the Roman alphabet (or in transliterations of the others), AFAIK, so that must be some sort of mistake (the Bulgarian ъ can be transliterated as "ă", but this is usually not the case; other than that, the letter only occurs in Romanian and Vietnamese). Also, all of those last words that you wrote are Serbo-Croatian. Rimush (talk) 09:44, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, so having identified the language, the question remains: are you (Deborah) sure of the ‹ă› in năci? Could the word perhaps be naći, the Serbo-Croatian word for "to find"? +An gr 11:03, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's indeed likely – and if so, it wouldn't be the only typographic error in this text (in which one boy's surname is entirely wrong). Aside from the word's context (above), the parallel sentence in German seems to support this: "Bis heute ist es nicht gelungen, Familienangehörige der ermordeten Kinder zu finden." -- Deborahjay (talk) 11:16, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As a native speaker of Serbo-Croatian, I can confirm the analysis. It is Serbian (rather than Croatian), but the text obviously stems from a non-native speaker -- there are few grammatical errors and few awkward constructions. Another typographical error is mentioned "đarske", which is actually "Mađarske" -- Hungary. But I gather that you know the meaning already, only that the language was unknown. 142.52.88.205 (talk) 18:59, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Schindler's Liſt

What is “Schindler's Liſt”? --84.61.146.104 (talk) 08:19, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's Schindler's List using a long s in place of the usual ‹s›. +An gr 08:21, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The long s looks like an “f”. --84.61.146.104 (talk) 08:25, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Even more so when printed via printing press, as opposed to hand-written. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 08:31, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And my first thought was an elevator manufactured by the Schindler Group (and a pun on Schindler's List). Is there any context I am missing? ---Sluzzelin talk 08:27, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In Stan Freberg's comedy album History of the U.S. Part I, he has Ben Frankling reading the draft of the Declaration of Independence, and saying incredulously, "'When in the courſe of human eventſ'? All your esses look like effs there!" ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 08:31, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, it appears I am not missing context but a new pair of glasses. I actually read "Liſt" as "Lift", and thought Angr was giving a possible explanation which seemed likely but not necessarily the only one, without further context. My suggestion should be ignored. ---Sluzzelin talk 09:07, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(Slightly off-topic) Wow, having read the article long s, I never knew before the integral operator was actually an elongated long s. I just thought it was a cool-looking abstract symbol. It kind of makes sense though, seeing as the sum operator is a magnified capital sigma, the product operator is a magnified capital pi, the "for all of these" predicate is an upside-down A, and the "for at least one of these" predicate is an upside-down E. JIP | Talk 18:43, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An upside down E is just an E. The "there exists" symbol is a back-to-front E. --Tango (talk) 20:45, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking about rotating 180 degrees instead of flipping vertically. That's how I imagine being upside down. I don't know what is the correct meaning of the term. JIP | Talk 20:48, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To me also, "upside-down" of a letter means rotated 180%. Back when printing was done with little pieces of metal, turning one piece by 180% was the only way to achieve an upside-down letter. +An gr 21:27, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm curious to know where someone saw that f-like "ess" in any reference to Schindler's List, given that long-s in printed English disappeared a long time ago. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:09, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed... since in german the name appears to be http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schindlers_Liste .77.86.115.45 (talk) 21:30, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese characters, weird translation

What is a more precise translation of 相無宗教 other than "mutual irreligion"? I have a book on the Chinese Jews and this is on the front cover, along with Buddhist Lotus drawings. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 11:14, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I often find that translating each individual chinese character can help with translation. So 相 can mean "mutually", 無 = "no", 宗 can mean "sect" or "school", 教 = "teaching" or "religion". So, could it be "no mutual religion", or even "no mutual belief"? From my Euro-centric view Judaism and Buddhism have little in common. Astronaut (talk) 13:05, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can't tell someone's religion by looking at their face? William Avery (talk) 16:55, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deliverables

Is deliverables (plural) a word? Gmail's spell check keeps telling me that it isn't. I asked someone, and they said that deliverable (singular) is a collective noun. Does this make a difference? --The Dark Side (talk) 18:07, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it's a real word http://www.askoxford.com/asktheexperts/faq/aboutwords/deliverables 77.86.115.45 (talk) 18:37, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A deliverable is a good or service to be delivered. Deliverables are goods or services to be delivered. This term is in common use in business settings in the United States. Marco polo (talk) 20:32, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A term frequently used in Information Systems. A deliverable can be a document, a programming module, etc. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:08, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Palais de Tokyo

Where does this French art museum's name come from? It doesn't have Asian art and it wasn't founded by an Asian, so the name seems kind of strange. --70.129.186.243 (talk) 21:10, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.palaisdetokyo.com/fo3/low/programme/index.php?page=../infospratiques/historique.html named after the Quai de Tokyo "Pier tokyo" - now all is needed is an explanation for that...77.86.115.45 (talk) 21:35, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Word for song transition

Is there a specific name for when a song changes in tempo, tone and rhythm? Here is an example of what I mean, at time 2:12 link 82.44.55.254 (talk) 21:18, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

possibly a Segue or possibly not.77.86.115.45 (talk) 21:27, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]