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.

August 2

French construction: "le (singular noun) est des plus (plural adjective)"

In a French book I'm reading (it's a phonetic description of a variety of Munster Irish, written by Marie-Louise Sjoestedt in 1931), I've encountered a construction I'm not familiar with:

Le/la X est des plus Y

where X is a singular noun and Y is a plural adjective. Examples:

Ce genre d'opposition est des plus répandus en morphologie.

La vélarisation est des plus nettes.

What does this mean? Is it just "X is very Y"? +An gr 13:51, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It means "among", or as we would also say in English, "one of". ("Velarization is among the clearest/one of the clearest"). Adam Bishop (talk) 14:12, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I thought about that for the first example ("This type of opposition is among/one of the most widespread in morphology"), but it doesn't make much sense in the second example, because velarization isn't being compared within any context: "Velarization is among/one of the clearest" - one of the clearest whats? +An gr 14:20, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I don't know, I assumed there was a previous sentence to give it some context! What comes before it? Adam Bishop (talk) 15:14, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like it's "very" then (maybe also "quite" or "rather"?). This Nouvelle Grammaire Française has examples with "des plus (plural adjective)" and "des plus (singular adjective)". ---Sluzzelin talk 15:44, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, according to that, when it means "very" the adjective should be in the singular (La situation était des plus embarassante), but maybe Sjoestedt didn't know that (the singular and plural are homophonous in these examples anyway). +An gr 16:47, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I found this: http://www.cnrtl.fr/definition/plus (a very nice website for rare words and grammatical constructions). It says (among others):

− Des plus + adj., littér., superl. abs. Parmi les plus, très.

As an example, "Un personnage secondaire et des plus effacés" is given. So the adjective should be plural (no matter whether the subject is singular or not), and it means "very Y" indeed (literally: "of the most Y"). Markussep ^Talk 15:11, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Likewise, in English, the universal set is plural, regardless of the grammatical number of the subset. For example, in "one of the most famous buildings" and "some of the most famous buildings", "buildings" is plural because there is a set of famous buildings, and particular mention is being made of "one" of them and "some" of them (not "one" of "it" and "some" of "it").—Wavelength (talk) 22:45, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some French authors use the singular after "des plus", while others prefer the plural. It is a choice. In the sentence "La situation était des plus embarrassante" (the situation was most embarassing), the adjective "embarassante" agrees in gender and in number with the noun "la situation". However, "des plus embarassantes" would have been correct too. In any case, a plural noun is followed by a plural adjective. Maurice Grevisse suggests a preference for the singular in short sentences like "Lire est des plus agréable" (reading is very pleasant). However, apart from literary works, the plural is increasingly used today. --Keguligh (talk) 23:00, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Homophonic Translation

I'm trying to find some examples of identical sequences of letters that can be red in different languages. The following is a famous example by Elena Addomine (from Oplepo, the Italian version of Oulipo):

Italian: Lo vedi, paga in amore, tremo rapita. Ma fine porterò fatale.
English: Love dip, again a more tremor: a pit, a... 'm a fine porter of a tale!

Do you have any other example, in any other pair of languages? --151.51.156.20 (talk) 15:48, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some people have devised texts that can be read in both Latin and Italian, with exactly the same word boundaries and punctuation... AnonMoos (talk) 16:26, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My hand is warm is spelled the same and means the same in English and Afrikaans. +An gr 16:52, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't find a German/English one online, so I tried to make one up, and it doesn't make sense either in English or in German, but here goes anyway ...

German: "Theorien tun der Ananas gut." (Theories do the pineapple good.)
English: "The Orient, under a nana's gut."

By the way, wouldn't this be closer to a "homographic translation" (we do have an article on homophonic translation with a nice French version of Humpty Dumpty, but I couldn't find one on what 151.51 is seeking). ---Sluzzelin talk 17:20, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite what you asked for, but IIRC, the phrase "Good butter, good cheese, good in English, Good in Friese" apparently has both the same words and the same meaning in English and Friesian. Alansplodge (talk) 19:57, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

IIRC, those two sentences sound very similar in English and Frisian, but are not spelled the same. +An gr 20:25, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Translate a single German sentence, please

Could the following please be translated?

"Feodosiy Petsyna war von 1994 bis 2006 Erzbischof von Drohobych und Sambir im Kiewer Patriarchat und seit 2007 der Ukrainisch Autokephalen Orthodoxen Kirche."

I've just imported it from de:Feodosiy Petsyna, a two-sentence stub, to User:RFD/Feodosiy Petsyna. The meaning of the article's first sentence was obvious to me, even though I don't speak German, but I can't properly understand this second sentence. Nyttend (talk) 19:17, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Feodosiy Petsyna was from 1994 to 2006 Archbishop of Drohobych and Sambir in the Patriarchate of Kiev and since 2007 of the Ukrainian autocephalous Orthodox Church. ("Autocephalous" is a designation for a non-metropolitan seat Subordinate Archdiocese, according to Google Translate.) Looie496 (talk) 19:27, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church Canonical. Looie496 (talk) 19:31, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

... and Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Kyivan Patriarchate and Deaths on the 23d of July, 2010. ---Sluzzelin talk 19:36, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, my search somehow missed Ukrainian Autocephalous Orthodox Church. Looie496 (talk) 19:46, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick help! Article is now in mainspace. Nyttend (talk) 19:48, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for doing this-RFD (talk) 21:13, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Latin phrase translation

What would be the best rendering in English of "Obnoxiosa sed non ob noxiosa"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.104.106.143 (talk) 21:05, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Obedient, but not to a fault." LANTZY ^TALK 21:12, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.104.106.143 (talk) 21:13, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

August 3

Illegitimate bastard

I recently was puzzled by a quote that I read in a non-fiction book. It stated, essentially, "Not only was he illegitimate, but he was also a bastard." I always thought that the word illegitimate and the word bastard both meant the same thing (namely, one born out of wedlock). But the phrase that I quoted above has a construction that makes it seem like the two words have distinct meanings. What am I missing? Is there some subtle distinction that makes one an illegitimate versus a bastard? Thanks. (64.252.34.115 (talk) 12:13, 3 August 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Reads to me as though the author is playing with the words and using bastard in its other meaning i.e. "not a nice person", in the manner of "The bastard was a bastard" - X201 (talk) 12:22, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this is definitely meant as a joke on the word's two meanings. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 12:25, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Funny, I never thought of that ... that the author was playing on the words for humor. So, as far as being born out of wedlock, "illegitimate" and "bastard" mean the same thing and are essentially interchangeable? Is that correct? Thanks. (64.252.34.115 (talk) 12:36, 3 August 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Yes, the definition is the same, and only the emotional content is different-- 'bastard' is much ruder. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 12:46, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think they are quite the same, in that one is a legal term, the other a factual. In Germany, for example, the child of a married mother is legitimate unless this status is explicitly challenged, and only very few people can challenge this status. The child can still be a bastard (both senses), though. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 12:52, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As an aside, Jewish law recognizes multiple forms of illegitimacy and only one of those forms is a bastard (ממזר, mamzer). Bastards are born of the biblically prohibited incestuous relationships, such as a man and his mother, daughter, sister, etc. Rabbinically prohibited incestuous relationships produce offspring that are rabbinic bastards (a man and his grandmother, granddaughter, etc.). If a man commits adultery with another man's wife the child is also a bastard. But being born out of wed-lock does not give one the status of a bastard. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 17:56, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Earliest acronym?

I'm always amused at the urban legends of "acronym" words like golf, posh, drag, nylon, tip, phat, cop, f*ck, and others. The earliest acronym I can recall is RADAR. It only goes back to the 1940s and is science or military based. Rhetorical question: why do people believe these false etiology of acronyms? They are almost always too cleverly coincidental. Real question: Are there *any* pre-1900 acronyms that would still make sense to us today? --70.167.58.6 (talk) 15:05, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you mean acronym in the narrow sense of an acronym that is pronounced as a single word, as opposed to an initialism. The earliest initialism I can think of is SPQR (though there may well be earlier ones). Tanakh is an acronym in the narrow sense, and I assume that name is older than 1900. But neither of these examples are English; did you want to restrict answers to English? +An gr 15:13, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Acronym and initialism#Historical and current use gives more discussion on the history of acronyms. Another early example cited there is ΙΧΘΥΣ. +An gr 15:17, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I meant well known words pronounceable in English. I wouldn't consider SPRQ or Tanakh. --70.167.58.6 (talk) 22:32, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Our article on your rhetorical question is Backronym, and it gives a few possible reasons in passing, but doesn't confront the "why" question head-on. That article also cites a book that states that acronyms were "rare" prior to the 20th century, meaning there must have been some; but the article doesn't elaborate. Comet Tuttle (talk) 18:24, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The earliest I can find any information about is the Egyptian hieroglyphic acronym ankh wedja seneb --

-- containing the first symbols from the three words for life-health-strength. Looie496 (talk) 20:41, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The spurious acronymic explanations are but a small part of the range of etymythology documented for example by Michael Quinion at http://www.worldwidewords.org. I suggest that their popularity is a particular case of the human penchant for narrative discussed at length by Jack Cohen and Ian Stewart in their Science of Discworld books and elsewhere. --ColinFine (talk) 23:34, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's also S.V.B.E.V., a common Latin greeting in personal correspondence. "If you are well, that is good, I am well." One I named a system that and users learned to say it as a single word. :-) PЄTЄRS J VЄСRUМВА ►TALK 20:11, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Saying it as a single word is easier when you remember that V in Latin was both a vowel and a consonant. SVBEV would be pronounced simply subeu. +An gr 20:52, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article Name - Chinese/Japanese Translation

I made an English version for an article that exists in Chinese and Japanese for something called 葛根湯 (Mandarin: gěgēntāng, Japanese: kakkontō). I cite an English article referring to it by its Chinese name and another referring to it by its Japanese name. What should the name of the article be? One website said the English version of the name is "Kudzu decoction" so that's what the article is named for now but that sounds a bit funny. What's a good English version of the name? Or should I refer to it as Gegentang because it originated in China? Thanks for your help.Rorrima (talk) 23:43, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Antifebrile infusion? In fact, I have only ever seen it called 'kakkonto' in texts in English. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 23:54, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Kagetora. That sounds like what you'd see on a product in a store. Although, since it doesn't mention kudzu in the title and I was hoping for a really loyal translation I may need another name...Rorrima (talk) 09:06, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If it's any help, our naming conventions mandate that the most common name of the subject in English should be the article's title. Typically, the name that is most prominent in the English-language references cited in the article, would be the most appropriate article title (unless a different name is demonstrably more common). The fact that the product originated in China would only be relevant if there was no established usage in English-language sources. decltype (talk) 11:15, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Decltype, thank you! The article is now at kakkonto. Rorrima (talk) 00:07, 5 August 2010 (UTC)108.3.173.100 (talk) 00:04, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

August 4

Japanese translation

http://i36.tinypic.com/rusodc.jpg

What does this say in English? --138.110.206.99 (talk) 02:47, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

「おはなしするのは　ポケモンを　じゆうに　しましょう　という」"What (s)he's saying is, 'Let's set free the Pokemon'".Rorrima (talk) 03:19, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The line is unfinished. The sentence should be continued. The translation is "I'm telling you that 'Let's set free the Pokemon" is...". Oda Mari (talk) 05:31, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you assume that the missing part of the sentence is 「ことです。」, then the translation would be something like: "What we are discussing here is to release the Pokemon." Of course this is all speculation, without more context it's kinda hard to be 100% sure. I'd forgotten how damn hard it is to read Japanese in kana only... TomorrowTime (talk) 15:21, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

French: -ement vs. -ant endings

When I was using Facebook (I set in in French so I could learn some new vocabulary), I saw it display "téléchargement" when it wanted to say (down)loading. I know that the verb télécharger means "to download," but I am confused because when I put "téléchargement" into Google translate, it outputted "downloading," which I thought should be "téléchargant," the present participle. What's the difference between the two? — Trevor K. — 03:50, 4 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yakeyglee (talk • contribs)

Google Translate is not very reliable and you can't always rely on it to give an accurate translation. In this case however "downloading" seems like an OK translation of "téléchargement" in the sense of the actual act of downloading something. For example if you wanted to talk about the speed of downloading you would say "la vitesse du téléchargement". On the other hand if you want to say "I am downloading..." for example then the correct translation of that would be "Je télécharge..." rather than something using the present participle. --Viennese Waltz ^talk 08:13, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) As far as I understand, -ant is the participle, i.e. a de-verbal form used as an adjective (like the -ing in "the person downloading the film"), whereas -ment is a de-verbal noun, like the -ing in "the downloading of the film". Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:17, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah but you wouldn't translate "the person downloading the film" as "celui téléchargeant le film", you would say "celui qui télécharge le film". The present participle would be used in the sense of "while", e.g. "en téléchargeant le film..." --Viennese Waltz ^talk 08:35, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You can kind of get both at once as "-emment": inconscient, inconsciemment etc. AnonMoos (talk) 09:58, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chouli

What is Chouli?199.126.224.156 (talk) 10:49, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My guess is that it's a variant of "Chou-li", the Wade-Giles equivalent of pinyin "Zhouli". Deor (talk) 11:22, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And Google points to that article. --ColinFine (talk) 11:26, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Latin company motto

floreat itunensis vallis or maybe itunensis floreat vallis (not sure if it is a "i" in "itunensis") can someone translate it, etc, Thanks.77.86.119.98 (talk) 11:54, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what Itunensis is, but vallis is either a valley or a wall. Is Itunensis supposed to be iTunes? Then "may the iTunes wall flourish"? Where did you see this? Adam Bishop (talk) 13:56, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Er, no, that's dumb. Ituna is apparently Solway, so "may the Solway valley flourish"? Adam Bishop (talk) 13:59, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Or even better, it is also the name of the Eden River which flows into the Solway Firth, and there appears to be numerous things called "Eden Valley" (which may or may not have anything to do with the actual Eden Valley in Cumbria), so I guess it means "may Eden Valley flourish". Adam Bishop (talk) 14:10, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I kind of like the first option. Perhaps it is Dog Latin for some promotional iTunes campaign? — Michael J 14:46, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I should have given the source [1] page 568 - it's on the company seal of the "Eden Valley Railway"

It's written thus

      itunensis 
   floreat  vallis

So "Let the Eden Valley flourish" is about right then? Thanks for you help by the way.Sf5xeplus (talk) 17:15, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

While I'm here, maybe someone knows what this inscription says [2]

  I       O       M
     G  E  N  I  O
      L  O  C  I
         B  R
      S  V  A  P
   O  L  L  I  N  A
R  I  S     P  R  I  N
     C  I  P  C  F

From a 'roman altar' - just asking out of curiousity.Sf5xeplus (talk) 17:23, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, "genio loci" means "to the genius loci", and there is the name Apollinaris, but the rest is abbreviated and not immediately apparent. Someone has probably recorded the inscription and a translation somewhere, or at least an expansion of the abbreviations...might take some digging. Adam Bishop (talk) 17:55, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, see this page. Adam Bishop (talk) 17:58, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much.77.86.119.98 (talk) 18:02, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

Archaic Dutch declension

A while ago I here and here at the reference desk tried to start a discussion about the quality of the mentioned article. Seen no one reacted, I try here for a lost time. The article is at least doubtable. Maybe someone with a larger command of English than me and a knowled of Dutch history can do something about it. Mark Coenraats (talk) 15:48, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, I am not completely convinced your criticisms of the article are very much to the point.

First of all, the way I see it, the article is about the declensional system for written Dutch as prescribed during the nineteenth century. The fact that in some aspects (the diminutives) nothing changed and therefore the 1995 and 2005 guides to writing Dutch offer the same rules, does not mean this article is incorrect.

Secondly, you say you find no evidence for a vocative and locative in archaic Dutch. Well, in the case of the vocative the article agrees with you - "One should not use the vocative case" - but in earlier days the grammarian Christiaen van Heule had made an artificial attempt to introduce it - so a Dutch vocative is not completely unheard of. As for the locative, surely you have heard the expression "van mijnent wege"?

And as for the word "vele": I think the reason the article says it may be used, is that it can also be omitted.

I hope this helps. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.171.56.13 (talk) 18:00, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

August 5

comment dit-on...?

How would one say, "this address book is the property of John Doe" in French? 02:24, 5 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.76.147.53 (talk)

"Ce carnet d'adresses appartient à John Doe". --Viennese Waltz ^talk 08:20, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hagrid's accent

On page 47 and 48 of HP1, Hagrid uses the word summat for "something", as in, "Got summat fer yeh here," and, "I'd not say no ter summat stronger if yeh've got it." I just don't see how any accent would produce such a substitution -- am I just missing out on the British English involved or is this some ridiculous thing Rowling thought up? DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 03:34, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it is a version of somewhat, which archaically has been used as an equivalent of something. Looie496 (talk) 03:42, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Must be a West Country thing. Newfoundland English has a similar accent and they also say "summat". It's definitely a real word. Wiktionary even has a page! Adam Bishop (talk) 03:43, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's used in Northern England too. Wiktionary agrees it's from somewhat, but I always thought it was from Old English sum wiht, wiht being an OE word for "thing" and the source of the -ght part of words like aught and nought. +An gr 06:08, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The OED just lists it as a 19th-century variant form of "somewhat", but it's certainly still in use in the north of England and possibly elsewhere. Algebraist 07:37, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am from Barnsley and still sometimes say "summat" meaning "something" (but only after a few beers). Robinh (talk) 11:16, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I;ve noticed Ricky Gervais says it in Extras.--Cam (talk) 12:36, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The accent itself is, of course Scottish in this case - Robbie Coltrane being Scots. Gurumaister (talk) 12:46, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But Hagrid doesn't have a Scottish accent (and obviously Robbie Coltrane is not in the book). Adam Bishop (talk) 13:18, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And in the films Robbie Coltrane is clearly putting on a non-Scottish accent. (It sounds vaguely West Country to me, but I'm not real good at identifying English English accents.) +An gr 14:33, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's definitely a West Country accent that Hagrid is using. FTR, I'm from the North West, and 'summat' is used quite a lot on the other side of the Pennines from me, most notably in Yorkshire. I didn't know the word was used as far south as the West Country, though. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 15:20, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was also thinking Yorkshire, as that word tended to show up in All Creatures Great and Small. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:44, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me guys but Hagrid's accent in the film is Scottish and it is nowhere near westcountry - I live there and would definitely know. In fact Robbie Coltrane isn't really using a voice much different from his own natural one - and it IS Scottish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.71.20.194 (talk) 19:08, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

'Summat' meaning 'something' certainly appears in various localised British English non-educated registers. As far as its appearance in Hagrid's dialect goes, remember that the Harry Potter books take place in a fantasy world similar to but not actually the same as ours, that Hagrid is a half-giant rather than any variety of actual British human, and that Jo Rowling is a humanly fallible author who was not necessarily perfectly adept at inventing flawlessly plausible speech in what was her first published work. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 16:35, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, just because Robbie Coltrane uses a West Country accent for Hagrid, that doesn't mean that Jo Rowling had a West Country accent in mind for Hagrid when she wrote the books. Maybe she was intending him to sound like he was from Yorkshire (though then you'd expect other Yorkshirisms like t’ for "the", nowt for "nothing", and maybe spellings like coom oop indicating the absence of the foot-strut split). +An gr 17:10, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

With regard to the West Country idea, it's perhaps worthwhile to note that Rowling was born and raised in Gloucestershire and is therefore doubtless familiar with those dialects. Our article West Country dialects says (unsourcedly) that "J. K. Rowling's Harry Potter fantasy novels feature Hagrid, a character who is supposed to have some kind of West Country accent". Deor (talk) 17:27, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've just spoken to a friend of mine from Devon who confirms that people there do say summat, so I've struck my comment above. +An gr 18:26, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think JKR was intending that Hagrid should be seen as an uneducated rustic who nevertheless had arcane knowledge and skill. She followed a well worn stereotype in giving him a "west country" accent and words that are not normally used by educated people. See Moonrakers. Richard Avery (talk) 18:32, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe I am confused because I think Hagrid talks like a pirate, but 87.21, surely that is not Robbie Coltrane's actual accent? He doesn't sound anything like that normally. Adam Bishop (talk) 19:40, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can't see any 87.21 commenting above, Adam. If you meant myself, then (i) the stereotypical 'pirate' accent is West Country, largely because of Robert Newton's classic portrayal of Long John Silver, and perhaps because a number of actual British pirates likely were from Bristol and other West Country locales, such as the Forest of Dean on whose dialect Rowling says she based Hagrid's; (ii) Robbie Coltrane's 'natural' accent is indeed Scottish, but being an actor he is eminently capable of assuming others, just as the very Scottish David Tennant does when playing Doctor Who (except in one episode when the Doctor is passing for a Scot to ingratiate himself with Queen Victoria). 87.81.230.195 (talk) 23:50, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Adam's "87.21" was, I think, a typo for "82.71". See the last unindented comment above. Deor (talk) 00:05, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, yes, I meant 82.71 (and probably looked too quickly and also saw 87.81). Adam Bishop (talk) 00:19, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation of Lithuanian surname

I need to transcribe ("transliterate" according to the phonology) into Hebrew the Lithuanian surname Macijauskas. Tentative transliterated version: מאצ'יאוסקאס. Either confirmation or IPA would help. -- Deborahjay (talk) 07:35, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In Lithuanian the letter ‹c› is pronounced [ts], so I would suggest a tsade without a geresh for the Hebrew transcription. To spell [tʃ], the Lithuanians use ‹č›. --Theurgist (talk) 09:58, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So does the ‹c› not change its pronunciation when preceding a vowel (or several)? My source text lacks diacritics so I'm relying on the name as it appears in the Lithuanian Wikipedia (per the link above), with that letter indeed a simple ‹c›. The particular individual, whose first name I don't know, was a commissar attached to the Soviet Red Army's 16th Rifle Division and survived the war. On another note: I'm inclined to drop the letter ‹א› from the Hebrew where the consonant sequence allows unambiguous syllabification. -- Deborahjay (talk) 10:59, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't speak Lithuanian, but this might be the guy from the list on the disambiguation page: Jonas Macijauskas (1900–1981) – Lietuvos sovietinis karinis veikėjas, generolas majoras. "sovietinis" and "generolas majoras" were the give-aways. From the article it appears that he held a political office in the Soviet Army, so commissar would fit. Then again, this might be some other Lithuanian Soviet soldier. Rimush (talk) 12:53, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't speak Lithuanian either, but I'm reasonably sure that "‹c› does not change its pronunciation when preceding a vowel", and that it is always pronounced as [ts]. No such user (talk) 13:47, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't speak Lithuanian either, but Lithuanian language#Phonology says that all sounds are palatalized before /i/ and /e/, which suggests [ma.t͡sʲi.jaus.kas] (with some pitch accent I don't know and which is irrelevant for transcription into Hebrew anyway). But the article gives no indication that palatalization is severe enough to cause a merger of /t͡s/ and /t͡ʃ/ in palatalizing environments, so I'd go with מציאוסקס (or with alephs for the a's in the first and last syllables if you feel they're necessary). +An gr 14:28, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's certainly not objective -- transliteration, by definition, is not an exact science, and certain types of spellings (like the one you suggested, Deborah) conforms to a yiddishized style, similar to one who transliterates Mendelson as מנדעלסאן. Granted you have no ע, which is also a Yiddish thing, but the Hebrew א does not lend anything but psychology to your word unless it possesses a vowel. So all three of them are superfluous. My name, as I spell it ראוזנבך, is pronounced in Hebrew "Ri-O-zen-bach" -- definitely not a pure transliteration. My family was not religious a few generations back and I didn't have any precedent and so made it up myself. So I'm not saying that your suggestion is wrong (except, of course, for the tz issue, which I cannot comment on because I do not know anything about how to pronounce the Lithuanian c. But putting that aside, your excessive use of the letter א gives it a very Eastern European flavor. DRosenbach ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 02:38, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hague Convention Abolishing the Requirement of Legalisation for Foreign Public Documents

Regarding the above, is it safe to use appostillisation and appostilling?--Forty two^{Thanks for all the fish!} 11:24, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When you say safe, what do you mean? It's hard to imagine a situation in which you could be hurt by using those words. Gdr 14:15, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

At Sturgis, maybe. "Loan's paid off, man." "You got apostillation, dude?" --- OtherDave (talk) 18:28, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Podesay

What does the work "podesay" mean? It's mentioned on this page. It sounds like it's a sort of textile, the link implying that it's measured in yards (in the same sentence as brocade). Cheers, matt (talk) 13:03, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wondering whether it's a mangled version of peau de soie. ---Sluzzelin talk 13:28, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Although the exact spelling in question is not recorded in the OED, I think it's probably a variant of paduasoy, which denotes a fabric somewhat different from peau de soie. The OED does record 17th-and-18th-century variants of paduasoy (e.g., pudisway and paddisway) indicating a pronunciation ending in /eɪ/, and peau de soie was not introduced until "the second half of the 19th century" (originally as a trade name). Deor (talk) 13:43, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gesta Herwardi or De Gestis Herwardi Saxonis

How should we refer to this manuscript within wikipedia?

I believe the only existing copy of De Gestis Herwardi Saxonis is actually Gesta Herwardi. Herwardi is sometimes spelt Herewardi. There are a few wikipedia articles referring to De Gestis Herewardi Saxonis

Other sources vary. For example Gesta Herwardi in

c1300(?a1150) Gesta Herwardi in RS 91.1 :: Gesta Herwardi, ed. C. T. Martin, RS 91.1 (1966). 339-404.

and Gesta Herewardi in

Lapidge, Michael (1999). [Google Books Anglo-Saxon England]. Vol. 28. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521652030. {{cite book}}: Check |url= value (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)

but also De Gestis Herwardi Saxonis in

Bevis, Trevor (1981). Hereward and De Gestis Herwardi Saxonis. Westrydale Press.

and even Gesta Herwardi, De Gestis Herewardi and Gesta Herwardi Incliti Exulis et Militis in

Fairweather, Janet (2005). [Google Books [[Liber Eliensis]]: a history of the Isle of Ely from the seventh century to the twelfth]. The Boydell Press. ISBN 1843830159. {{cite book}}: Check |url= value (help); URL–wikilink conflict (help)

Fairweather (2005) p. xlii, says

Gesta Herwardi Incliti Exulis et Militis, in Gaimar, Lestorie des Engles, ed. Sir Thomas Duffus Hardy and C. Trice Martin (Rolls Series xci. i, London 1888), pp. 339–404

There also exists a translation by W. D. Sweeting of a transcript by S. H. Miller of the Gesta Herwardi] typescript edition: Peterborough 1895),[Sweeting titles the translation De Gestis Herwardi Saxonis] and another by M. Swanton, printed in Medieval Outlaws: Ten Tales in Modern English ed. T. H. Ohlgren (Stroud 1998) and in Swanton's own Three Lives of the Last Englishmen (New York and London 1984). An OMT with translation, eds. P. G. Schmidt and J. Mann, is forthcoming.

Gesta Herwardi: in Fairweather (2005) pp. xlii, 2–3, 204–219, 223, 529
De Gestis Herewardi: in Fairweather (2005) pp. 209, 211, 215, 219

hunting animals to extinction.

Is there a specific name for killing off animals with the intention of rendering the species extinct? Homicide is where one human kills another, fratricide is where a human kills his/her sibling, regicide is where a human kills his king, genocide is where a group of humans tries to exterminate another group of humans, but is there a specific name for a group of humans trying to kill off all black rats, or all house cats, or all blue whales? Googlemeister (talk) 18:22, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Planned extinction mentions "specicide". ---Sluzzelin talk 18:26, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, both specicide and speciecide appear to be used in various books [3][4] and articles [5][6], though the enclosing of the terms in quotation marks in a number of cases indicates that the authors feel that the terms are neologisms. Deor (talk) 18:37, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't speciecide refer to something like this? Clarityfiend (talk) 20:36, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. The choice would be between using the root speci- (which makes the existing 'specicide') or the whole word species (which makes the uber-sibillant monstrosity 'speciesicide') -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 21:29, 5 August 2010 (UTC) [reply]

How about "extinguishing"? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:34, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For something a little more demotic, "wipe out" is often used to cover this meaning: If there's a species of animal that's causing problems nosing around your camera, we'll have it wiped out! But that isn't a "specific" term, I suppose. What about "extirpation"? LANTZY ^TALK 23:32, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would probably use "eradication" if I were writing about that myself. Looie496 (talk) 01:33, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The near-extinction of the American bison was a planned event that nearly succeeded. I expect those pursuing that end would have had a term for it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:41, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ancient writing in Britain

Hi. Is there any evidence of any sort of writing in pre-Roman Britain? (I'm assuming it would only be primitive scratched inscriptions or similar.) If no such writing survives, is the view that it never existed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.184.26.135 (talk) 19:09, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe there is. See Anglo-Saxon runes and Elder Futhark. Rmhermen (talk) 19:16, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But surely those are not pre-Roman? (Isn't all that kind of writing, from runes to ogham, actually inspired by Roman writing?) Adam Bishop (talk) 19:35, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is use of Latin alphabets on some coins from pre-Roman Britain[7]. Our articles on runes seems to claim there exact origin is somewhat in doubt but in general writing systems are thought to have developed entirely independently only a few times. Rmhermen (talk) 19:56, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Right, but considering the Anglo-Saxons were not in pre-Roman Britain (Roman Britain starting from AD43 onwards), the two links given above are still not relevant. Our article on ogham seems to suggest that Ogham was developed without influence from the Latin alphabet, but was developed in or around the 4th Century AD, making it well within the Roman era. As for any other writing systems, I have not heard of any. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 20:09, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article on the British Iron Age makes mention of coins and other artifacts that seem to require at least some form of writing system (even if only on the part of the elites who did the actual minting). You might find sources there that will point you in the right direction? ☯.Zen Swashbuckler.☠ 20:52, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe Pictish carvings are written language - there was a paper about this recently - see [8] and [9]. (Looks like these stones wouldn't be pre-Roman-conquest, but they would be on the other side of the Antonine Wall from the Romans.) Wurstgeist (talk) 21:15, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the replies. The inscriptions on the iron age coins are interesting; I hadn't thought of that. As far as I can tell though (and correct me if I'm wrong), these were Roman-inspired and only slightly predate the Roman arrival, so they're perhaps not quite what I had in mind. There is a nice picture at http://www.bbc.co.uk/ahistoryoftheworld/objects/xzvfJLCDS3Cud47dFY1IrQ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.184.26.135 (talk) 02:38, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There appears to be some uncertainty as to just how early Ogham began to be used, given that most early examples of its principal medium of wooden staves will have been subject to decay or deliberate destruction. Although the article suggests that Ogham was most likely derived via runes from Latin (or the related Venetic) script, it has become apparent in recent years that there was considerable continent-wide commerce and intercourse long before the Roman invasion of Britain, so writing systems and usage could have spread in advance of that forcible introduction. It is unfortunate that Druidism seems to have eschewed the use of writing in favour of memorising for philosophical reasons, even though many Druids (a social caste rather than just the priesthood recruited from within it) may have been literate in Latin and/or Greek, etc, before the Roman absorbtion of their territories. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 13:45, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I had suggested Elder Futhark for just those reasons - some consider that its origin to pre-date the Roman invasion of Britain and it was perhaps widespread on the continent. Rmhermen (talk) 15:43, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Despite the absence of any writing, some British names of rivers and mountains come from pre-Celtic languages, for example Wye, Itchen, Humber, Colne and (but not sure) the Thames.

Continental Celtic inscriptions reflect the history of alphabet: Celtic languages used Etruscan (7th or 6th c. BC), Phoenician, Greek and Roman alphabet. Ogham alphabet remained insular. Although any idea would be stupid without artifacts, it is not impossible that relationship between Celtic peoples may have resulted in a knowledge of foreign alphabets in Britain. --Keguligh (talk) 22:54, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Caption translation for an image

Resolved

This image in Commons has a description that's only available in German. A translation in English would be appreciated, considering that the image is used in the Molotov cocktail article. bibliomaniac 1 5 23:54, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's done, done, done!! 83.81.60.233 (talk) 06:53, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a bunch. bibliomaniac 1 5 23:36, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Daft as a brush?

Just how daft would that be? I never understood that frase —Preceding unsigned comment added by JyzzCannon (talk • contribs) 23:55, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Go into your bathroom, and ask your hairbrush a very easy question, like "What does 1+1 equal?" or "Is it wise to put forks in electrical sockets?" No matter how easy you make the question, the brush will not be able to answer correctly. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:25, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, go ask your grandfather clock the same questions ... yet no one ever says "dumb as a grandfather clock". ---Sluzzelin talk 01:22, 6 August 2010 (UTC) Ha ha, just realized the grandfather clock could actually answer FisherQueen's first question correctly, depending on when you ask. Own goal. ---Sluzzelin talk 01:24, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just asked my hairbrush, "What's 1 minus 1?" and it said nothing. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:39, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is a big difference between saying nothing and saying "nothing". See use-mention distinction. --Tango (talk) 02:21, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get back to you on that after I finish reading "Eats Shoots and Leaves". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:29, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This OED entry doesn't exactly explain everything, but tries to trace the origins, and the attribute "which flops, unable to stand upright" obviously doesn't apply to every household item. ---Sluzzelin talk 01:49, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There appear to be four theories [10]. Also, according to this thread [11] on some forum somewhere, we used to have an article about it (see the post from "Orac"). We used to have an article on everything... (It appears to refer to the article Ken Platt, but Orac's post is two years older than the article so I don't know what's going on there.) Wurstgeist (talk) 02:09, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

August 6

Double adjectives following "a pair of"

A pair of Japanese and United States computer whizzes claim to have calculated pi to five trillion decimal places …

That says to me that both these people had dual nationality or dual citizenship. However, the rest of the story makes clear that one was from Japan, the other from the USA, and there is no mention of dual anything.

Are there any exceptions to the rule (I assume there is such a rule) that whatever adjectives follow “a pair of” apply equally to both members of the pair?

Is there an easier way to rephrase the sentence than “A pair of computer whizzes, one from Japan, the other from the United States, claim to have …”? -- (Jack of Oz =) 202.142.129.66 (talk) 00:49, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's very bad wording, but people make that kind of mistake all the time. You could say "A Japanese and an American computer whiz claim...", but it doesn't sound quite right. (I would never use "United States" as an adjective, either. As much as I hate it, the correct adjective form is "American".) --Tango (talk) 02:25, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you like the "pair", you could say, "A pair of computer whizzes, one Japanese and one American, claim to have ..." and then maybe wonder what the point would be considering that each decimal place is only 1/10th the magnitude of the previous one. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:36, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you were talking about a couple (as in two partners in a romantic relationship), I think you could say "a Japanese-American couple", but somehow "a Japanese-American pair of computer whizzes" doesn't seem to work, perhaps because it's less of a unified entitiy than couple?---Sluzzelin talk 11:28, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"A Japanese-American couple, Yuki Yamaguchi and Sarah Finkelstein, ..." would leave one in no doubt they were one of each nationality, and which one had which. But "A British-Australian couple, Mary Smith and Brian Jones .. " could easily mean they were both born British, got together in the UK, and moved as a couple to Australia; when the truth may be that Mary was British, and she met her Australian partner Brian while both were holidaying in Majorca. So, it depends. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 22:02, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Japanese-American" would usually mean an American citizen of Japanese descent (analogous to African-American). --Tango (talk) 22:06, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Usage of "American"

Oh, Bugs, if you think the five trillionth decimal in pi is a pointless thing to know, then I'm sorry to say you just haven't got what it takes to be a pure mathematician. Tango, side issue, but what's the objection to "American", apart from any possible confusion with other parts of the Americas (which isn't really a confusion at all since nobody ever refers to Canadians or Mexicans or Uruguayans using the contintental sense of "American")? The country is, after all, the United States of America, not the United States of Anywhere Else. -- 202.142.129.66 (talk) 02:45, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"American", by itself, refers to the USA. Regarding pi, I wonder if they found a "Hi There" message in the middle of it, as postulated in the book that was made into a movie called First Contact or something like that (a Jodie Foster movie). ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:50, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That is the objection. "American" ought to mean anyone form the continents of America rather than from one country. (BTW, calculating pi to lots of decimal places has nothing to do with pure maths, it's just a way of showing off how good your computer is.) --Tango (talk) 02:54, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Then what business did the founding fathers have in using the word "America" in the name of the country? Whatever, but they did so use it. Hence "American". "USian" etc just don't wash. -- 202.142.129.66 (talk) 03:03, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bugs, don't be sidetracked by sillinesses of the 4th kind. Focus on the number itself in all its glory, and be enrichulated. -- 202.142.129.66 (talk) 02:59, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

202.142 has a point. Off the top of my head I would say there isn't another country on the continent (nor anywhere else in the world) with "America" in its name. Rimush (talk) 08:04, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There might not be at the moment. But if e.g. Myanmar suddenly decided to rename themselves the United Republic of Asia, would you then accept that the term Asian then would only apply to persons from there? Hardly. 88.131.68.194 (talk) 09:48, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody is saying that "American" only refers to people and things from the USA. Of course it can have wider meanings than this. But the USA is the only country whose demonym is "American". As well, context is everything. If a random person says "I am an American", then unless there is some context that indicates to the contrary, that is taken to mean by 100% of people that he is a citizen or national of the USA, not of anywhere else in the world in general, and not of anywhere else in the Americas in particular. This has never been a problem, so it amazes me that of recent times some people have tried to make a problem out of it. Words mean what they do mean, not what someone thinks they should mean. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 09:59, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. I've heard many Europeans refer to the USA as "America". It's common usage. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:27, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And not just Europeans. See Coming to America, America, America, The Americanization of Emily, The American President, and numerous other native uses. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 10:44, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, but I wonder if the USA was the first nation in the western hemisphere to gain independence from its European counterpart? If so, it would have made sense to glom onto the "America" part. What else would they call it? Washingtonia? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:51, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How are people from the United Arab Emirates usually referred to? The article lists "Emirati" but also "Arab" as demonyms. This sort of corresponds with either "Statesian" (or something like that) and "American", doesn't it? ---Sluzzelin talk 11:08, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The basic reality is that there is no convenient English-language single-word true adjective corresponding to Spanish estadounidense, and as long as no such word exists in English, then some other word will have to be pulled in to fill the linguistic gap (currently "American" is used as the gap-filler). Frank Lloyd Wright advocated for the word "Usonian" to fill the gap, but it never really caught on... AnonMoos (talk) 17:04, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, no formal English-language single-word true adjective. Over here in Ukland, we generally use "Yank" as an adjective and noun in casual conversation, unless there are any citizens of the USA actually present :-) . 87.81.230.195 (talk) 20:50, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Being called a "Yank" by a Brit is a badge of honor. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:54, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We've called ourselves "Yank" on occasion, as with Yank, The Army Weekly and "I'm a Cranky Old Yank in a Clanky Old Tank on the Streets of Yokohama with my Honolulu Mama Doin' Those Beat-o, Beat-o Flat-On-My-Seat-o, Hirohito Blues", but as a general-purpose "demonym" it's somewhat lacking... AnonMoos (talk) 23:00, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Yank" is fine as a noun and as a predicate adjective, but it's a little awkward as a prenominal adjective, or if you try to use it in the comparative and superlative degree... AnonMoos (talk) 21:57, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What's this? "American" a gap-filler? and a temporary one at that? What a load of rubbish, if I may speak bluntly. It is the permanent demonym of the United States of America, and has been since the inception of that country. It is as cemented in as it is possible for any word to be. It is not ever going to be supplanted by any other word, unless they change the name of the country to something that doesn't include the word "America". And is that likely to happen? Well, we don't do crystal ball gazing here, but NO. Get over it, get lives, and move on. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 21:51, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I said nothing about "temporary". However, if there had been a convenient English-language single-word true adjective handy in the 1770s, then "American" probably never would have come into use in that meaning in the first place... AnonMoos (talk) 21:57, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, but that's like saying we call those things we sit on "chairs" because there was no better word available. Isn't it? -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 22:10, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The United Mexican States is Mexico, the Federal Republic of Germany is Germany but the United States of America has no name. I don't think it works like that. Rmhermen (talk) 22:20, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Y'all are missing a key point. There is no other place that is also Mexico. There is no other place that is also Germany. There are many other places that are also in The Americas. Please try to address that in further responses.

DaHorsesMouth (talk) 22:45, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, but how often are things outside the USA described as "American"? Well, let's see. There's the Organization of American States. And there are the adjectives for North, Central, Latin and South America, and the Americas in general. Probably a few other uses. But BY FAR the primary use of "American" is in reference to the USA. That is its default meaning, because you need a special context for it mean something else. That's in English. What other languages, particularly Spanish, might choose to do is their own affair. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 03:24, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, exactly. I always say the English word American and the Spanish word americano are false friends. They look and sound similar but have different meanings: the English word American corresponds in meaning to Spanish estadounidense, and the Spanish word americano corresponds to English phrases like New-World or Western-Hemisphere (with hyphens because they're being used attributively) or of the Americas. And anyone who doesn't believe that is invited to ask an English-speaking Canadian if he's an American and see what he says. +An gr 09:11, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What does German amerikanisch mean? The German-speaking people use the attributive US-amerikanisch to strictly refer to something or someone of or from the United States. --Theurgist (talk) 09:22, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, when I tell Germans Ich bin Amerikaner, they know I mean I'm specifically from the U.S., not from just anywhere between Alert and Ushuaia. +An gr 09:43, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Those other "American" contexts are where that handy coinage of mine, 'novomundane', would come into its own, if only someone would bloody well actually use it. The 'Organization of Novomundane States' does have a nice ring. But why stop there? To end the ceaseless confusion, they could rename North (etc) America as North (etc) Novomundania. :) -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 21:34, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bringing a language back from extinction

What is the longest period of time in which a language went extinct and was revived later on? It seems Cornish was revived 150 years after it went extinct. Also is it possible to speak Gaulish the extinct language of the Celtic gauls of France, today, I'm not sure if it's a written language or not.--Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 07:55, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify, by 'revived', do you mean that the language once again began to be spoken as an everyday means of communication, and taught to children as their 'mother tongue', rather than being intelligible to and potentially useable in conversation by just a few expert archeologists and historical linguists, like Sumerian? Also, by 'extinct', do you mean that it became totally disused in spoken form, rather than being preserved only as a liturgical language for a period before being reintroduced as a living language, like classical and Modern Hebrew? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.81.230.195 (talk) 13:26, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! Sorry for not signing. I usually do, honest! 87.81.230.195 (talk) 20:47, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

87.81 brings up a good point with the relative nature of "revived." The following doesn't directly answer the original question but I think shows why it's not all that easy to answer.

Linguist Geoff Pullum wrote on The Language Log in 2005 about efforts to revive Cornish. While the following is his (educated) opinion, I think it's a relevant one:

Let me remind you what is necessary for a language to be living: there must be little kids who speak the language with each other because it is their only language or else their favorite. Little kids who would speak it even if they were told not to. It is not enough that a community of grownups (squabbling or not) has learned it from books and reads to each other each Tuesday night in someone's living room...

Ask around the village and find the age of the youngest people using a language every day for all their normal conversational interaction. If the answer is a number larger than 5, the language is probably dying. If the answer is a number larger than 10, it is very probably doomed. If the answer is a number larger than 20, you can kiss it goodbye right now.

Pullum refers to a colleague who believes that "traditional Gaeltacht [Irish_language|Irish]" (Gaeilge) will be dead before the middle of the century. Jim McCloskey's thoughts are more nuanced than I can summarize here. He makes a case for second-language use while making clear that "what is ‘maintained’ or ‘revived’ in this process, is very different indeed from the language which was the original focus of revivalist efforts." --- OtherDave (talk) 13:52, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's an interesting article, thanks for the link. (One interesting thing about it is that as recently as 2004, Jim McCloskey still hadn't figured out how to put an acute accent over a vowel on his computer and was still using the vowel + slash kludge people were using in the early 1990s when only ASCII was available.) +An gr 22:38, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Esperanto was brought to life as a language which had never existed.—Wavelength (talk) 16:26, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't really a critical mass of surviving long connected texts in Gaulish Celtic, so if you were to try to make it be a full usable language, a lot of speculative filling in of gaps would necessarily be involved. The only language which has been fully resurrected from being the childhood language or birth tongue of nobody to being a well-established language with full recognition from at least one government in the world (i.e. not just the hobby project of a few individuals) is Hebrew. Cornish definitely does not qualify -- its enthusiasts can't even agree which of three competing spelling systems to use...

Wavelength -- There are a few people who grew up speaking Esperanto (since that was the only language which their mother and father had in common), but there are no real Esperanto monolinguals, and interestingly such childhood native speakers of Esperanto generally end up using a form of the language which is rather divergent from Esperanto as approved by Zamenhoff, so it's hard to say that Esperanto is actually a living language, in any meaningful sense of the term.

In any case, in censuses of India, there are always a few people who claim to be native Sanskrit speakers... AnonMoos (talk) 16:48, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a source regarding the non-standard use of Esperanto by "native" speakers? Not that I doubt you—I'd just like to read more about it. WP's Esperanto and Native Esperanto speakers say nothing of it.--el Aprel (^facta-_facienda) 03:17, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My source was oral folklore among academic linguists, that native Esperanto speakers "creolize" the language to some degree, and that such departures are often looked down upon by those who learned Esperanto as adults -- whereas if Esperanto were a true living language, they would set the direction of future language change (as happened in the early 20th century when early native modern Hebrew speakers departed in some details from classical Biblical/Mishnaic Hebrew). AnonMoos (talk)

See Native Esperanto speakers. Nyttend (talk) 00:55, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't the revival of the Hebrew language be the best example of this? John M Baker (talk) 17:34, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was already mentioned several times above... AnonMoos (talk) 09:53, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the revival of the Hebrew language, in its literary form with the Haskalah, and especially as a spoken language, through Eliezer Ben-Yehuda, is really interesting. It may be an example for the speakers of endangered languages. --Keguligh (talk) 23:35, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just to go back to the original question; the last people who could speak Cornish died towards the end of the 19th Century[12], at about the time that the revival began. This page[13] refers to them as "semi-speakers". The initial aim of the revival was to give access to the Cornish literary canon, hence the strange mix of early and middle strands of the language in the "Unified Cornish" system. It would be like learning English which was a mix of Chaucer, Mallory, Shakespeare and the King James Bible. Alansplodge (talk) 17:45, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology of Yugoslavia

What is the etymology of Yugoslavia? The article does not say?Ritta Margot Clantagenet (talk) 08:56, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, if not, it should. Yug-, yugo- and similar terms are commonly found in Slavic languages, meaning "south, southerly". Yugoslavia was the land of the south Slavs. The tennis player Mikhail Youzhny might otherwise be called Michael South. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 09:01, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia#Etymology. I agree it should be moved/copied to the "main" article. No such user (talk) 09:02, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a bundle! So fast!Ritta Margot Clantagenet (talk) 09:03, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is also a list of country name etymologies. (And a list of etymologies of country subdivision names.) --84.46.3.47 (talk) 03:31, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese

http://www.gamefreak.co.jp/blog/dir/

Could someone translate the four most recent entries on there? I tried Google translator (which gave me a lot of gibberish), and the English version on the site is a year out of date. --138.110.206.102 (talk) 12:29, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's quite a lot you're asking for... I'll give you the last entry, because it's the shortest, somebody else might have more time on their hands and do the rest:

Game Freak is going on summer vacation from tomorrow.

Masuda will be in Hawaii from the 12th to the 18th for the WCS!

What country will be the first in the world?

Check out this site for more:

http://www.pokemonworldchampionships.com/2010/

Ciao!

Hope that starts you off. TomorrowTime (talk) 13:02, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"oly gyenge jellem, hogy mindent elkölt, az utolsó fillérig"

If you understand that, please help answer the question at Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Humanities#what_english_word_expression. Thanks. --Dweller (talk) 15:41, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese help

http://www.nintendo.co.jp/ds/irbj/index.html

Click the link under Reshiram (the left one). What do the labels on the map say? --138.110.206.101 (talk) 19:41, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I only get an error message for that site. Maybe you could take a screenshot and upload it somewhere? TomorrowTime (talk) 08:57, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"The couple is" or "the couple are"...

...expecting their next child? Shahid • ^Talk2me 21:04, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My understanding is that you use "is" or "was" when referring to the couple as a whole, but "are" or "were" when referring to individual members. For example, "The couple are getting married next week", but "The couple is expecting their next child". Regardless of which verb you use, the pronoun is almost universally "their", not "its". Xenon54 (talk) 21:14, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Whoa, hang on a minute there, Xenon54. The couple is expecting their next child - ?? That doesn't sit well in my brain. That's one case where I'd retroactively readjust the verb to agree with the the pronoun. The couple are expecting their next child sounds much more natural, even if it's a joint expectation. Same with cases like The couple is making their travel plans > The couple are making their travel plans, even if they're travelling together at all times. Technical correctness has to take a back seat in such cases. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 21:33, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In British English, we would almost always use the plurals. American English tends to be a little more logical and use singular verbs and pronouns for singular nouns, even if they refer to multiple individuals. For example, in British English we would say "The government are doing a bad job." and in American English they would say "The government is doing a bad job.". --Tango (talk) 21:19, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. Typical usage would be "The couple is..."; not "The couple are..."; although saying it the second way would not be the end of the world. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:25, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's typical usage in the US. --Tango (talk) 21:43, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The US usage is what matters. --138.110.206.101 (talk) 22:33, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you bloody mind? This is the English speaking WP and many others apart from Merkins use it! So the exclusive US interpretation of everything is not welcome!

BTW, verb should always agree with subject. Therefore: 'The couple is' is correct. Couple is a singular noun.--BrianSturgeon (talk) 23:38, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, it should, but in British English it doesn't. --Tango (talk) 23:52, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But does it always work as a singular noun, Brian? Here are some opinions to the contrary. Sometimes it refers to the multiple individual elements of the set, rather than the set itself. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 07:43, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is common outside the USA for technically singular group nouns to be used to refer to the members of the group ("the members of the government ..."; "the individuals in the couple ..."). Whilst a singular subject must always take a verb in the singular, the "members of ..." usage is sufficiently common to many speakers of English that they automatically read a plural subject when they see a verb in the plural. This may sound odd to pedants, and to those who are unfamiliar with the idiom, but it reads as perfectly natural and correct as an idiom to those who see it regularly in print. In very formal writing, even in the UK, it would be preferable to re-cast the sentence for the benefit of pedants. Dbfirs 08:21, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"I saw a couple of people along the road. It was jogging." Dbfirs 09:47, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

August 7

Every other odd item in a set: part of speech?

Which part of speech is every other in this noun phrase? Friends are arguing that it's an adjective, but it looks to me that 'odd' is functioning as an adjective, and 'every other' an adverbial phrase. Am I right? If not, why am I wrong? Preferably in grammatical terms, so I could at least research on the topic.

Thanks in advance. -- 124.171.138.193 (talk) 03:46, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Every other" does not have any special characteristic separate from its component words. There are three adjectives in "Every other odd item in a set" - every, other and odd.

Adverbial phrases act as if they're adverbs: they answer the questions how?, when?, where?, to what extent?, etc, and they're associated with verbs (hence the name ad-verb). There's no verb in the phrase in question, no adverb, and no adverbial phrase. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 07:52, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The phrase is ungrammatical as far as I can see. What is it supposed to mean? Looie496 (talk) 02:46, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How can a phrase be expected to be grammatical? Few phrases make complete sense divorced from their contexts. That's why they're merely phrases, and not sentences. But I would say "other" means alternative (or alternate, for US-speakers), and it's referring to selecting every second odd number from some set of numbers. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 08:15, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, every odd item = 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 17, 19. Every other odd item in in bold. -- 124.171.138.193 (talk) 08:40, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, JackofOz. The precise definition of an adverb was confused, I discussed adverbs/adjectives further with a friend and came to predicative sentences, to which I need to pose another question: In predicative sentences (or in other cases, if that's possible), how is it determined which part of speech is used?

It is sad, there's no doubting this is a predicative adjective.
It is swimming, it's a present participle verb, sure, but why?
It is interesting, the distinction is less clear. I know it's an adjective, because it takes very. But my judgment is based on intuition.

Swimming and interesting can also be adjectives, but are there any predefined rules to determine which? -- 124.171.138.193 (talk) 08:40, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Compare: "I love history because it is interesting", and "Murdoch's theory is interesting many scientists lately". Although both cases are based on something that interests (verb) someone, in the first case it's an adjective because it's used in exactly the same way as "the sheep is white". "Because it is interesting" can be rewritten as "because it is an interesting subject", but you can't do that with the 2nd sentence: "Murdoch's theory is an interesting subject many scientists lately" makes no sense. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 09:03, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I suppose that does clear up any confusion I had, but opens a few more questions... Are these phrases abbreviated forms of longer ones where an object is defined implicitly? Will words always, without regard to part of speech or word, follow the rule of its expanded phrase when used as an abbreviated predicate statement? Edit: This doesn't actually clear confusion, just makes things confusing. Analyzing this, you are suggesting we append a direct object to the predicative statement, and if it is ungrammatical as a verb then it is an adjective, and vice versa? -- 124.171.138.193 (talk) 09:55, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's a bad pun in here ... somewhere ... I think ...

The Pearls Before Swine (comic strip) comic for today, August 7th, presumably contains yet another really bad play on words, I think :-). It's banging around in the back of my head, but won't come out.

(After the link rolls over to Sunday's page, you'll probably have to click one of the links under that page's SEARCH graphic to get back to Saturday's strip.)

Need the help of more literate Wikipedians than I seem to be today. Thanks! DaHorsesMouth (talk) 17:51, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not necessary, but I've taken the liberty of changing the URL in DaHorsesMouth's query to a more permanent one (and have restored his/her sig). Deor (talk) 17:58, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't that just an Oliver Twist reference? Or am I missing something? TomorrowTime (talk) 18:52, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know. The somewhat odd phrasing of both Rat's and Pig's remarks does suggest a more specific allusion than that, but I'm unable to identify the reference. Deor (talk) 19:42, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I want to think it's a ref to some old Beatles tune. There's also something (ooh, a clue perhaps) about Pig's eyes.

And, if any of that turns out to be true, it marks a sea change for Stephen Pastis -- up to this point his "bad pun" strips have had all the subtlety of a brick wall. DaHorsesMouth (talk) 21:16, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm old enough that current comics frequently make references to items of pop culture with which I'm unfamiliar. The only Beatles tune that seems relevant is their cover of "Please Mr. Postman", but aside from the title, there's no similarity in the lyrics. Deor (talk) 22:18, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Behaviour

Why is it that this word almost invariably means bad behaviour? Kittybrewster ☎ 19:40, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? That's not my impression. Looie496 (talk) 21:05, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In family contexts, the topic of a child's behaviour is usually raised when said behaviour has not been up to scratch. I mean, a parent does not sit a child down whose behaviour has been exemplary, with "I want to have a serious talk to you about your behaviour lately. It's been perfect". Maybe they should acknowledge good behaviour more often, rather than just taking it for granted and only focussing on behaviour when it's been less than great. Is this the sort of thing you're talking about, Kitty? In other contexts, police talk of both good and bad crowd behaviour. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 21:17, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

the phrase "your behavior" almost always has negative overtones - why would anyone want to single out some aspect of your behavior for conversation unless they wanted to change it? Occasionally you'll see it used positively: "Your behavior on the court today was impeccable; that's good sportsmanship", but that's usually to reinforce good behavior (a different kind of change). the word 'behavior' is by itself neutral. --Ludwigs2 21:51, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have found it used in divorce proceedings by the narcissist to belittle and reduce their opponent. Kittybrewster ☎ 21:57, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Blind men and an elephant and http://www.exemplarybehavior.com/. -- Wavelength (talk) 02:13, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See http://www.buzzle.com/articles/behavior-charts-for-kids.html and http://www.buzzle.com/articles/behavior-charts-for-teachers.html.

—Wavelength (talk) 03:48, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Translation from Japanese

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEJJFuSmGpE

This video's subtitles are missing what Dento and Prof. Araragi say. Could someone translate those parts? Thanks! --138.110.206.99 (talk) 20:25, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think you would be better off finding a Pokemon fan forum for these requests. I don't think there are any Pokemon fans among the regulars here (at least, none who also understand Japanese). You could try asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Pokémon. Also, please don't troll the Science desk. -- BenRG (talk) 22:34, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bravery vs courage

What is the difference? Kittybrewster ☎ 21:58, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

the same thing as, respectively, between the words:

lucky and fortunate
earthly and terrestrial
motherly and maternal

bravery is Germanic whereas courage is Latinate. The former word has a smell, the latter one a scent. 92.230.232.141 (talk) 22:13, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, they mean the same thing. It's a characteristic feature of the English language that we have a lot of synonyms due to our mixture of Germanic and Latin origins. --Tango (talk) 22:19, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

According to the Wiktionary (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/brave), brave (and the German term brav) is a French derivative and goes back to a word in the Gaulish language. Related terms exist in Irish and Breton. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 23:43, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would say that bravery is a property of behavior, but courage is a property of one's state of mind. Bravery is physical, courage is mental. Looie496 (talk) 02:38, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Help coming up with a short phrase for a company value?

The Chinese company I work for has asked that their catchy Chinese values be translated into English. The first 3 went ok: "Champion employees", "Embrace customers", "Quality, always", but the fourth is a bit tricky. Essentially, it means that the company always keeps its promises, meets all its deadlines, fulfills all its commitments. If it was a person, you'd say "he's a man of his word" or "his word is as good as gold" or what have you. That's the idea they want to convey. This is concise and lovely in Chinese, but I'm having a hard time thinking of an equally concise English equivalent. "Fulfill Commitments" is not very stirring! 174.34.144.211 (talk) 23:32, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, "dependable" is the word that occurs to me. Looie496 (talk) 02:41, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also reliable and trustworthy. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:12, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Integrity? 129.67.37.143 (talk) 11:08, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

August 8

Chinese coiffure

Does anyone have access to the book History of the Qin and Han Dynasties (秦汉史) by Jian Bozan? Page 198 of the work supposedly mentions the dress and appearance of the Dayuan people. The author of a book I am reviewing states the Chinese character used to describe the headdress of the people can mean either "turban (diadem) or a coiffure." With my limited knowledge of Chinese, the only character for the Chinese coiffure I know of is Jiu (鬏). What other possibilities are there?

I have a secondary question regarding whatever character that more knowledgeable editors may come up with. Even though the character can be used to mean coiffure and turban, has it ever been used to describe any other type of headgear other than turbans? If so, please give examples (preferably from around the Han Dynasty if possible). Thanks. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 10:20, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Number of phonemes

This question (Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities#Do_humans_have_a_natural_language) at the Humanities RD let me thinking: Is User:Ludwigs2 right?--Quest09 (talk) 10:44, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken the libery of emending the link in Quest's query. Deor (talk) 10:50, 8 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

August 2

French construction: "le (singular noun) est des plus (plural adjective)"

Homophonic Translation

Translate a single German sentence, please

Latin phrase translation

August 3

Illegitimate bastard

Related question

Earliest acronym?

Article Name - Chinese/Japanese Translation

August 4

Japanese translation

French: -ement vs. -ant endings

Chouli

Latin company motto

Archaic Dutch declension

August 5

comment dit-on...?

Hagrid's accent

Pronunciation of Lithuanian surname

Hague Convention Abolishing the Requirement of Legalisation for Foreign Public Documents

Podesay

Gesta Herwardi or De Gestis Herwardi Saxonis

hunting animals to extinction.

Ancient writing in Britain

Caption translation for an image

Daft as a brush?

August 6

Double adjectives following "a pair of"

Usage of "American"

Bringing a language back from extinction

Etymology of Yugoslavia

Japanese

"oly gyenge jellem, hogy mindent elkölt, az utolsó fillérig"

Japanese help

"The couple is" or "the couple are"...

August 7

Every other odd item in a set: part of speech?

There's a bad pun in here ... somewhere ... I think ...

Behaviour

Translation from Japanese

Bravery vs courage

Help coming up with a short phrase for a company value?

August 8

Chinese coiffure

Number of phonemes