Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language

Welcome to the language section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

• Computing
• Entertainment
• Humanities
• Language
• Mathematics
• Science
• Miscellaneous
• Archives

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

   

How can I get my question answered?

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

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

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

See also:

• Teahouse
• Help desk
• Village pump
• Help manual

December 27

Korean help

There is a street address in http://www.jejuair.net/company/images/contactus_map_03.jpg

What is the Korean (typed)? Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 08:50, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

The text after "주소" (which means "address") reads: 제주득별자치도 제주시 연동 301–7. I don't know Korean and I can't be sure about my comment, but I think there is at least one typo in it: the full Korean name of the Jeju Province is 제주특별자치도, that is, the third character is 특 theuk, and not 득 deuk as it appears in the image. --Theurgist (talk) 17:22, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much :) WhisperToMe (talk) 00:11, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Arabic help

There is an Arabic name of Royal Wings at http://www.royalwings.com.jo/images/3.jpg What is it? Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 17:04, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

الأجنحة الملكية‎, as seen here. --Theurgist (talk) 17:23, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you :) WhisperToMe (talk) 19:40, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Jana Gana Mana

I just read the article Jana Gana Mana. Now I've actually once taken the trouble to learn the basics of the devanagari script, although I don't remember nearly all of it. But what caught my eye was the first part: জনগণমন. I remember that the letter ন means "na". So why does it only appear in the first and third word, not the second one? Why isn't it জনগনমন? (Note: I had to copy&paste all the devanagari text. My keyboard obviously lacks direct devanagari keys.) JIP | Talk 20:57, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

If you look at the article Bengali alphabet, it appears that the letter 'ণ' is in the second (retroflex) series, whereas 'ন' is in the third (dental) series; but they are both glossed as 'n'. It would appear therefore that in Sanskrit these words have different nasal consonants, but that the difference is neutralised in Bengali, but the difference in spelling is preserved. --ColinFine (talk) 23:44, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Translation Portuguese/English

I have already translated an article from portuguese, but I'm not sure if the english translation is well, can someone give a help revising the english of the translation? It's Talk:Miguel, Crown Prince of_Portugal#Draft, on point III. Thank you for your attention, Jorge alo (talk) 14:18, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

Did you mean to link to Talk:Miguel, Crown Prince of_Portugal#Draft? 86.179.114.20 (talk) 03:17, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I think he did.--Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 18:57, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Receipt meaning recipe ?

In the BBC series Cranford, they used the word "receipt" to mean a recipe for food. Is this British English, obsolete, or both ? Wiktionary:receipt lists recipe as the 6th meaning, but is this British, obsolete, or what ? I've never heard it used that way before in the US. StuRat (talk) 22:58, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

I think it's old rather than British. I remember seeing it in the Homer Price books; you can't get much more American than that. --Trovatore (talk) 23:04, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

According to the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, it has an archaic meaning of "recipe".

receipt noun

I 1 = recipe noun ... c The formula of a preparation, or an account of the means, for effecting some end; the means for attaining an end. archaic early 17th century.

Mitch Ames (talk) 00:02, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Well, it's certainly been in use much more recently than that. Homer Price was published in 1943. --Trovatore (talk) 09:35, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Oh indeed, Jennifer Paterson of the Two Fat Ladies used to use it quite extensively in her spoken pieces to camera. However I don't have any of their cookbooks to check whether she used it in writing. The series original ran from 1996 - 1999, but has been repeated since. --TammyMoet (talk) 13:18, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

That does seem to imply that it's more common in British English than US English. Sounds like it became archaic in the US first. StuRat (talk) 05:12, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

The two words appear to have a common origin:[1][2] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:57, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, all. StuRat (talk) 09:30, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Pajama man song

In the article The Yama Yama Man, there is mentioned something called a "pajama man song" (first paragraph in the Origins section with a tag, sourced from The Billboard magazine). It appears to be a turn of the century American neologism from the world of stage and theater, however unclear what exactly it means. Any ideas? My guess is they were comical acts involving people in clown suits ("pajamas") but it's a guess and there might be a more specific meaning. I searched Google, Google Books and OED without much luck. Green Cardamom (talk) 22:58, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

This might be a stumper. Well I won't check back here but if anyone has an idea please post on Talk:The Yama Yama Man, thanks! The article is coming up for a DYK in a week or so. Green Cardamom (talk) 19:49, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

I went looking for context, and couldn't find it. Why does Google Books only allow snippet view for Billboard magazine from 1908, and why are the snippets so small as to be illegible, and why do many of the highlight boxes appear over blank white areas instead of over the text?  Card Zero  (talk) 22:11, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Does this link work? It's in the far-right column. There should be a zoom (+) button at the top. Green Cardamom (talk) 03:09, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

What I see there is just a 132x183 pixel image of the front cover, which isn't clickable. There is no aspect of the page layout fitting the description "far right column", and no zoom button. It still looks the same when I tried with a different computer (different OS, different ISP). Odd.  Card Zero  (talk) 10:06, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Might be a regional restriction. I've uploaded a copy to Internet Archive], can you access it? It's 350MB, if you want, wait a day or so the "Read Online" version will show up (takes a while for it to convert/derive). Green Cardamom (talk) 02:54, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

December 28

Are there more references to alternate language history beyond this video?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQhqzRlJCjk&feature=related

On Facebook, I posted the status with improvised "unadulterated/unfrenchified English:" "I love a good alternate history lesson. (Or, mysoul betend an enrichful teachment of the proxyborne yoreyears.)"

How far off did I miss the mark? How would "I love a good alternate history lesson" sound in the Unfrenchified, alternate English shown in said video?

And as the subject asks, where do I find how our English would sound if the French hadn't had won the invasion? (As a bonus, is there an arcane "translator" to this kind of alternate English, so that I can see what ordinary pasted texts would look like in this way?) Thanks. --70.179.174.101 (talk) 09:28, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Well, you have 'rich' in your sentence, but a quick Google search reveals that the French borrowed it from the Germanic, not the other way around; but believe it or not proxy is from [French http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=proxy&searchmode=none].

In any case it's certain that the pronunciation would be different. Who know when or if the/a Great Vowel Shift might have happened? Have a look at Old English to get an idea of what English looked like before 1066.

Duomillia (talk) 13:34, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

In Sprague de Camp's classic short story "The Wheels of If" the locals speak an unfrenchified Anglish. He doesn't always get every single francification, but it's still a good try (and much lengthier than that video). --Orange Mike | Talk 14:02, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

You might take a look at Anglo-Saxon linguistic purism and follow up on some of the leads therein. Deor (talk) 14:30, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

What's wrong with the word "I"? That's not from French. Adam Bishop (talk) 18:35, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

The best known example in Science Fiction is Poul Anderson's 1989 piece 'Uncleftish Beholding' which, though originally presented with no explicit justificatory frame, logically predicates an alternative history in which English has developed to the 20th century (since it's a straightforward description of some 20th-century scientific knowledge) without any influence from the Romance languages - including Latin itself - or from Greek.

The complete lack of surrounding explanation accompanying the piece's original publication in Analog magazine added to the amusement of its impact. It wasn't even explained if it was fiction or fact: the magazine published both, and Anderson had previously written factual articles as well as fiction for it; consequently the reader had to recognise the subject matter and work out why it was being thus presented.

Although the work is presumably still in copyright, I daresay web searching would turn up a copy of the text, which is well worth reading for someone with interests in 'alternative language history.' {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.141 (talk) 20:31, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

As the IP above mentions, but does not elaborate on: Many 'French' words could just as well be seen to be 'Latin' words. Even without the Norman conquest, it's likely that Latin (Europe's academic and intellectual language for centuries) would be a massive source for new words. As far as I know, England was already a Christian country by the time of the Norman conquest, and as such, the presence of the Catholic church would have ensured the prestige of Latin.

All languages change, as indeed is the premise of your question: 'What would English be without the French words?' i.e. 'How would English have evolved without the French influence?'. The answer to that would depend on how you imagine world history unfolding. Who would be England's foremost trade partners? How would the power dynamics be in this alternate world? Who would influence whom? If Latin is still the prestige language, the romance influence on English grammar and vocabulary might be very similar to what it is today.

Some languages are quite purist, modern Norwegian is more purist than modern English, but not as purist as Icelandic. Another interesting language would be Turkish, where Attatürk chose to reform Ottoman Turkish to modern Turkish by removing a lot of loan words from Arabic and Persian. As a result one of his speeches (written in Ottoman Turkish) is incomprehensible for the modern Turk. V85 (talk) 22:41, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

---

There's a whole genre of "Altlangs", with Brithenig being semi-well-known (see also Wenedyk etc.). -- AnonMoos (talk) 18:18, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Curate's egg: 'her' and 'she'

At List of British monarchs by longevity I found this footnote:

• Should she be alive on ... 18 October 2034, at the age of 108, she would surpass Sobhuza II of Swaziland as the longest documented reigning monarch (male or female) in world history, unless the reign of King Bhumibol Adulyadej (King Rama IX) of Thailand surpasses 82 years, 254 days. He ascended 5 years, 242 days before her, and is one year 228 days younger than she.

The last sentence looks wrong to me, mixing 'her' and 'she'. I'd prefer 'her' in both places, being the natural word to use in both constructions, and this also satisfies parallel construction.

I could also (grudgingly) accept 'she' in both places, meaning:

• He ascended 5 years, 242 days before she did, and is one year 228 days younger than she is.

But we have a curate's egg at the moment. Can this possibly be correct? -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 19:15, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Looks OK as is to me. Her is the object of the preposition before and thus in the objective case, and "younger than she [is]" is also acceptable usage. The constructions aren't really parallel, so the syntax need not be. Deor (talk) 19:24, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Grammatically it's OK, but I would say that than + accusative is a relatively little used form in modern (spoken) English, so for the modern reader, and given the structure of the sentence, I would've written than her rather than than she. V85 (talk) 22:47, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Did you mean to say ... than + nominative is a relatively little used form ...? What you're suggesting (and I agree) is that we use than + accusative. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 23:45, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

The "than she/than she is/than her" could just be left off. We also need an "On" before 18 October 2034. Clarityfiend (talk) 05:06, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

It's there @ "Should she be alive on". The text I quoted is the last of a number of bulleted points that all refer back to that introductory phrase. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 07:44, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

I've just realised that if it had been written out as per my above hypothetical example: He ascended 5 years, 242 days before she did, and is one year 228 days younger than she is, I wouldn't have had the slightest issue with it. But leaving out either of the 'did' and the 'is' and just having those dangling 'she's makes it unnatural, forced and stuffy to my ears, even if it is technically correct. The aim of written language is to flow, and not have readers questioning word choices in mid-read, which would interrupt the seamless imparting of meaning from the writer's mind to the reader's mind.

• 'Her' in both places would achieve this optimally, being concise, correct and natural.
• 'She did' and 'she is' also does the job, with only a slight loss of conciseness.
• I've already explained why I don't like bare 'she's in this sentence.
• The worst of all possible worlds is mixing 'her' and she', as we have currently. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 08:05, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

So you asked a question, waited for some replies, and finally posted your opinion, which underlay your question in the first place. Looks like soapboxing to me. FWIW I find the original text unexceptionable. --ColinFine (talk) 15:12, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

How extraordinarily - and surprisingly - rude that remark was, Colin. I said "I've just realised that ...", meaning that this was a later thought, not something that had occurred to me when I posted my original question. There was no soapboxing involved; I was simply updating my thoughts. I read something in an article, felt uneasy about it, and came here for some advice before deciding whether to edit it or not. Because sometimes expressions that I find a little odd might be perfectly OK in other idiolects, and I don't profess to know all of them. And sometimes these things require some to-and-froing before one settles on a final position. All positively expressed points of view are welcome.

Btw, you put your criticism of me in normal size font, but your actual response to the question in small type, something that's reserved for off-topic comments. What does that say about your priorities as a ref desk answerer? How terribly sad to end the year with such an exchange, but there was no way I was going to let you get away with that outrageous and unjustified comment. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 20:33, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Jack, I apologise, and have struck the comment about soapboxing. I saw you ask "is it correct?" and later assert that it was "the worst of all possible worlds", an opinion with which I happen to disagree: I would find "her"/"her" natural in speech, but "her"/"she" preferable in writing. --ColinFine (talk) 21:15, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick retraction, Colin. Disagreeing is par for the course on the ref desks, not something to get defensive about. When I came here for some opinions/advice/comments/feedback, I certainly did not expect them all to agree with my original position. And most haven't. My initial impulse when I read the text in question was to immediately edit it to the way I would have preferred to see it. But now, I probably won't, thanks to the invaluable advice of my esteemed colleagues, yourself included. (Unless I come across it in a year's time and no longer have any memory of the foregoing; or much else.) -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 21:35, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

December 29

Him/himself

I'm usually reasonably good with the language, but I'm not entirely sure which word to use in instances where sentence subjects are performing actions with objects within certain proximities of themselves. I've made up three examples to illustrate my confusion:

• The pitcher threw the ball behind [him/himself].
• After he finished reading, he placed the book beside [him/himself] on the couch.
• I set the book down next to [me/myself].

For these three, I'm thinking the correct pronouns would be him, him, and me. I'm basing my guesses somewhat on the phrase, "I put the past behind me," as something like, "I put the past behind myself" just sounds absurd.

Any help (and with an intelligible explanation) would be appreciated. I'm pretty sure that once I can figure out which pronoun is correct in instances like these, I'll always remember. --Sgt. R.K. Blue (talk) 09:50, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Reflexive pronoun is the article. The problem seems to be that the person is the subject of the sentence, but is not quite the object - a location near to the person is the object. So I think you're right. Himself would be needed if the person was the object. In David Bowie's lyrics he opted for "I turned myself to face me", which was surely incorrect and should have been "I turned myself to face myself". Similarly you could have "The pitcher threw the ball at himself" and "After he finished reading, he placed the book on himself", with the person being the object. (In all these sentences there are two objects, in fact.)  Card Zero  (talk) 10:47, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

In the first example, if you use "him", that "him" could be referring to any third party mentioned in preceding sentences. In the second example, that would be clumsy because the word "he" was already used in the sentence (it's bad style to use "he/him" repeatedly to refer to more than one person when these words are used close to each other), but still not completely free of ambiguity. That's precisely the purpose of using the reflexive pronoun. Only in the last case, there's no doubt that "I" and "me" is the same person, and "me" could be used instead of "myself" without loss of information.--Itinerant1 (talk) 10:59, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

What's the purpose of ever using "myself"?  Card Zero  (talk) 11:04, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

I can't tell you the purpose, but what I can say is that the phrase "By myself" means something, whereas "By me" means something different, if it means anything at all. It's all a matter of context. --TammyMoet (talk) 18:17, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Practical English Usage informs me that "...after prepositions of place, we often use a personal pronoun (me, you etc) if the meaning is clear without using a reflexive. E.g. She took her dog with her (she could hardly take her dog with somebody else), but she was very pleased with herself (she could be pleased with somebody else)." --Itinerant1 (talk) 11:27, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

@ TammyMoet: If you don't have anything nice to say, come sit by me (Dorothy Parker). -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 18:27, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

The proto-indoeuropean reflexive pronoun was entirely lost in English (it survived in Latin and Slavic languages like Polish and Russian). However, because there are times when a reflexive pronoun would be useful to eliminate ambiguity, an ad hoc solution was invented by adding "self" or "own" to the personal pronouns, and even then, there are still problems with ambiguity. To really understand the power of the reflexive pronoun, you would have to know Latin, Polish, Russian or any of the other languages in which it survived. It's kind of difficult to piece together using just English. Any technical explanation using just English would be convoluted and generally unhelpful for ordinary practical purposes. It's like the subjunctive mood in English, which is a difficult concept to grasp or explain for English speakers who don't know German, but easy to figure out for those who do. For practical purposes, you just have to rely on example. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 11:40, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks for the quick responses. I found the "She took her dog with her" example particularly helpful. --Sgt. R.K. Blue (talk) 17:42, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

And in the American midwest, we would say, "She took her dog with." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:50, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

... but in the rest of the world, we would ask "with what?" Dbfirs 14:17, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

You have to say it the right way, stressing the "with". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:14, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Arabic help

What is Arabic for "Embassy of Qatar in France"? I want to use it in Commons:Category:Qatari Embassy, Paris Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 10:37, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

I think سفارة قطر بفرنسا‎ could do. --Theurgist (talk) 18:24, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

It took a bit of googling [3] but it's actually سفارة قطر في فرنسا‎ ; the difference is "fi fransa" and not "bifransa". --Xuxl (talk) 09:15, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

fī faransā is another (and probably more obvious) way of saying it, but I don't think this means bifaransā is wrong. I chose bi because I noticed there were biʾusturāliyā and bilātfiyā respectively beneath the two photographs at ar:سفارة. Search Google for بفرنسا‎ and "سفارة قطر بفرنسا"‎. Additional comments by Arabic speakers are welcome. --Theurgist (talk) 13:57, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Brněnec

Brněnec is the location of the WWII-era Brünnlitz forced labor camp where Oskar Schindler relocated his German Enamelware factory and with it 1,200 Jewish prisoners he rescued. The Brněnec page lacks indication of the pronunciation that I need for transcription into modern Hebrew. -- Deborahjay (talk) 14:02, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Czech pronunciation: [ˈbr̩.ɲɛ.nɛts], the "R" is syllabic. Here is a convention for Herbaicisation of foreign names; quickly glancing through it I couldn't detect anything about syllabic consonants, but the name Brněnec is very similar to the well-known Brno [ˈbr̩.no], which appears on the Hebrew Wikipedia as ברנו. The -ně- combination is pronounced as if it were spelt -ňe-, and the <ň> in Czech writes /ɲ/, the sound that is spelt <ñ> in Spanish (as in cañón) and <gn> in French and Italian. Probably ברננץ‎ or ברנינץ‎ will do, as far as I can comment on this. --Theurgist (talk) 15:00, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Chinese, Russian, and Turkish help

At the Commons, Commons:Paris, the page says "This page contains a selection of the best illustrations of Paris stored in Commons" What is the phrase in Chinese, Russian, and Turkish? Thanks, WhisperToMe (talk) 17:41, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

As follows:

• Russian: Эта страница содержит подборку лучших иллюстраций, хранящихся в Париже общин
• Turkish: Bu sayfa Commons saklanan Paris'in en iyi çizimler bir seçme içeriyor
• Chinese: 此页面包含了一个在下议院中选择巴黎最好的插图

Will that do? Rcsprinter (warn) 19:36, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Yep - thank you so much! WhisperToMe (talk) 19:44, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

As for one other thing, what are the Chinese characters in this picture?

• File:Paris 13e - Olympiades - temple bouddhique 2.JPG

Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 19:44, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

• 法國潮州會館 (in simplified characters: 法国潮州会馆). rʨanaɢ (talk) 23:19, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Rcsprinter - those are the results of Google Translate, but I as a human being daresay that at least the Russian doesn't make perfect sense. I'd probably revise it as: "Эта страница содержит подборку лучших иллюстраций Парижа, хранящихся на Викискладе." or something like that. --Theurgist (talk) 20:19, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! I changed the Russian WhisperToMe (talk) 22:38, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

The Chinese machine translation is also incorrect. I'm not a native speaker so I can't give a great translation either, but something like 维基共享资源在此页为您提供巴黎相关的图片 would be better (the translation is not exact but it sounds more natural than a literal translation). The one from Google is not really grammatical. rʨanaɢ (talk) 23:33, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your help WhisperToMe (talk) 06:09, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

The Turkish is wrong too. My best guess, with limited Turkish, is "Bu sayfa Commons'dan Paris'in en iyi çizimlerinin seçimi içeriyor." Lesgles (talk) 10:41, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Language help (Italian, Japanese, Korean, Portuguese)

For the Commons:Paris page What is the phrase "This page contains a selection of the best illustrations of Paris stored in Commons" in Italian, Japanese, Korean, and Portuguese? Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 20:08, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

• Italian: "Questa pagina contiene una selezione delle migliori illustrazioni di Parigi contenute in Commons" --151.41.188.184 (talk) 15:36, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

December 30

German

Straubingen on the Danube, c. 1630

I've got no knowledge in German

• 1. How would you translate into German: "He is from Straubing"?
• 2. Can the word "Straubingen" be a case form of Straubing (in Greman or in Ancient German)?
• 3. May one use the form "Straubingen" in sentences like "He is from Straubing" (in Greman or in Ancient German)?
• 4. May the words "Straubing-Straubingen" be (grammatically) related to each other just as the words "Munich-München" (and likewise) are?

77.125.76.235 (talk) 10:28, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

• 1. Er kommt aus Straubing or Er ist aus Straubing.
• 2-4. As far as I can tell, you would never use Straubingen in any kind of grammatical context to refer to this particular town. -ingen is simply a common ending for place names, but not in the name of this town. If someone were to say Straubingen, I would assume the person is referring to some other town. --Terfili (talk) 15:11, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Straubingen is apparently a name once used to refer to present-day Straubing near Regensburg. See this article: Ulrich Schmidl. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 23:26, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Actually, it looks more like a older dative case form of Straubing. See this article: [[4]]. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 23:37, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

That's more likely to be a variant name than an old dative. Only weak nouns ever had a dative singular in -en, and I don't think any noun ending in -ing was ever weak. Angr (talk) 00:07, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

There seems to be a bit of confusion here about what is a dative form of what: as far as I recall, the -ingen itself is an old Germanic dative ending, used in a locative sense in place names (so a presumed archaic form "Straubingen" would basically mean "place of Straub", who- or whatever Straub may have been). For various reasons, the -ingen ending was shortened to -ing in Bavarian (and I think in English - I may be totally off the mark, but I seem to remember that English place names like Reading share the same etymology) -- Ferkelparade π 01:30, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Addendum: de:-ingen confirms what I just said - it's nice to know that occasionally I'm not completely wrong :P -- Ferkelparade π 01:32, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

My point was just that Straubingen is not synchronically the dative of Straubing (and wasn't in the 18th century either, when the quote at de:Gäuboden was written), even if place names in -ingen did start life as dative plurals. Angr (talk) 02:19, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Aye, and you were certainly correct..sorry, I was barging in a bit prematurely here after I read "Straubing" and "dative", without actually having read the quote at de:Gäuboden. Town/City names in German generally aren't inflected, except the genitive -s and except the odd archaic latinism where a Latin inflection ending is stuck on a German city name. -- Ferkelparade π 02:47, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Regarding your number 4, perhaps I'm missing something here, but how are "Munich" and "München" "grammatically related"? They are in two different languages. "Milano", "Milan" and "Mailand" aren't grammatically related for the same reason, as aren't "Sprengstoff" and "explosive" (to take an example at random). Tonywalton ^Talk 13:30, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

December 31

US flag

The US flag features two "interspersed" rectangles of stars. I'm wondering if there's a better term for this. Here's a scaled down version:

* * *                  * * *
             * *        * *
* * *    +         =   * * *
             * *        * *
* * *                  * * *  

StuRat (talk) 17:11, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

The sites I've read before consider the design one of alternating rows of so-many and so-many; I don't recall an exact term. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 17:19, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

It might be described as a repeated quincuncial pattern—at least, that is the term used at Francis Hopkinson#Flag controversy. Deor (talk) 17:32, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

I agree -- and "Quincunx" is even one of my favorite words... -- AnonMoos (talk) 23:36, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

wikt:interleave (which means regularly interspersed) is a slight improvement on wikt:intersperse (which means irregularly mixed). You could also say arrays instead of rectangles.  Card Zero  (talk) 17:37, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

I agree with Grandiose; I think it's best described not as two interleaved rectangles but simply as alternating rows of however-many stars. rʨanaɢ (talk) 17:40, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Square lattice calls it a "diagonal square lattice". Perhaps it counts as knurled.  Card Zero  (talk) 17:45, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

In my lifetime the US has gone from 48 states, very easy to turn into a rectangle of stars, to 50 as discussed above. Being a bit of a maths and flag nerd, I've been busting to know how the pattern would be arranged for 51 states. HiLo48 (talk) 00:51, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, that's 3 rows of 17, but obviously that would have the wrong proportions. If you break it into 3 rows of 8 and 3 rows of 9, alternating, that could work:

 * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * *
 * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * *
 * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * *

StuRat (talk) 01:01, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Our article has two possible designs (here but the one Stu shows is most likely. Rmhermen (talk) 03:48, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure 51 is really very likely, though. The GOP, if they can help it, will not allow Puerto Rico to become a state without a more Republican-leaning state admitted at the same time (George Will suggested Staten Island, although I have never actually heard of Staten Island separatism outside that article). So maybe we should be thinking in terms of a straight jump to 52. --Trovatore (talk) 04:31, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Other ways of achieving a new Republican-leaning state would be (1) separating Upstate New York from NYC + Long Island, (2) separating inland California from coastal California, or (3) dividing Texas into two. But I can't imagine the Republicans allowing a predominantly Spanish-speaking area to become a state under any circumstances, even if they were to receive a Republican-friendly state of their own in return. Angr (talk) 08:26, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

The GOP certainly has a nativist faction that would object to a Spanish-speaking state, but that's not the kind of thing that's going to result in party-line opposition (and the Democratic Party also has such a faction, though it might be relatively weaker). The thing that makes me predict solid Republican opposition is not cultural ideology but self-preservation. No one wants to give their opponents eight electoral votes for the forseeable future. --Trovatore (talk) 23:56, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Splitting California into a coastal part and an inland part is a recurrent conservative fantasy, but it's extremely unpopular among voters (a recent poll found that voters disapproved of the idea 80% to 10%), so I don't see this happening any time soon. Besides, a lot of inland California has recently become hispanic, socially conservative, fiscally liberal, and generally unsympathetic of the GOP; Californian white conservatives want to secede from Bay Area granola liberals, but they don't particularly care for hispanics, either. In 2000, Bush won in every single inland county except Imperial. In 2008, Obama managed to take Riverside, San Bernardino, Fresno, Stanislaus, Merced (by 8%), and San Joaquin (by 10%). The only way to form a Republican state out of California is to push the new boundary all the way to the Sierras. By my count, if we were to form a conservative state by joining all contiguous counties that voted for McCain in 2008, we'd end up with a thinly populated, mostly mountainous state, with the population of somewhere around 2 million (vs. 36 million in the coastal counterpart), no industry to speak of, and with the largest urban center being Bakersfield. --Itinerant1 (talk) 09:24, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

HiLo, there's no such thing as "a bit of a nerd". It's either full Nerdsville or nothing. I think today's a good day for you to come out of the closet, vexillonerdologically speaking. You're among friends here.  :) -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 04:23, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

The trouble is, Jack, while as a kid I could recognise just about every country's flag, too many of them have changed since then (flags and countries), and my knowledge of lots of those that haven't seems to have been filed in one of those hard to find brain compartments. Does being a vexillological amnesiac remove one from the nerd team? HiLo48 (talk) 04:59, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Not at all. Just being aware there have ever been countries called Paraguay or Bhutan or Togo, not to mention having even a vague idea of what their flags are or were, not to mention editing Wikipedia with serious intent, puts you in the nerd category these days. I remember the days when every second kid was into flags and stamps and coins and stuff like that, and knew about Trieste and Danzig and Fiume and Port Arthur and all the rest; they were golden days, philatelonumismatovexillonerdologically speaking.  :) -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 05:19, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

These days the kids collect friends. HiLo48 (talk) 22:38, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

I was a total geography nerd when I was a kid. I could name the capital of any country, recognize the shape of the country (except for small island nations, which all look like little circles), and recognize the flag of any country. I could probably still do those things for any country whose capital, shape, and flag haven't changed since 1970, but other countries? Fuhgeddaboutit. Angr (talk) 08:26, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Signing and talking

Could a bilingual person (in sign language and whatever spoken language), sign and speak at the same time? I have only seen it on films, but I know that signs do not reflect the local spoken language (for example, American Sign Language is not the equivalent of English in signs), so, it must be quite difficult to speak and sign at the same time. 88.8.75.198 (talk) 19:34, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

You are correct that American Sign Language is not the same as Signed English. For examples of bilingual people, perhaps a good source might be YouTube. BrainyBabe (talk) 19:39, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Right, but could they do that spontaneously? When people say they are not the same, I have in mind that the grammatical structure is as far as a foreign language. So, it looks like it's incredible difficult, so difficult as writing Chinese while speaking in English (for a bilingual person in both). 88.8.75.198 (talk) 19:50, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

I studied Japanese Sign Language in Japan (because I had some hearing-impaired kids in my class I was teaching), and there appear to be two types. There is one for people who still think in Japanese (i.e. learners), and one for those fully born and brought up with only sign language as a base. The former is based entirely on the structure of spoken Japanese itself, whilst the latter seems to be a more simplified (and therefore efficient) version. Of course, this is not so clear-cut, so there are combinations in between. The word order also seemed to be much more free (as is the word order in spoken Japanese itself), as in, I could use either Japanese word order or English word order (to a certain extant - the verb still came at the end), and the meaning would still be understood (in most cases). Speaking at the same time (because I had to interpret for the other kids and teachers), therefore, was not a problem, but this is JSL. I don't know ASL or BSL, but I doubt there is much difference. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 23:17, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

The JSL article covers this. As in several other countries, there are two (here three) very different languages, JSL and Manually Signed Japanese. It appears from that article that JSL may owe more to Japanese than ASL and BSL do to English, but I suspect that, like them, it is a separate language with a radically different grammar. --ColinFine (talk) 16:24, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Signing while speaking is possible. I've seen it done (in English and ASL). I'm sure it's difficult, but most things involving a second language are, and people still manage it. rʨanaɢ (talk) 00:50, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

In the case of ASL, when people sign and speak simultaneously, their ASL tends to approximate English. It's actually not very difficult if you allow yourself to modify your signing to accommodate English, or if you sign pidgin ASL to begin with and thus already approximate English, as a lot of native English speakers do. I imagine it would be much more difficult to sign pure, unaccommodating ASL while speaking English. (It would be interesting to see how this compares with deaf native signers who can speak English, and with hearing children raised by deaf parents.) As for your Chinese example, I've spoken English while reading French (that is, translating while reading), and I think that's more difficult, because with simultaneous sign and speech, both are produced directly from the same thoughts, and no translation is involved. Plus they're your thoughts, and you're less likely to think something you don't know how to say. Sign languages are like creoles, in that there is a "pure" form and a whole series of compromise forms that are closer to the prestige language. I imagine that reading and speaking would be easier if you were reading in French and speaking Haitian creole, because you could adjust your creole to more closely match your input, and that's closer to the situation with English and ASL. — kwami (talk) 22:37, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Joyo kanji

Do native Japanese speakers reliably know whether or not a given kanji is on the Joyo list (e.g. because they remember from school)? I mean, I'm sure everyone knows that all the very common kanji will be on the list, and that very obscure kanji (that maybe they don't even recognise) won't be, but is there a grey area in between where people would be unsure and have to look it up? 86.181.202.9 (talk) 23:51, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

I never give thought about joyo kanji. I just use kanji I want to use. It means nothing to most people that whether or not a given kanji is on the Joyo list. Though joyo kanji is important to civil servants and people in media, especially for reporters/writers in news paper companies and telop/tickers writers in TV companies, as they have to use joyo kanji only, fiction and nonfiction writers do not pay attention to joyo kanji at all. Oda Mari (talk) 18:37, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

I understand from your reply that these people do not care whether they are using Joyo kanji. Do you mean also that they don't even know whether they are using Joyo kanji? 86.171.174.74 (talk) 19:48, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Joyo kanji are the ones you learn in school. But while you're at school, you'll also pick up non-joyo kanji. I doubt many people can remember which is which, unless they have to keep track of them for their job. Some are obviously standard, because they're used all over the place. Others are obviously rare: the kanji in the name of your town, say, which you hardly ever see anywhere else. But I suspect some cases would be difficult to judge, and most people have no reason to even try. — kwami (talk) 22:05, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

January 1

Central Asia and Azerbaijani languages Turkish and Russian

Before Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan, Azerbaijan and Uzbekistan became USSR states, did their languages have sound totally turkish or were they the same as today with Russian words? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.31.16.143 (talk) 02:03, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

They had their own languages even when they were USSR states. Languages don't correspond to political boundaries. rʨanaɢ (talk) 02:11, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

By the way, it's been alleged that the Soviets sometimes made rather arbitrary decisions as to what were to be considered separate languages and what were to be considered mere dialects, based more on political motives than pure linguistics, and that the newly-adopted writing systems for the various Turkic languages were made needlessly different from each other. The first writing systems adopted under the Soviets were based on the Latin alphabet, then converted to Cyrillic under Stalin... AnonMoos (talk) 12:10, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Languages of the Soviet Union has some infomation, though not as much as one might hope. --ColinFine (talk) 16:31, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

I think anon. is asking whether the massive Russian loans in Soviet Turkic languages preceded the Soviet Union. AFAIK, they did not: most came in with the development of technical, educational, political, and administrative vocabulary under the Soviet government, with Russian as the model. There may have been some Russian loans before that, but they would have been far fewer and more likely to be for Russian cultural things: the Orthodox church, maybe, or food or music, the kinds of terms you would pick up from your neighbors. Foreign administrative terms would probably have been Persian. — kwami (talk) 22:18, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Is "lost" in Latin "perditus"?

Also, how would it be pronounced, /pur-dih-shus/ or /per-dit-oos/? 99.242.47.208 (talk) 03:07, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it means lost and is pronounced /per-ditoos/. --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 03:22, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

/per-di-toos/ I believe. Rmhermen (talk) 03:43, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

With the stress on the first syllable. Angr (talk) 08:18, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

That is the nominative singular masculine form - for a different case, number or gender it would have a different ending. See Latin declension#First and second declension adjectives. --ColinFine (talk) 16:34, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Anon, the pronunciation would depend on whether you're trying for a Latin pronunciation, or an English approximation. But I don't see how you'd get an "sh" sound, since there's no i after the t. — kwami (talk) 22:09, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

"Danish pasting"

I've seen this phrase used, but "Korean pasting" does not show up (when searched), for example. Why?Curb Chain (talk) 03:41, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Probably a play on "Danish pastry"... AnonMoos (talk) 06:59, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Need your help translating the following document

Does anyone know Arabic? TheCuriousGnome (talk) 08:34, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

I can't help you, but if it's an Ottoman document, it must be in Ottoman Turkish, not in Arabic. --Theurgist (talk) 11:49, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

It's rather small and blurry (except for the tughra and heading at top), so it would probably need a pretty good expertise to decipher). AnonMoos (talk) 11:55, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

linguistics

am a student and i need some help in linguistics: difference between chomsky and hymes in communicative competence !! thnk u — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.1.114.118 (talk) 09:56, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Communicative competence is being able to successfully convey your intended meaning to your listener(s) -- not always the same thing as speaking a language correctly... AnonMoos (talk) 11:44, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Anyway, that's how I would define it, but we actually have articles Dell Hymes and Communicative Competence which say something slightly different... AnonMoos (talk) 11:51, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

For a student to be asking this homework question outright, without proffering any evidence they've at least done some simple searching to begin their quest to answer it, is not acceptable. I can understand it's holiday season and all, and you can't be arsed to do the work yourself. So you come here and effectively ask us to do it for you. Not on; we have a policy of not doing people's homework for them, and we have it for very good reasons. Come back when you've done some groundwork, and ask a MUCH more specific question, which we'll help you out with IF you can demonstrate you've tried to answer it yourself but failed. Happy New Year. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 18:38, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Vexillonerdologically (not to mention philatelonumismatovexillonerdologically)

I saw this word in a section above and turned to Google search to get its meaning, precedents, record of use, etc. Google only found one use which happens to be the one I saw above.

Is this because the word was only recently coined or does it have a prior history of written use that has not yet been placed on the internet?

Also please what is the meaning? The root words "vexil" and "loner" and "dologic" seem clear but that is as far as I can take it today. Thanks, and very best wishes for 2012. Wanderer57 (talk) 22:24, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

I have an extremely strong suspicion that the word was coined VERY recently. Yesterday, in fact. HiLo48 (talk) 22:40, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Technical name is nonce word... AnonMoos (talk) 23:18, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Even more recently than that, HiLo48. I coined the (relatively) short version yesterday, but it appeared in its full glory for the first time only this morning (our time; 2nd January). It's gonna be a great year, I can feel it in my bones. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 01:23, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

It's a word coined by Jack of Oz in the thread above, from vexillology, with nerd stuck in the middle and -ically added to make it an adverb, presumably meaning "in a way characteristic of a nerd interested in flags". Adding philatelo- and numismato- extends the nerdishness to include two other obsessions of some nerdish youngsters, stamps (philately) and coins (numismatics). Deor (talk) 22:44, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Great word! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.171.174.74 (talk) 00:41, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 01:23, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you. Nonce word - "not expected to recur". Pity. Perhaps a campaign to create questions and situations which cry out for the use of "Vexillonerdologically" could be mounted? There must be scads of them.

This raises the question, what word was used to convey the same meaning until this sparkling new one was coined? (Or minted, or printed?) Wanderer57 (talk) 02:59, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Don't encourage him! Jack is always making up words and trying to get others to adopt their use (when he's not employing them to cheat at Scrabble). Deor (talk) 11:52, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Cheat? Me? Never, sir. It's one thing to use a made-up word, knowing that one's fellow players will accept it as yet another of those obscure but valid words I happen to know and they don't, and they won't challenge it, and may not even ask what it means, but if they do, I'll come up with a plausible answer (well, it's up to them to check in the dictionary, and if they're too damn lazy, that's their lookout; I can't be blamed for being a human being who sometimes makes .. er, mistakes). But cheat? Me? Never, sir.  :)

The pity is I'll never be able to use my new baby in a Scrabble game, unless they more than double the number of letter-spaces on each side of the board, which would have other consequences. (Anyone for a septuple word score?) -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 21:08, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Btw, "philat ... ically" scores 455 with a septuple word score. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 02:54, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

January 2

What's the go with hyphens and dashes?

Been editing Wikipedia for a couple of years now, and one area I've never come to grips with is one that some editors are clearly obsessed with - hyphens, en-dashes and em-dashes. (I will probably be chastised and corrected for the way I've just used them!) I can hardly see the difference when I see a change made by one of the dash police. They are all cute little short lines.

I finally decided to look at the appropriate part of the Manual of Style, and found it quite incomprehensible. I studied English at school to a reasonable level and I write a lot. Never have I ever seen such an obsession over short lines than here in Wikipedia.

Two questions:

1. Why does it matter so much here?

2. Is there a simpler summary of the rules than the Manual of Style? HiLo48 (talk) 02:59, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

I have also been perplexed by this issue in the past. The problem in part is that there is no "en-dash" on my keyboard. When I learned to type, a few generations ago, they told us to use a double-hyphen to stand for a dash. The best explanation I can give for your second question, the MOS approach, is that hyphens are used for connecting related words, such as with "semi-automatic" (or as the minus sign in math usages), while dashes are used as the equivalent of "from-to", such as birth and death dates, or as connections between unrelated words, such as Minneapolis–Saint Paul. I'm sure there's much more to it. And since I firmly believe the answer to your first question is, "It isn't", I don't spend a lot of time worrying about it. I just use a hyphen and let the n-dash obsessed editors find and fix it, on the assumption that they know what they're doing while you and I might not. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:02, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

(ec) I don't worry about those distinctions, either. My advice is to just use a regular dash. If some other editor with too much time on his hands then wants to change it to something imperceptibly different, let him. I call this the "dash and go" approach. StuRat (talk) 06:06, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I have autocorrect set in my (old) version of Microsoft Word to insert the appropriate length of line (when I remember to use the shortcuts I've created), but that doesn't work when editing Wiki articles. The en-dash and em-dash are available at the bottom of the editing page if you have either "Insert" or "Wiki markup" selected, but that helps only if you know which one you should be using. There are much worse faults in many (most?) Wikipedia articles, so I don't think it's a big deal either, even though I try to get it right in Word documents. Dbfirs 08:30, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

I can quite easily notice the difference between them, and find it quite apparent in many instances when the wrong one is used, or when one is used incorrectly. However, in a number of circumstances I forget all the complexities of the rules and have to recheck the MOS. Now, when writing in article space I am quite particular about using the right one, and will correct incorrect usage if I see it. On the other hand, when writing elsewhere, such as on talkpages or the reference desk, I just use a dash for speed. And as above, I'm not really obsessive about it in terms of hunting them down, as I know most people don't notice (much less care about) the difference. However I wouldn't say that this is the only place that is obsessive about it; I think that most professional publishers would be similarly obsessive. I guess the point is that in a perfect world all Wikipedia articles would also be perfect, including perfect—and perfectly consistent—use of the agreed upon rules of grammar and punctuation (FWIW those are correctly used em dashes). If you're interested there is a short tutorial at User:Tony1/How to use hyphens and dashes that is perhaps a bit simpler than the MOS. --jjron (talk) 12:10, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

But not helped by the fact that the opening sentence of that article - "Hyphens and dashes are basic to stylish writing in English" - is totally and incontrovertibly bollocks. Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:26, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh, and I forget to mention... Given that someone above referred to using a dash as the minus sign, thought I would also point out that that is also incorrect. The minus sign is yet another type of short straight line! --jjron (talk) 12:17, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

That was me, and I was saying that you use the hyphen to indicate the minus sign. Or I do, anyway. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:54, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

My personal opinion is that it matters so much because the "gnomish" aspects of Wikipedia exert a strong attraction on a set of editors with obsessive personalities. Looie496 (talk) 15:06, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't seek out correcting hyphen/dash usage, but I may fix an incorrect usage if I happen to stumble upon it the same way I would correct a capitalization error or something else minor I came across. And while the en dash and em dash are available to input into the wiki under "Special characters," I find it much faster to add them directly via alt codes: Alt + 0150 on the numpad for an en dash (–) and Alt + 0151 on the numpad for an em dash (—). --Sgt. R.K. Blue (talk) 15:35, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Ah yes, alt codes. Back in the 1990s-era day, I learned a few of them and still use them to this day: Alt+130 for é, Alt+138 for è, Alt+144 for É, Alt+135 for ç. They're so much quicker than any other method of accessing those characters. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 21:36, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Or on a Macintosh, option - for – and option+shift - for —. Pfly (talk) 23:54, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

To anyone who cares at all about writing correctly, confusing dashes with hyphens is a significant error. People who dismiss this as pedantry are mainly wrong. (Well, certainly wrong in an environment such as Wikipedia.) There are some borderline word-linking cases where the choice between hyphen and dash is not always clear-cut, but in the large majority of cases the two are very definitely not interchangeable. 86.176.210.154 (talk) 00:54, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

I can see it matters a lot to you, but did you see my Question 1. at the start? Why does it matter so much? HiLo48 (talk) 01:55, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Why do any marks of punctuation "matter so much"? Would your question 1—"Why does it matter so much here?"—be any less understandable if it ended with a period or with no punctuation at all? The use of punctuation marks in accordance with a house style or widespread conventions may seem to some to reflect sheer arbitrariness or pedantry, but to others it reflects an admirable professionalism and an awareness of historic typographic practice that isn't lightly to be tossed aside. If you don't want to make any distinction between hyphens and en dashes and em dashes when you edit Wikipedia articles, you are of course free to do so; but why express incomprehension of editors who think the distinction worthy of preservation, and why use that as an excuse to make more work for others? If you truly can't understand the different situations in which the three marks should be used, perhaps you should try to word your sentences in such a way that none of them need be used. Deor (talk) 02:24, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

(EC) Just to add my tuppence-worth: first; in some published material hyphens, en-dashes, em- or even double em-dashes, and minus signs may all be used for different purposes, so carelessness in their application may cause the reader confusion; secondly, even if only one or two of the different uses are being employed, inconsistency in usage will cause many readers – perhaps more sensitive to minutiae that you, HiLo48 – to stumble and become irritated. Editing is like theatre direction, generally one doesn't consciously notice it unless it's poor.

Professionally trained editors are always aiming for perfection in this as well as in other aspects of editing – one inconsistency or one annoyed reader is one too many – and perhaps we sometimes become a little obsessive about it, or apply it in areas like talk pages where it's not strictly necessary, and certainly we're more likely to notice lapses, but better that than sloppiness :-) . {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.103 (talk) 02:41, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

的 and spanish de

Is the Mandarin 的 (de) related at all to the Spanish de in that they both have similar pronunciations (as well as identical romanizations) and similar usage in that they can be used to connect two nouns in an adjectival manner? 98.113.158.92 (talk) 03:35, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

No. It's a coincidence. (Also they are not grammatically similar; in Mandarin the structure is POSSESSOR de POSSESSEE [张三的书], whereas in Spanish it's POSSESSEE de POSSESSOR [el libro de Mengano], unless you're referring to something different.rʨanaɢ (talk) 03:40, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

The first principle of evaluating a proposed etymological relationship between two languages is to go back to the earliest known form on each side. So it's relevant that in Latin (the ancestor of Spanish), de most literally meant "down from" (or in an extended sense, "about" or "concerning"). It did not mean "of", and it did not form a quasi-adjectival connection between two nouns. Furthermore, the shorter the forms to be compared between two languages, and the more that they consist of sounds and sound patterns (phonotactics) commonly found in many languages of the world, the greater the probability of a purely accidental resemblance. Combined with the facts that Spanish and Chinese were in quite different parts of the word, with little opportunity to influence each other until less than 500 years ago, and it seems exceedingly unlikely that there is any kind of etymological relationship... AnonMoos (talk) 06:33, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Tongue

Hello. An uninformed person recently tried to seem smart to me by "citing" the etymology of the word 'tongue' as French (accompanied by a very butchered and affected rendering of the "original French"). Little did he know I speak French and have a strong grasp of word origins and naturally I chewed him out for it (in a friendly way, of course :) But looking back it seems a reasonable mistake to make, after all how the word is constructed (silent -ue, -on-, structure reminiscent of the 'legit' French 'langue'). I was wondering, could there have been any interference from French on the development of the spelling of this purely English word? If so what is this phenomenon called? Thanks. 24.92.85.35 (talk) 04:15, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

False etymology? --Jayron32 04:21, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

I think some of what you're asking (especially the relationship of "tongue" to "langue") is addressed in the article on false friends. Jwrosenzweig (talk) 04:59, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

It's interesting to note that EO says "tongue" and "langue" have a common origin... neither one of them being French, of course, but long before that.[5] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:52, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

See also wikt:Tongue. Baseball Bugs' EOD link says the spelling originated in the 14th century. Was the Middle English pronunciation /ˈtɔŋ.ɡə/ or /ˈtɔŋə/ ? --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 20:48, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Whichever the consonants, the stressed vowel was almost certainly [ʊ]... AnonMoos (talk) 02:29, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Terms for deer

English has a colloquial, unmistakable term for the family of Cervidae - deer. As far as I can see, this is not the case in many other languages. For example, the German word Hirsche means "deer" as well as "stags". What's the term for deer in other languages, and is it unmistakable? Or what else does it mean? Especially, I'm interested how the following dialogue in the movie Bambi (20th minute) has been translated into other languages, with what term for "deer":

Bambi: Mother, you know what?

Mother: What?

Bambi: We're not the only deer in the forest.

Mother: Where did you hear that?

Bambi: Thumper told me.

Mother: Well, he's right. There are many deer in the forest besides us.

--KnightMove (talk) 13:28, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Given the scarcity of large mammals in the Philippines, we have only one word for deer in (all?) Filipino languages - usa (pronounced oo-SAH). It used to refer strictly to the three endemic species of the genera Rusa and Hyelaphus in the islands, but it has been adapted to be the direct equivalent of the English word "deer". The Philippine mouse-deer, a chevrotain (Tragulidae) not a true deer (Cervidae), is not called usa despite its English common name, but has its own unique local name - pilandok. There are also no separate words for doe or stag or juveniles, instead the generic words for female/girl/mother or male/boy/father or child/young are used. Bambi has never been translated to our languages, as most of the population understand English.-- Obsidi♠n Soul 14:18, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

There are two problems: the different names for different species, and the different names for different sexes of the same species. Usually, however, I think there is one term that can serve as a general one (German Hirsch, French cerf, Russian "олень", etc.) and would probably be used in a translation of the film. Interestingly, the original Bambi in the story by Felix Salten was a roe deer (Reh, chevreuil, косуля), but in the Disney film, he is a white-tailed deer (Weißwedelhirsch, Cerf de Virginie, Белохвостый олень). Lesgles (talk) 14:53, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

In the Scandinavian languages they qualify the general name for animal(s) 'dyr' or 'djur' with specific words like 'rein' for reindeer and 'rå' for roe deer, which as I understand it was the original usage of the english word 'deer'. Mikenorton (talk) 15:59, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

In German everyday speech, Hirsch covers deer species such as the red deer (Rothirsch) and fallow deer (Damhirsch), but not the roe deer, which is called Reh. Confusingly, the German dubbing of Bambi, uses Reh for Bambi and Hirsch for the adult deers, which doesn't make any sense zoologically (see de:Bambi (Film)#Einfluss). --BishkekRocks (talk) 17:02, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Just to point out that English has an astonishing number of unrelated words to describe deer of varying sexes, species and stages of development. Off the top of my head, I can think of: stag, buck, hart, hind, doe, pricket, fawn, and there are probably others. It's probably not a surprise that other languages have a variety too. Alansplodge (talk) 20:47, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Basque Dialectical Differences

Thank you for a comprehensive Basque page and this opportunity to ask questions

My question concerns online or other resources to improve my comprehension of dialectical differences in Euskara. I am currently at a stage where I am able to follow albisteak in Batua but have difficulty for example in following the Basque soap, Goenkale online. Other online aides like Kerman Mintzalagun and SitePal's text to speech are helpful but do not fulfill the audio-visual support that I believe I need to progress further. Is there any Basque programming that you know of that includes subtitles, so that speech patterns and dialectical variations can be more readily recognized?76.103.195.49 (talk) 15:27, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't think such a thing exists. Written materials aside, you're pretty much on your own with the Euskalkiak in my experience. Akerbeltz (talk) 16:20, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Ok, having said that, I'm assuming you checked out places like HABE for their material? Akerbeltz (talk) 23:00, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

This being the language desk, perhaps it'll be tolerated if I point out that you probably mean dialectal, not dialectical. --Trovatore (talk) 22:30, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

January 3

The use of the verb "drink" to automatically and assumably mean "drink alcohol [without specifying alcohol]"

This also occurs in the Spanish language, with the verb "beber [to drink; I would think it would be related to the 'beverage']," as I used a form of "beber" in a sentence in a college Spanish class once (without specifying beverage), which, if literally tranlsated into English would assumed to be alcohol, and my professor, a native Spanish speaker, said I needed to specify which beverage, otherwise (just as in English), it would be presumed to be alcohol. So, I would guess this the usage of "to drink," without knowing what exactly, would probably exist throughout Western civilization-based languages.

Why is so?

I'm not sure it's automatic in English; as with many verbs that have numerous meanings, it depends on context. That said, "drink" as a verb typically has an object. "We ran laps for an hour, then everyone collapsed and drank water." You could certainly say "collapsed and drank," and in the context of a school sports team, the reader or listener would assume a non-alcoholic beverage.

As a verb with no object, "drink" tends to imply alcohol, and the context can reinforce that assumption: "On weekends all the guys in my dorm do is drink [alcohol]." Specifying a beverage as your instructor suggests is a way of reducing ambiguity. --- OtherDave (talk) 01:27, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

See metonymy. This is not restricted to Western-civilization languages - it occurs in practically any culture with a strong drinking tradition (which is basically, any culture) 24.92.85.35 (talk) 01:35, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

"Beverage" is indeed cognate with the Spanish beber, from the Latin bebere. Curiously, "beverage" is typically taken to mean non-alcoholic in English, unless specified as "alcoholic beverage". In contrast, the word "imbibe", which comes from that same Latin root bebere, and which simply means "to drink" or "to drink in", is used as a variant or euphemism for "drinking" (alcohol) and likewise without the qualifier.[6] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:28, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

I wonder if the reason for this usage is that drinking a "soft" beverage is unremarkable, whereas drinking a "strong" drink carries a number of assumptions along with it. It's also worth pointing out that other forms of "drink", such as "drunk" and "drunkard", pertain either to alcohol explicitly or to something else metaphorically, e.g. "drunk with power". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:34, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Radicals vs phonetic components

Are there any Chinese characters where the radical component is also the phonetic component? If so, what are some examples? 98.113.158.92 (talk) 03:52, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Radicals can be semantic or phonetic; thus, most two-radical characters have both a semantic and a phonetic radical. (For instance, 摸 has the semantic radical 扌(手) and the phonetic radical 莫.) rʨanaɢ (talk) 04:10, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

I meant more like the index radicals you'd use to look up a character in a dictionary. 98.113.158.92 (talk) 04:30, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

A bunch of examples are listed at Radical (Chinese character) (text starting "There are also instances of section headers which play a phonetic and not a semantic role in those characters...") 86.176.210.154 (talk) 04:36, 3 January 2012 (UTC)