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.

December 3

Some better word

In the sentence- "His essay Russkoe Vostochnoe Soglashenie (Russian Oriental Relations) emphasized not only agreement between and understanding of one another by Russians and Muslims but an actual drawing close together–sblizhenie," is the phrase "drawing close together" correct, or can you suggest some better word choice or interpretation for/of the word 'sblizhenie.' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.74.40.58 (talk) 07:03, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bonding ? Rapprochement ? StuRat (talk) 07:30, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As well as

I have some confusion regarding the verb to use with "as well as." As far as I know, in the sentence "This possibility as well as the previous topics is in need of systematic investigation" the verb should be singular but my senior seems to think otherwise. If I am correct, then please cite some reliable source by which I can defend my decision. Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.74.40.58 (talk) 07:10, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's a plural subject, so it's "are", not "is". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:22, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Plus, it's kind of mangled English. With "are" instead of "is", it's not wrong but it's inelegant and would not be written by a native speaker. You don't really need to split them up like that, you could just define the topics/possibilities in the previous sentence and then say "These topics need to be systematically investigated" or something. --Viennese Waltz 14:41, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Bugs, but most style guides I'm familiar with call for a singular is in this construction (although I would set off "as well as the previous topics" with commas). See my comments—particulary the quotation from Words into Type—as well as the rest of the thread, at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2008 March 1#More subject / verb. Deor (talk) 15:05, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The commas change the construction. As written, "as well as" equates to "and", making it a plural subject. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:08, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're just being silly now, I fear. Deor (talk) 15:17, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You've got it wrong. "This and that" ARE, not IS. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:51, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK, uncle. I tried the original sentence in Word, then switched it to "are", and it wants me to change it back to "is". It still doesn't seem right, though. Awkward wording. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:58, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that, technically, the verb should be is, but this sounds so wrong to a native speaker's ears that the sentence should be rewritten, maybe something like "Both this possibility and the issues already discussed need systematic investigation", though even this is less than elegant. I'd need to know the context to suggest something smoother. Marco polo (talk) 16:03, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Bugs. In this case, as well as is being used as "and", and the plural verb is necesary. If the phrase were a parenthetical one set off by commas or parentheses the singular verb would apply. But it isn't, so it doesn't. μηδείς (talk) 18:07, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As well as is logically equivalent to but grammatically distinct from and and doesn't change the number of the original subject. It doesn't matter whether the writer remembers to include commas or not: the very nature of the phrase creates a parenthetical. It's is, but (as stated above) the whole thing is just unpleasant to look at and should be reworded with an and or rephrasing. —

Llywelyn II

23:50, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I get that rationale, but I don't buy it. If you pause vocally, is sounds fine. If you don't pause, are is the only natural alternative. μηδείς (talk) 01:31, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sanskrit Translation

Hi I would really love to get a reliable English to Sanskrit translation for this Rumi quote: Put your thoughts to sleep. Do not let them cast a shadow over the moon of your heart. Let go of thinking Thanks! 41.222.8.161 (talk) 13:33, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you'll get the response you want, but I will warn you that this desk is weak on South Asian languages. Marco polo (talk) 15:57, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think the folks at WP:IND can help you with your request. Such a gentleman 19:48, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Another Latin title page

Hello, I'd love some help understanding the following Latin text from the title page of a book:

Radulphi / de / HENGHAM / Edwardi Regis I. / Capitalis olim Juſtitiarii / Summæ.

Magna Hengham, & Parva, Vul- / gò nuncupatæ nunc primùm ex / vet. Codd. Mſſ in lucem prodeunt.

Londini Biblioplarum Corpori execu- / ditur. M. DC. XVI.

The virgules represent line breaks. The book is by Sir Ralph de Hengham and consists of two texts, the Hengham Magna (Great Hengham) and the Hengham Parva (Small Hengham), but it appears the book as a whole is also called the Summæ though I don't know what this means because Google Translate suggests this means "final" or "supreme". Thanks! — SMUconlaw (talk) 17:33, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll give this a go. The translation is something like "Collected Works of Ralph de Hengham, formerly Chief Justice of King Edward I, commonly named Hengham Magna and Parva, now for the first time brought to light from the ancient manuscripts. London. Published by the Printers' Company, 1616". "Hengham magna" and "Hengham parva" are the (Latin) names of collections of lectures on legal matters written by Hengham. Marco polo (talk) 18:53, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Ah, so vet. is vetus ("old") and Codd. is the plural of cōdex – what word would that be? — SMUconlaw (talk) 19:28, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Codices (although the syntax of the title would require ablative codicibus if it were spelled out). Deor (talk) 19:31, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I looked up Wiktionary but it gives the plural forms as cōdicēs (nominative and accusative), cōdicum (genitive and ablative), and cōdicibus (dative and vocative), and none of that makes any sense to me! — SMUconlaw (talk) 19:35, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You misread, I think: The Wiktionary table gives the plurals as cōdicēs (nominative, accusative, and vocative), cōdicum (genitive), and cōdicibus (dative and ablative). But the English plural you would use in translating the title would be codices, if that's what you meant. Deor (talk) 19:41, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops. No, I meant the plural form of the Latin word. And would Mſſ thus be manuscrīptīs (ablative, according to Wiktionary)? Does vetus codicibus manuscrīptīs mean "ancient books of manuscripts"? Fascinating stuff. — SMUconlaw (talk) 19:46, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, vetus has to be ablative plural as well to agree with the objects of ex, so it would be ex veteribus codicibus manuscriptis. I'd render it as "from old handwritten codices" or the like. Deor (talk) 21:29, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The title is quoted here with vett., hence it is vetustissimis (oldest). Note also Bibliopolarum and excuditur. --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 21:33, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You were right about the typos in Bibliopolarum and excuditur but the version of Hengham's works I was looking at has vet. instead of vett. — SMUconlaw (talk) 16:09, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here a bibliographic record (including a contemporary translation of the title). --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 01:11, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for highlighting this interesting book. However, I don't see an English translation of the Latin book title. Am I missing something? — SMUconlaw (talk) 04:25, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Public Domain with Restrictions?

Hi.

The content of some articles contain matieral from the Jewish Encyclopedia. The JE webpage says that the material is in the public domain, but at the same time it places restrition on its use. Is the content which they claim is unedited original pd or not? Samuel Stevens — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.63.1.220 (talk) 18:37, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Jewish Encyclopedia website also marks every scanned image as copyrighted, but they apparently have no legal claim to do so, see Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp. and the many project pages that link thereto, so I don't know how credible their copyright claims are. הסרפד (call me Hasirpad) 19:51, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese translation request

Is anyone interested in translating the blue-linked content in this edit so it can be added to the Japanese article at ja:デトロイト大都市圏における日本人の歴史?

Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 18:57, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

December 4

Sung Spanish "muy"

Do you sustain the "u" or the "y"? According to wikt:muy#Spanish both /muj/ and /mwi/ are acceptable pronunciations. If it matters, this is a 16th-century piece by Cristóbal de Morales. -- BenRG (talk) 00:21, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's likely to be conditioned by whether the following word begins with a vowel or not--but I can't imagine sustaining the word in any case. It's not normally phrase-final. μηδείς (talk) 01:29, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The text is "Juicio fuerte será dado y muy cruel de muerte." I was surprised to see "muy" sustained for so long too, but it is. The tenors have a four-note melisma on it, more than on any other syllable. -- BenRG (talk) 01:46, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My first impression assuming I have the meter right was to go with muí, but I can see múy as well. Best I can say is I would try to avoid "mwi" as a literal consonant followed by "ee". That sounds totally off. Shame Miss Bono is not posting. I tried, but I can't find the other user she would sometimes communicate with for an opinion. μηδείς (talk) 02:17, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do wish somebody else had commented on this. From English it's clear someone could sing "high upon the rockies" (same meter as the Spanish verse) as either /haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaɪ/ or /haɪɪɪɪɪɪɪɪɪɪɪɪ/ upon the rockies. μηδείς (talk) 01:38, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

English to Japanese translation help

Hello. Can anyone translate the following into Japanese:

"Please clear the firing range. Weapons demonstration commencing in 3, 2, 1..."

I'm going to be speaking this out loud (this would be for a video, kind of a like a PA message), so please also provide it in roman characters. Tips on pronunciation and where stress should be placed etc. would also be much appreciated. Thank you.-- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 02:14, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Noun-to-Adjective derivations using the '-ed' suffix.

Hello, again!

In the English language—it has long been established—one can readily form adjectives from the past-participles of verbs, even to the point of forming stand-alone words.

e.g.

"He had truly loved her."

"She was a much-loved woman."

Many times, however, people sort-of cut out the verb "middleman," and use the ubiquitous -ed suffix to form adjectives directly from nouns.

e.g.

"Alicia's dark-haired son walks, hand-in-hand, with that red-sweatered girl, over there." —Even though there is no such verb as to hair or to sweater.

I have two quick questions about this usage: One, is it unique to English, or would someone also encounter it in other, Indo-European languages? And two, does it "work" when said nouns are homographs of irregular verbs?

Namely, could somebody call a police officer who walks two different beats, across a city, "a two-beated cop"? Likewise, would anybody ever refer to a mountain with five manicured, ski-runs as "five-runned, winter resort?"

Pine (talk) 11:11, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For the last bit, your two quoted words (beated and runned) seem cromulent to me. That is, while a bit non standard, they are understandable in context without any explanation. They seem to work within the understood rules of English grammar, even if they are a bit awkward. --Jayron32 12:11, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

They're awkward because they don't work; what works is: a two-beat cop and a five-run resort. Someone else will know the grammatical reasoning here. However, it returns to your original query if it's a four-legged cop (police dog). In English (as other languages no doubt) usage makes the most sense and exceptions are the rule. Manytexts (talk) 12:51, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

But, Manytexts, your versions only work because they are phrases with numbers. A tough-beat cop and a steep-run resort don't work, or at any rate are at least as infelicitous as a tough-beated cop and a steep-runned resort. I think Jayron32's answer is right. --ColinFine (talk) 13:08, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some musings and attempted break-down (by first and second part) of "Double-Barrelled Adjectives", distinguishing "noun-ed" elements from past participles, by Nigel J. Ross, teacher at the City of Milan School for Interpreters and Translators, fwiw. ---Sluzzelin talk 15:51, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This question was asked within the last year or so. A search of the archives may help. μηδείς (talk) 16:09, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see another hazard where the noun being used as a verb is a homograph of a regular verb with a different meaning. (If I run out of matches, am I poorly matched? If I refuse to have a bow put in my hair, does that mean I remain unbowed? If somebody agrees to give me some refuse, have I been refused?) Card Zero (talk) 19:59, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to me, these are all cromulently correct! in that all tangential meanings are true. You would be poorly matched with a smoker, not bloodied, but unbowed for sure, and yes, you have been refused.

At ColinFine, is it then, a five-fingered discount (meaning the lifted object) or a five-finger discount (meaning the act of lifting it)? Manytexts (talk) 22:08, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, neither of those phrases conveys anything to me. I'm not aware of a meaning of "discount" which is an object which can be lifted. --ColinFine (talk) 23:14, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Five-finger discount" is a euphemism for shoplifting. It could likewise be called "five-fingered discount", but as far as I know "five-finger" is more commonly used. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:33, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As for similar usages in other languages, the formation is not universal. In Zulu, adjectives are a small closed class. Instead of using participles as adjectives, adjectival constructions are made with relative verb phrases, one would have to say, approximately, a beast which has feet which are four. The construction does exist in Latin: e.g., vagina dentata. μηδείς (talk) 17:28, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Exists in French. Le chat botté (Puss in Boots). Itsmejudith (talk) 09:48, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I had clean forgotten about the allegorical toothed birth-canal! Unless I err, there never was such a verb as dentare. :)

At any rate, thanks a lot for all of the responses! I now see that between its classical, Latin usage, and its living, French one, this very much constitutes an established part of Indo-European grammar, and not merely a vulgar anglicism (as I incorrectly assumed). Now, unless someone requests my presence, I shall purchase a refreshment at the cheap-drinked store, across the street. Pine (talk) 13:33, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved

December 5

Use of there is/are after adverbials

First of all, I'm not a native speaker. Although my English is quite fluent and I use it in my job every day, there is one thing I'm still not sure about. Is it correct (in standard BrE or AmE) to simply omit there in sentences like On my desk there are some books ? Thanks in advance. -- 87.123.216.155 (talk) 14:48, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is quite acceptable to omit there, especially if you want to emphasize the desk rather than the books (that is, as opposed to saying, "Some books are on my desk"). See Inversion (linguistics)#Subject–verb inversion. Deor (talk) 15:08, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's perfectly fine grammatically, but it seems incomplete by itself. I would expect some further thought, like: "On my desk are some books. Could you bring me the one lying on top of the others?" or: "On my desk are some books; please be careful moving them if you intend to work there." In either case you could retain the "there". If you simply said "On my desk are some books." I would likely respond, "And?" I also agree with Deor's point. μηδείς (talk) 17:18, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's an irrelevant comment, Medeis. Usually, saying anything has both a context and a point to it. The OP was asking about the grammatical correctness of this particular sentence. In answer to the question, 'there' can be used or not used. Both are OK. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 18:53, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So, you are disagreeing with me? μηδείς (talk) 20:22, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For me, either would work formally. In casual speech, omitting it would sound like "On my desker some books." But I think you're most likely to hear "there's some" (on my desk there's some books), despite grammatical incorrectness. It's engrained enough that I seriously doubt I would catch it while proofreading formal writing. Post-college, urban Midwest sociolect/dialect. Lsfreak (talk) 22:21, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Latin motto

I'm a bit puzzled about the Latin motto engraved below the crucifix in this picture. There are a couple words that I can't make out at all and the grammar of the second sentence also seems odd (go and remember our what?). My best guess at a transcription is:

eni locusquo a teposiiis rogari vos purate. Ite: et recordemini nostri.

Donald Hosek (talk) 21:48, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

An odd mix of upper and lower case. I think that fourth word is "reposilis", which I assume has something to do with resting. The last word might be nosiri or posiri. Where is this? Is it on someone's tomb? Or on a church building? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:25, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can't make out even as much as that, but I know that nostri is also the genitive of 'nos' (us), so I suspect the end means "remember us". I also think the second word is probably 'locusque', and the fourth 'repositis'. --ColinFine (talk) 23:11, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And the capitalized letters probably form some kind of Latin number, possibly the year or something like that. Fut.Perf. ☼ 23:16, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Name for that is Chronogram... -- AnonMoos (talk) 00:33, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think you aren't looking at the big version of the picture (click "original file"). Unless you're suggesting some kind of carving error, like copying from a text supplied in illegible handwriting. "Loqusquo" clearly ends in o, not e ... but I guess it could be "repositis", because the letter t is carved in an indistinct way throughout, with a tiny vestigial crossbar and only the faintest curve at the foot. Card Zero (talk) 11:06, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect "teposilis" is actually antepositis and that letters are missing from the beginnings and ends here. μηδείς (talk) 01:07, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There are no numbers there at all, there's just some weird capitalization. I read it as "En! Locus quo a repositis rogari vos purate. Ite: et recordemini nostri." There's nothing missing around the edges, but it seems like there is something grammatically essential that isn't there. Maybe "repositis rogari vos purate" is "rogati vos putare" or "putate". I'm still trying to make sense of that, but the rest of it says "Behold! The place where... Go: and remember us." (Or "remember me.") I thought it might be a Bible quote, but apparently not. Adam Bishop (talk) 08:51, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

de:Chronogramm has many examples. First try: 1778 (Prague): enI LoCVs qVo a reposItIs rogarI Vos pVtate Ite et reCordDeMInI nostrI (= MDCCLVVVVIIIIIIII = translation wanting). --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 10:42, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! I see what you mean now. Maybe the month and day is in there too, but there seems to be too many Vs. Adam Bishop (talk) 11:18, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want to speak too soon, but encoding multiple numbers (day, month, and year) in the form of scrambled numerals which have to be summed in arbitrary combinations seems less practical than summing them all to get a single number (1778). Card Zero (talk) 11:33, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah. Neat. I don't think I've ever come across chronograms before. I guess that's why the Latin seems a bit tortured, they have to come up with something that will fit a chronogram? Adam Bishop (talk) 11:37, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, between chronograms and other, cool stuff such as sigla, it really saddens me that we don't all speak Latin, anymore. Pine (talk) 13:42, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There's still only Latin for prefaces in many Oxford Classical Texts (although, as that page says, many texts since 1990 have used English instead). It's funny to have to read something like "My university, Otago, was kind in their support for this project" in a language that was already "dead" before New Zealand was even established. --Atethnekos (Discussion, Contributions) 22:07, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I know so little Latin that I really should just shut up, but "rogari" strikes me as a name. I'm guessing at something like, "This is the place where reposes rogar who was purified by you. Go, and remember us." Looie496 (talk) 03:59, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rogari could be a passive infinitive ("to be asked")... AnonMoos (talk) 06:35, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's rogari or the past participle rogati. "The place where you believe you are invited by the dead"? I don't know. Adam Bishop (talk) 09:02, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This took me a while to make a guess at. That first "I" has got to be an exclamation point, not an "I". So: "en! locus quo a repositis rogari vos putare. ite: et recordemini nostri." My translatese take:

~~"Behold! A place where, by having brought restoration, you are sought to purify. Go, and remember us."~~

~~Better English: "Behold! A place where you are sought to bring purification through restoration. Go, and remember us."~~

Particularly if they're trying to do a chronrogram for the date of completion, and it takes them so long to work out a chronogram that they go into the next year and have to start again... MChesterMC (talk) 10:13, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, that's mixing up the main verb. Hmm, I'm stumped. "the place to be sought where, through restoration, you are purified"? --Atethnekos (Discussion, Contributions) 10:30, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Would "redemption" be a better word than "restoration"? It fits the theology better - I don't know about the Latin. Alansplodge (talk) 14:09, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps, "reconciled". [1] [2] [3] -- Alanscottwalker (talk) 16:09, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

December 6

Opposite of philanthropy?

Opposite of philanthropy? --78.156.109.166 (talk) 19:50, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Misanthropy. --Nicknack009 (talk) 22:00, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

One might be tempted to say capitalism (using the popular rather than the literal meaning of "philanthropy"), or profiteering for a more politically neutral term. See also war profiteering, cartel, monopoly, Rachmanism, etc. Tevildo (talk) 13:17, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, Exploitation is probably the best single antonym. Tevildo (talk) 13:19, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see how "profiteering" is more neutral than "capitalism". Many capitalists have been known to be philanthropists as well. Bill Gates, for example. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:11, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I intended profiteering to refer to general abuse of a dominant market position to make more money than is "fair", in some abstract sense. However, my main point is that misanthropy is not (in popular usage) the opposite of philanthropy. For example, Howard Hughes is the very type and acme of a misanthropist, but he still engaged in the very philanthropic act of endowing the Howard Hughes Medical Institute. And Peter Rachman himself was, so I understand, a very outgoing, affable and socially-adept person - the opposite of a misanthrope - but nobody would describe him as a philanthropist. Tevildo (talk) 19:57, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The term "capitalist" is not inherently negative except maybe to an avowed Marxist. Etymologically, "philanthropy" and "misanthropy" are opposites, but they're not really used that way nowadays. As I recall, even some Mafia figures were known to open soup kitchens and the like, and I'm not so sure "philanthropist" is the first thing that comes to mind when thinking of Al Capone. Really, an excellent illustration of the idea would be Ebenezer Scrooge, before and after. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:18, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is Gates a capitalist? I think the term has two quite distinct meanings, and I'm not sure Gates actually qualifies on either count. One meaning is "philosophical supporter of the free market", and I think he's at best lukewarm on that. The other meaning is "someone in the finance business", which as far as I know applies to him only in the sense that he's an investor. --Trovatore (talk) 03:56, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If I correctly interpreted the dense prose from century-old books, capitalists are the people who benefit from the money-commodity-moremoney exchange, also known as M-C-M'. →Σ σ ς. (Sigma) 04:41, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Microsoft is a for-profit company, last I heard. Maximizing profits, i.e. accumulating more and more money (i.e. more and more "capital") is the essence of capitalism. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:42, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, different people use words different ways, but to me the essence of capitalism is freedom of exchange. It's not clear to me that Gates is a big supporter of that. There are lots of people who make lots of money in radically anti-capitalist countries. --Trovatore (talk) 05:18, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In a capitalist system, there is a natural progression from true "free market" (many small firms), to a relatively few large firms (monopolistic competition), or maybe only one significant one (monopoly or near-monopoly). That's what Gates has done. I'm not sure what you mean by "freedom of exchange", but the bottom line is that successful people and companies don't want ongoing competition, they want to defeat that competition and be kings of their particular hills. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 08:28, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The point is, "capitalist" doesn't mean "businessperson". Just doesn't. There are two major senses. Ideologically, it means a classical liberal, and I don't think Gates is one (I think he might even be a Democrat). Professionally, it means someone who lends money, which of course he does because he's an investor and a big one, but it isn't his profession. --Trovatore (talk) 08:45, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're talking libertarian idealism. I'm talking reality. But maybe you could give me an example of a "true" capitalist. And I don't mean philosophers writing books, I mean practical capitalists, i.e. those who accumulate capital (keep in mind that "capital" and "money" are synonyms in this context). ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 08:57, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Trovatore is correct there are at least two senses of the word, and it's clear Gates is not a free market capitalist. He is obviously a capitalist if you define that as someone who derives his wealth from return on capital, whether directly held or invested. μηδείς (talk) 01:32, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To me, capitalism is about money and business - beginning and end of story. I'd like to hear of any other practical application. Feel free to educate me. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:03, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Next time google the antonym. μηδείς (talk) 02:23, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have Google. --78.156.109.166 (talk) 20:38, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain that claim? Denmark has free speech, and you have access to the internet. Are you in prison, or are you a child on a computer with parental controls? There are other search engines as well. μηδείς (talk) 23:47, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The OP's contribution history is currently under scrutiny at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User: 78.156.109.166. It may be best to just overlook this for now. Rgrds. --64.85.214.127 (talk) 15:17, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What is the name of...

a glass that can make things look bigger? I've forgotten. --78.156.109.166 (talk) 20:06, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean a Magnifying glass (convex lens), or something less obvious? Dbfirs 20:10, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Magnifying glass was what I was looking for, I figured it out by myself shortly after I wrote my question. --78.156.109.166 (talk) 20:14, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, memory is strange. I increasingly have the same problem. Admitting that I can't remember something seems to trigger my brain to make the appropriate connections that were somehow missing when I was actively searching for them. Dbfirs 09:51, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can't even read your text just above, because my drug causes memory and concentration lapses (problems). But I would have them (although much less intense) even without the drug. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#FORUM --78.156.109.166 (talk) 20:49, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The OP's contribution history is currently under scrutiny at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User: 78.156.109.166. It may be best to just overlook this for now. Rgrds. --64.85.214.127 (talk) 15:16, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

December 7

17th century French: "Tracy"

Can someone translate to English the sub caption for this map of western New France (lower right corner)? [4] What does "TRACY" mean, here? Thanks. Alanscottwalker (talk) 14:18, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Les nations de Tracy "the Nations of Tracy". I do not know what it means, maybe something connected to him.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 15:33, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Oh, I see. So, its a list of "nations": (seemingly odd, that the other two, Illinois and Iroquois, are native tribes). Can you make out the rest of it, "people" and so forth? Alanscottwalker (talk) 15:42, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A nation is "[a]n historically constituted, stable community of people, formed on the basis of a common language, territory, economic life, ethnicity and/or psychological make-up manifested in a common culture" (Wiktionary), so it is not uncommon to find "tribes" of people referred to as "nations". Note that some of the aboriginal peoples in Canada are termed "First Nations". — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 16:00, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do not find it odd that they are listed as nations, but that Tracy was among them, but it looks like there is an answer for that below. Alanscottwalker (talk) 16:16, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken the liberty of moving that page to reflect his full name, which up till now failed to include the Tracy part we're discussing here. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 16:26, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here's an early-18th-century book that lists the "Nations de Tracy" among various native tribes ("diverse peoples in Canada and Louisiana"}. The map you're inquiring about shows them as inhabiting a rather extensive region around the western Great Lakes, but I'm having trouble finding further mentions of them under this name. Deor (talk) 15:51, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Most helpful. Yes, it looks like the "Nations de Tracy" are around western Lake Superior; the "Nations de Ilinois", around Lake Michigan; and the "Cinc Nations" Iroquois in the east on this map. Thx. Alanscottwalker (talk) 17:46, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably "Cinq Nations", meaning Five Nations. --Bowlhover (talk) 05:31, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the transcription:

PARTIE OCCIDENTALE du CANADA ou de la NOUVELLE FRANCE où sont les Nations des ILINOIS, de TRACY, les IROQUOIS, et plusieurs autres Peuples ;

Avec la LOUISIANE Nouvellement decouverte etc.
Dressée sur les Memoires le plus Nouveaux.
Par le P. Coronelli Cosmographe de la Sér.[énissime] Repib.[lique] de VENISE Corrigée et augmentée par le Sr.[sieur] Tillemon ; et Dédiée À Monsieur l'Abbé BAUDARD À PARIS
Chez J.B. Nolin Sur le Quay de l'Horloge du Palais Vers le Pont Neuf à l'Enseigne de la Place des Victoires
Avec Privilege du Roy

1688

Translation a little later if somebody does not outrun me already.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 16:10, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

With regard to "Ser.", see the first bulleted item in Most Serene Republic#Historical states. Deor (talk) 17:11, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Added your transcription to the image file. Very helpful. Alanscottwalker (talk) 17:25, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The nations of Tracy are apparently simply the nations living around Lake Superior, which was first named by the Jesuits "Lac Tracy", according to our article Lake Superior. According to this source, the Jesuits named the lake after "Monsieur de Tracy," apparently Alexandre de Prouville de Tracy. So Lüboslóv's conjecture seems to be correct. Marco polo (talk) 22:20, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that might also help explain "Ilinois" then, as that was also an early name for Lake Michigan. Thanks, Alanscottwalker (talk) 11:15, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the translation:

The Western part of Canada or the New France where the nations of Illinois, of Tracy [Lake Superior], the Iroquois and many other peoples inhabit.

With recently discovered Louisiana
Drawn according to the newest reports
By P. Coronelli, a cosmographe of the Most Serene Republic of Venice
Corrected and augmented by Sir Tillemon. And dedicated to Monsieur abbot Baudard
[Printed at] J.B. Nolin in the Quai de l'Horloge of the Palace across the Pont Neuf under the sign of the Place des Victoires

With the privilege of the King

I am not sure about the line Chez J.B Nolin..., it looks like an address. Espesially I doubt what means à l'Enseigne de la Place des Victoires as the place is far away from the Cité.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 03:16, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think you have got that line more or less correct. Chez means "at the office or place of business of", and in 17th-century books and documents it was common to refer to a place by its "sign" (I assume this refers to a signboard), presumably because at that time there was no numbering system for buildings. Thus, the line suggests that J. B. Nolin had a business along the Quai de l'Horloge which was marked by a signboard with an image of the Place des Victoires on it. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 17:29, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just say the word

Something I've often wondered about:

If it takes more than just saying "I insult you" to insult someone, or "I kill you" to actually kill someone, or "I hypothesise" to wax hypothetical, why is "I apologise" or "My apologies" considered sufficient for an apology, or "Congratulations!" sufficient to congratulate someone, or "My condolences" sufficient to express one's sorrow? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 16:38, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See speech act, and specifically performatives, which are things like "I hereby declare you man and wife" or "I dub thee Sir Jack". This is actually an important topic in philosophy and linguistics. Steven Pinker goes on about it in various places. μηδείς (talk) 17:34, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It reminds me of when people write to newspapers etc saying "I wish to complain in the strongest possible terms about [something or other]", to which my response would be: "well, go on then". AndrewWTaylor (talk) 20:19, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kind of "polite anger", which Monty Python used to satirize from time to time. "I wish to complain in the strongest possible terms about that last sketch. Many of my friends are lumberjacks, and only a few of them are transvestites..." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:13, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Of course this being Wikipedia the act of typing "I insult you" on a talk page is going to be considered a person attack and involve a trip to WP:ANI. CambridgeBayWeather (talk) 13:11, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The statement "I insult you" as a standalone comment is not an actual attack. It's like the standalone statement "I am lying", which likewise means nothing. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:11, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's an interesting question. What if I said, "I hereby insult you"? That might actually be insulting, and a good line for Steve Martin or John Cleese. μηδείς (talk) 18:57, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good one. Or taking it a step further, "I am hereby issuing you a legal threat." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:00, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

December 8

ED-earned

What does "ED-earned" mean: [5]?174.3.125.23 (talk) 00:30, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In this context, Emergency department. Tevildo (talk) 00:52, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What is earned?174.3.125.23 (talk) 01:37, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

wikt:earned. Tevildo (talk) 02:24, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It still doesn't make much sense to this reader. Is money one earns from working as a doctor in an ED somehow different from money one earns as a doctor in some other place? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 02:41, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's a human interest story, of interest to humans daydreaming about marketing their own strange new product. Here is how they financed their product, the story says: by working as doctors. Make what you will of that - you might observe that they worked hard in their jobs but still found time to give attention to the product, or that they were highly paid, or that they made all the money themselves and didn't need luck or an inheritance. So it seems to be saying "you could do this too" - if you're really determined and have some significant income to put into it, you too could help protect the world's bananas. Card Zero (talk) 03:12, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Plural of razzia

Subtitling a documentary film about the Holocaust in the Nazi-occupied Netherlands, I need the plural form of razzia, the term used by the Dutch for a roundup of civilians by security forces. -- Deborahjay (talk) 09:38, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The plural in Dutch is "razzia's" (see also Dutch_grammar#Plural. The English plural is "razzias", the plural in German is "Razzien" or, rarer, "Razzias"). ---Sluzzelin talk 09:57, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The original Italian plural is razzie, although that may not be what you are looking for. μηδείς (talk) 18:53, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A plurality of Ratzis:

Ratzi XVI
Ratzi XVII
Ratzi XVIII
Ratzi XIX
Ratzi XX

--Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 20:54, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Medeis gave the correct plural for Italian, but note that razzia (see that link's English and French section) probably did not enter English via Italian, but via French, nor is it of Italian origin. It's borrowed from Algerian Arabic, ... perhaps, see also Ghazi for a hint at "archaic Portuguese" :-S Better references are needed, perhaps. ---Sluzzelin talk 21:50, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I suppose I should of said whose form, razzia, originates in Italian. I wasn't intending to give the etymology of the Italian word. μηδείς (talk) 22:21, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You shouldn't of said "should of". -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:23, 8 December 2013 (UTC) [reply]

migod you didn't ort to write a sentence like that jack. Tevildo (talk) 22:54, 8 December 2013 (UTC) [reply]

It's curious whether this is the first time Jack has come acrost an item like this and not realized it was bait meant for him personally. μηδείς (talk) 01:13, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So, there it is. The nasty baitrice admits to violating the sacred ref desk space for the performance of a childish campaign of personal vindictiveness. So much for those years of stuff about the rules, and all those lectures about thresholds of appropriate behaviour. But, Mandela-like, I forgive you all your grotesque and odious excesses. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 06:32, 9 December 2013 (UTC) [reply]

@Sluzzelin: Better references? wikt:de:Razzia has 50 (fifty) references. --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 10:10, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

December 9

Chinese search help needed

Could someone please look for Chinese-language sources on the Four Happiness Boys? If it's what it's cracked up to be, it should have a lot more sources in Chinese than in English, and further sources are definitely needed. Nyttend (talk) 02:24, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Learning another improves one’s own usage?

I read somewhere (can’t remember where) that learning another language improves the learner’s usage or comprehension of her or his own language. Is this true? --66.190.69.246 (talk) 12:59, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It could work out that way, if it makes the learner more conscious of matters of grammar and usage. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:33, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It can also help when looking for translations of words from the new language you encounter new words in your native language. Richard Avery (talk) 16:09, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. That would be part of "comprehension", if you include "expanded vocabulary" under that topic. It's interesting to study a Romance language and see how many words you "know already but didn't know it." An example is the Spanish word for thoughtful, pensativo. The lesser-used English synonym for thoughtful is "pensive". Not a term the average Joe uses very often, but it might help comprehension. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:16, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have to be careful in using apparent cognates, of course. I'm reminded of Spanish-speakers I've known who say "traduce" instead of "translate" because the Spanish verb is traducir. However, the obscure English cognate "traduce" doesn't really mean "translate", it's more like "defame". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:49, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See Impact of Second Language Learning on First Language and Why learn a foreign language? Benefits of bilingualism by Anne Merritt. Alansplodge (talk) 18:31, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's definitely the case. Especially in the case of English as a mother tongue if you study a somewhat closely related Indo-European language, and not just in vocabulary. Although I could use the English verb tenses, the terms used to describe them, like "perfect" never made any sense to me until I studied French formally in high school. That first year of French was full of moments where things in grammar suddenly "clicked" for me, and I became a much better writer in English, with a better command over my choices. It's like going from knowing how to drive sitting in the seat to understanding how the gears and the steering mechanism and tires and so forth actually work, and applying that knowledge to what you know about the gear shift stick and the steering wheel.

You can't really form proper cnceptual abstractions unless you have at least two examples of the item you are trying to understand. Rules of grammar are pretty much meaningless words you memorize so long as you only know one language. Learning two or more languages gives you examples you can compare, analogize, and analyze abstractly. You'll also find studying logic and learning a computer language will also help, although a little less directly than will learning a natural language. In addition to the above links, I'd look at implicit learning (versus explicit learning, at second-language acquisition and at concept formation. μηδείς (talk) 18:43, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Medeis that it strengthens your command of English grammar to learn a kindred Indo-European language such as Latin, French, or German. I would argue that Latin and German are especially powerful. Latin helps you understand the roots of many English words and also the synthetic structures and categories that form the historic basis of English, even though English is a more isolating language. German is even more targeted at those synthetic root structures and categories, since it shares a more recent common ancestor with English. It also has many cognates with English words that offer insights into the original meanings of English words. However, there is also great value in learning a language from an unrelated family with radically different grammar, such as Mandarin Chinese. Studying Chinese, in addition to the intrinsic pleasure and utility of any foreign language, has given me a broader linguistic perspective on English and all of the European languages and how their strategies for making meaning contrast with other kinds of strategies. Marco polo (talk) 19:22, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think that you could make the argument that the further away from English another language is, the more abstract the level of learning about language. Learning a romance or germanic language will help immensely with vocabulary and to an extent with grammar (especially a West Germanic or one of the Western Romance languages). Greek and Latin will give you the roots of the vocabulary, and a mastery of grammar. Russian, Hindi, Japanese, Turkish, Arabic and Hungarian will give you a grounding in comparative grammar and an implicit understanding of comparative linguistics. Learning a truly distant language, like Chinese, will give you a grounding in the structure of thought itself. μηδείς (talk) 19:51, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Another article that might interest you is multi-competence. ---Sluzzelin talk 19:41, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Personal observation: Yes, as others have noted, it helps quite a bit with understand the structure of your own language, and also with understanding the origins of your language's word-stock. However, there is a small however: It is a common experience, after full immersion in another language (at least, a reasonably closely related one), to invent words in your own language that never existed, and not to be quite sure whether they're real words or not. It's a minor drawback, easily corrected, and I certainly wouldn't give it much weight — overall, your competence in your native language is likely to improve. --Trovatore (talk) 20:19, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Film Footage

I'd like some help explaining the usage of "footage". I know film is measured in feet. You can have one foot of film or two feet of film. Additionally, one may have one foot of footage or two feet of footage. But you can't have two feet of "footages". And you can't have two separate individual (foots?) feet of footages. So is "footage" always used as a plural? Or do the singular and plural have the same word? What other types of words are like this and do they have a name? --209.203.125.162 (talk) 20:55, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]