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 21

Can someone translate this please?

Can someone please translate what they are saying in this video I believe it is is Farsi (Iranian language) but it also might be in Arabic https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5Xn7l32i1I&feature=youtu.be --Johnsmith777555 (talk) 01:34, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE: The clip is titled "Syria War - Heavy Firefight Iranian Paramilitary In Heavy Combat", the first few seconds you hear no words, just machine gun firing. Then I had read the title, realized what's going on, and closed the window. ---Sluzzelin talk 01:46, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have added back Sluzzelin's comment. Please do not remove it [1] again. Warning people that a video clip may not be something they are comfortable watching or are able to watch in certain circumstances is a resonable reply and doesn't reflect negatively on the question (but removing such warnings does). Nil Einne (talk) 05:25, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Audio quality is not good. They are talking in Persian. I understand only these two sentences: "they're coming from the other side too;" and "aren't our pals shooting at them?" --Omidinist (talk) 04:54, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would especially like to know what they are saying at the end of the video--Johnsmith777555 (talk) 00:23, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Don't take pictures any more" is the last sentence I hear before the picture goes black. They can't resist and have to retreat. Omidinist (talk) 06:15, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can you tell me the last couple of sentences they say near the end?--Johnsmith777555 (talk) 22:56, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please specify the exact moment. A few sentences around minute three are not comprehensible. Omidinist (talk) 05:33, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Protoindoeuropean apostrophe

wikt:crock#Etymology_1

k(')rōug(')-, *k(')rōuk(')-

What does ' represent?174.3.125.23 (talk) 02:35, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Glottalization. See glottal stop and, esp., glottalic theory. μηδείς (talk) 03:01, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why represent with an ~~aphostrphe~~apostrophe; Isn't there an IPA symbol for a glottal stop?174.3.125.23 (talk) 11:33, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This was copy-pasted from Starostin's base which in turn copied Walde-Pokorny's dictionary. In IE-logy there is its own notation, not the IPA.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 14:07, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, this is not glottalisation. (I don't know any version of that theory that has both /k'/ and /g'/). It represents the palatals (or palatalised velars): the ones that underwent /k'/ -> /s/ in Satem languages. See Proto-Indo-European phonology#The problem of three velar series. --ColinFine (talk) 11:48, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Colin is right. Although the symbol is used for both. However PIE /g/ is not found glottalized, only voiceless stops are. μηδείς (talk) 16:44, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

~~Palatization~~Palatalization is represented by ^j? Why would/should the study of linguistics use 2 (or more) notation systems, in this case International Phonetic Alphabet and a adhoc Protoindoeuropean alphabet?174.3.125.23 (talk) 00:19, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There are several different levels at which that can be answered. One is that the phonology of PIE is entirely reconstructed, so the phonetic realisation is entirely conjectural. Another is to note that for many languages and groups of languages there are particular notations which are conventional in their study but not used in the same way outside. In this case, I believe that k and k' were simply used to denote the two putatively different phonemes in PIE which are historically distinguished by having the same reflex in some languages (the Centum languages) and systematically different reflexes in others (the Satem languages), with no suggestion of representing what the actual phonetic difference might have been. A parallel would be the use of 'o' and 'ö' (and similar pairs) in transcribing Old Japanese: from contemporary notation, there were two systematically distinct vowels that both surface as 'o' in Modern Japanese, but there is no generally accepted account of what the phonetic difference between these two was. --ColinFine (talk) 00:41, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Colin's answer is correct. I jumped to the conclusion /k'/ must represent the traditional /g/ which some like Gamkrelidze reconstruct as a glottalized voiceless stop, rather than as a voiced stop. This Gamkrelidze would indeed signify as /k'/. But Starostin doesn't use that transcription, and the /g'/ makes it clear he's indicating the posited palatalized form, which other use a superscript j to indicate. (Nobody posits a glottalized /g'/ in PIE.) The reflex in German here is irregular, since k > h whould be normal, giving AS hroc > NE rock, not crock. There's either an irregular development, or, I suspect, a borrowing from Celtic. (But I am not any sort of authourity on Celtic.) μηδείς (talk) 01:00, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

PIE notation existed long before the spread of the IPA. So this is tradition. And in printed texts you are most likely to encounter ǵḱ or ĝk̂ .--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 10:07, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Moving query about possessive here from very much dead Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Grammar help page.

I have ended up in an edit war over the usage of the possessive on Christian Dior. The other user insists that their form of rewording it:

"However, the Paris socialite and Dior's acquaintance Alexis von Rosenberg, Baron de Rédé, stated"

is correct. I disagree - I reverted the original change as it was accompanied by a poorly spelled edit, and it looked like pretty lousy grammar besides. I don't believe there is need for the possessive in this particular sentence structure - ie, "The Paris socialite and Dior acquaintance". They hostilely reverted a reasonable change to "The Paris socialite and acquaintance of Dior," and rather than get involved in a prolonged edit war over something so piffling, and because Groupie hasn't yet responded to my attempt to open a discussion on their talk page, I am asking the grammar coves here what they think. I've suggested an alternative phrasing of "However, Dior's acquaintance, the Paris socialite..." but I think it will be hostilely received again. In addition, I've noticed an issue with the sentence that means that it should have a citation (if one can be found) added, but given the situation, I feel I can't really do anything until this tiny issue is sorted. Please can a third party opine? Mabalu (talk) 11:14, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To me, "Dior acquaintance" is in a tone suitable for the gossip pages of a tabloid, and not for an encyclopaedia. But I think the coordinated phrase is very awkward, and prefer your version with the comma. --ColinFine (talk) 11:52, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As it stands, with or without the possessive, it could be construed as referring to two people (the socialite and the acquaintance). There's nothing wrong with your second version, IMO. Would "However, Alexis von Rosenberg, Paris socialite and acquaintance of Dior" be OK? In other words, what is it about your proposed change that your antagonist finds objectionable? Tevildo (talk) 12:07, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I had a bit of a problem with the two-person reading too. My solution would be "However, an acquaintance of Dior, Paris socialite Alexis von Rosenberg, stated...". This way the most crucial bit is foregrounded better (what qualifies this person to be a potentially competent witness for saying what he said is not that he was a Paris socialite but that he was an acquaintance, so that part should come first.) However, unlike in Mabalu's version above, I'd prefer to introduce the phras with an indefinite article, because we are introducing a new person into the narrative here and Dior would obviously have had more than one acquaintance. Fut.Perf. ☼ 13:02, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think most people would want "an acquaintance of Dior's" in your suggestion, Future Perfect. The possessive is usual in such constructions; for example, one says "He is an acquaintance of mine", not "He is an acquaintance of me". Deor (talk) 01:10, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Dior's acquaintance" is grammatical and preferable. "Dior-acquainteance would have to be hyphenated, and amounts to headlinese, which is deprecated in WP. μηδείς (talk) 01:07, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If it read "However, Dior's acquaintance", yes, but "However, the Paris socialite and Dior's acquaintance" - I just feel it doesn't read properly. BUT "However, Dior's acquaintance, the Paris socialite...." works on a grammatical level (although it's stlll not quite right. I like what Fut.Perf. has suggested, solution wise. That just seems to read fluently and naturally to me. Perhaps "However, one of Dior's acquaintances, the Paris socialite..." might work even better all round? Mabalu (talk) 03:40, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In context, I think you could get away with "his": "However, one of his acquaintances, the Paris socialite...". This would also let us use "Dior" rather than "the fashion designer" later in the sentence. Tevildo (talk) 14:21, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am puzzled by this discussion because, as Gertrude Stein once observed, there is no there there. True, there are often many ways of saying exactly the same thing. But what's the point? In reference to the Paris socialite Alexis von Rosenberg, you can call him "Dior's acquaintance" or you can call him "Acquaintance of Dior," and it would not make an iota of difference, as it means exactly the same thing. What you cannot do (if you want to use correct English grammar, naturally) is to call von Rosenberg "a Dior acquaintance," because it would be illiterate. Do you say, for example, "John friend" or "John's friend" when referring to a friend of John's? "Hey, meet Freddy, he is John friend. I like all of John friends." So what is this discussion about? I have corrected the sentence: "The Paris socialite and Dior acquaintance..." to "The Paris socialite and Dior's acquaintance..," and that edit of me (just kidding) of mine was incorrectly and unjustifiably undone by Mabalu on the grounds that it was "very poor grammar." Remarkably, Mabalu failed to recognize the correct use of the possessive case here and thought the apostrophe s in "Dior's" was an abbreviation of "Dior is." Once this nonsense was pointed out to him, Mabalu then insisted on coming up with an alternative language for no other reason but a purely gratuitous one. This is abuse of editor's privileges, and it has got to stop and must not be encouraged on this page.--Fashiongroupie (talk) 23:08, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's not quite the case. You can say a Chanel dress and a Dior perfume. The usage is adjectival. It's also deprecated, and I wouldn't use it in a Wikipedia's article. μηδείς (talk) 03:13, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Both Chanel dress and Dior perfume are okay grammatically because in these cases Chanel and Dior are inanimate nouns, while in the case of Dior's acquaintance, Dior is an animate noun, and different grammatical rules apply. Again, would you say: "Meet Paul, he is John acquaintance?" You can say, however: "Meet Paul, he is wearing a Dior jacket."--Fashiongroupie (talk) 07:56, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that "Dior's acquaintance" is preferable, as I said before. But the claim that "Dior acquaintance" is ungrammatical is wrong. What makes it journalistic in style is not the use of "Dior" as a modifier, but the absence of an article: "a Dior acquaintance" would be acceptable anywhere. --ColinFine (talk) 14:35, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So, just to clarify, it is your opinion that the sentence "Meet Paul, he is John acquaintance" is grammatically correct, except that the absence of an article before "John" makes it journalistic in style, while the sentence: "Meet Paul, he is a John acquaintance" is not ungrammatical whatsoever and would be acceptable anywhere. Did I get it right?--Fashiongroupie (talk) 15:48, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That does not make sense, no. If you are introducing Paul to someone, and giving the context that he is an acquaintance of John, the correct sentence is "Meet Paul, he is John's acquaintance" or "Meet Paul, he is an acquaintance of John's". The difference is, as you say, John is a person. --TammyMoet (talk) 17:51, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

But the construction can work with a surname. "A key Obama aide" is journalistic but well-formed, akin to "in the Clinton White House", "During the Kennedy administration". Itsmejudith (talk) 18:14, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, it can. It works in these very limited, president-specific examples of journalese. Such usage of common names as adjectives represents an exception to the rules of proper English grammar.--Fashiongroupie (talk) 03:24, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

December 22

Latin pronunciation In dulci jubilo

I have heard carol singers with lots of variations on the pronunciation of dulci; some say dulkee, others dulchee and yet others dulsee. Which is correct Latin pronunciation? Would it have varied depending on the date of the Latin? -- Q Chris (talk) 16:01, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Dulkee" would have been classical Latin, but since this is a medieval text in Church Latin, such a pronunciation would be a rather ahistoric affectation. Medieval Latin (and modern traditional ecclesiastic Latin usage) has various pronunciations for the soft c depending on your native language: Italian speakers would have had "dulchee", French speakers presumably "dulsee", German speakers "dultsee". Since this song comes from a German background and has a half German text, the German pronunciation "dultsee" would probably be most appropriate. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:22, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dulchee is the standard ecclesiastical Latin pronunciation. I'd go with the Anglo/-French- dulsee myself as being subjectively more pleasant. μηδείς (talk) 16:29, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That would put you somewhere between "bad Latin" and "bad Spanish" linguistically. Sai Weng (talk) 20:45, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, Spanish would be dulthee. Of course, the qualification of "subjectively" more pleasant implies the contrast objectively incorrect. 22:49, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

I have to endorse Future Perfect's analysis. The use of Italian pronunciation (dulchee) for Church Latin outside of Italy is a modern development. In medieval Germany, the pronunciation would have been dultsee (as it still often is in Germany today). Marco polo (talk) 22:51, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Dulchee" is pretty much a standard amongst English cathedral choirs and many of them have been about for a few centuries. Alansplodge (talk) 23:13, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Dulchee" is what my American choir directors taught as well. Rmhermen (talk) 02:24, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, oddly enough, dulchee is the ecclesiastical standard.

My brother-in-law requested a course in Latin for his children as his Christmas gift, and I was forced to choose between the ch ecclesiastical and the k classical versions of the companion CD. μηδείς (talk) 03:16, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For a few centuries, Alansplodge, but only a few. When we sang the Byrd four-part mass a couple of years ago, we carefully used what we were told was English Tudor-period Latin pronunciation, which would have had /dʊlsi/ not /dʊltʃi/.

So, how are you pronouncing the j in jubilo? μηδείς (talk) 16:28, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

December 23

English equivalents of the Chinese words "含蓄" and "文雅"

I have some problem translating the Chinese words "含蓄" and "文雅" into English? I think I understand their meaning, but haven't found what I'd consider as near-equivalents in English.

In the usage I have in mind, "含蓄" is used to refer to literary works or their styles. A work or style that is 含蓄 is not explicit; (some of) the meaning has to be inferred by the reader. "Implicit" and "implied" are two dictionary translations I've found, but "implicit" is not a word I'd use to refer to a work or style. (It sounds a little weird to me; maybe others don't feel the same way.)

In the usage I have in mind, "文雅" has the connotation of not vulgar or crude. To me, it suggests a style or expression appropriate for literature (maybe some classic, respected kind of literature?). Two dictionary translations I've found are "elegant" and "refined", but I think they have an overemphasis on beauty and refinement.

Any suggestions?

--173.49.12.181 (talk) 12:56, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Working just on the basis of your comments above, I would suggest "allusive" and "lucid". --ColinFine (talk) 14:37, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I too, with nothing but your explanations to go on, came up with allusive for the first one. The second is somewhat more vague to me; in particular, I'm not sure why you're rejecting refined, which seems to me a good match for "not vulgar or crude". What about tasteful? Deor (talk) 14:48, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the suggestion of allusive for 含蓄. If you aren't satisfied with refined for 文雅, what about graceful? I don't think lucid is quite right. (I am not a native speaker of Chinese, but over the course of the past year I have moved from an intermediate level to what I think is an advanced level.) Marco polo (talk) 15:22, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say reserved or restrained for 含蓄, and I can't really think of anything better than refined for 文雅, in the context of an antonym of plain-spoken (say, contrasting classical and more recent Chinese literature). If you're translating a passage, using two adjectives might help convey the full meaning. wctaiwan (talk) 02:46, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Apostrophe in Russian

I was going to ask a question about characters' nicknames in Roadside Picnic, but in the process I came across another curious thing. The Russian Wikipedia article about nicknames, ru:Прозвище, gives as synonyms кли́чка and погоня’ло. What is the apostrophe doing in погоня’ло? I've never seen an apostrophe used in this way in Russian; in fact I can't even find a way to type it on a Russian keyboard layout. Is it at all connected with the use of an apostrophe for hard sign in Ukrainian? Is this word a kind of Internet jargon where the apostrophe is just decorative? Or is the apostrophe there to differentiate from the past tense verb form? (This would be odd, because Russian is usually happy to permit different words to be written identically, like замок or мука.) Does it make any difference in the pronunciation? Does this show up in other words? --Amble (talk) 16:05, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Or maybe this is just a typo in the Russian Wikipedia article? I had convinced myself it's a real word (including the apostrophe) with a quick Google search, but on further investigation I think the hits may all lead back to the same Wikipedia article. If it's as simple as that we can just correct it in ru.wikipedia. --Amble (talk) 16:24, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would say that this is just a mistyped accent sign: According to [2], the accent is on я indeed. No such user (talk) 16:31, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Typo, obvsly. Many do not know how to type combining accents properly so they use apostrophe.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 19:28, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

But in the texts printed in 1920-1940 you usually encounter apostrophe in place of the hard sign.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 19:31, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

But don't hard signs only ever precede vowels? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 19:49, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, с’езд etc.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 21:04, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. That proves it can't be a typo for погонъяло - which is a good thing since there's no such word (except, maybe, in Bulgarian). -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 08:15, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's easy to remember that the hard sign in Russian is used only after prefixes (apart from some dozens of words like адъютант, фельдъегерь, etc. - but diachronically they also have/had prefixes).--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 12:11, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Such a word doesn't exist in Bulgarian either. It is true that the letter ъ occurs much more frequently in Bulgarian than it does in Russian because it represents one of Bulgarian's six vowels. However, there are some limitations with regards to its distribution. Word-initially, ъ is there only in the word ъгъл "angle; corner" and its derivatives, and in marginal loanwords such as ъперкът "uppercut". It never occurs orthographically in word-final positions, although, in the standard language, a final ‹а› has the sound of ‹ъ› in forms like чета "I read" (pronounced [чеˈтъ]) and света "the world" (oblique case form, pronounced [свеˈтъ]). Also, it is unusual for ъ to stay next to another vowel; this situation may appear across morpheme boundaries in words like съавтор "co-author" and съученик "classmate". In transcriptions of foreign names the ъ can be seen in all positions, including initially (Ърнест "Ernest"), finally (Кушадасъ "Kuşadası"), and next to a vowel (Кюъл "Kewell").

Some languages, like Ossetic and Kabardian, use multigraphs one of whose components is ъ (see Cyrillic digraphs). --Theurgist (talk) 00:54, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks to No Such and Lüboslóv; and thanks to Lüboslóv for the typo fix [3]. Indeed, it should have been obvious that it was a mistyped accent. I was led astray by the first two results on a Google search [4], [5], but there are hints that these actually echoes of the same original typo in the Russian Wikipedia article. --Amble (talk) 22:55, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

French help

I'm trying to transcribe an interview with a Kurdistan Workers' Party member, found here: [6]. I'm having trouble with a few words. Can someone check the following and correct the words marked with ??:

J’ai beaucoup participé aux opérations, parce qu’en général je me trouvais dans la région du ~~Boutane (??)~~ Bohtan. Il y a eu beaucoup de confrontations ; et j’ai souvent un eu l'ennemi face à moi. Environ cent de mes camarades sont morts près de moi. La Le plus difficile à vivre, c’était quand ils jouaient avec les cadavres. Ils se ~~jetest ( ??)~~ jetaient sur les cadavres, surtout sur les femmes. Ils les coupaient en ~~pétits~~ petits morceaux, ils arrachaient leurs oreilles, leurs yeux ; c’est toujours très dur pour moi. Ils ont fait ça à beaucoup de ~~guérilla hausse ( ??)~~ guérilleros. Ils arrachent leurs pieds, et leurs mains. Si tu tues une personne, pourquoi arracher ses oreilles, ses yeux, ses pieds, et ses mains ? Il y a beaucoup de cette violence, surtout des commandos spéciaux. La majorité de ces commandos spéciaux utilise des narcotiques (??) et ils n’ont plus de des sentiments humains. Quand une personne leur tombe entre les mains, même si elle est blessée, ils la torturent jusqu’à la mort.

Note: I am NOT trying to express any sympathy or opposition to PKK. I'm only transcribing an interview. Thanks for any help! --Bowlhover (talk) 18:10, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think I could hear those words fairly clearly and have suggested a few corrections. My French is not very good though. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:07, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Seems fine, apart from the last sentence which should be plural: ils la torturent. But I'm no expert. Ssscienccce (talk) 21:57, 23 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, my bad. Thanks to Future Perfect for the help! If anyone can spot other errors (in areas not marked with ??), please let me know. --Bowlhover (talk) 02:18, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I made some corections in the text. But 1) ils n'ont plus de sentiments humains, is for me, better French than ils n'ont plus des sentiments humains. And 2) des narcotiques (substances that induce narcosis) seems not to be the right word. I think she (the translator) would have used des stupéfiants, des drogues. — AldoSyrt (talk) 10:26, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

December 24

English dialect in Denmark?

Is there a specific way Danes speak in Denmark? Since English is the second language of the country, is there a specific dialect? If not, are there any differences whatsoever? Or do they just tend to speak English regularly? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MadisonGrundtvig (talk • contribs) 02:55, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think they usually learn Standard British English, which is derived from one of London's dialects. There's another question though of whether Danes have the option of learning either British English or American English in school and then which one is dominant? There's really not any such thing as regular English. Live in the different countries and you realise it fairly quickly. Good thing we understand each other most of the time.... Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 21 Tevet 5774 03:05, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm Danish. People learn English in school because it's an important language when communicating with foreigners, but few people speak it at home, and many people never speak it. People with Danish as first language usually have a Danish accent when they speak English, but that's not a dialect. It's like the better known German and French accents in people who have those as first language. Danes will sometimes make direct translations of Danish expressions when English uses another expression, but this is also common when speaking a foreign language and not considered a dialect. I don't know whether we are closer to British or American English. It may be influential that we watch more American films and television. I haven't heard of schools offering a choice between "British" and "American". PrimeHunter (talk) 03:20, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Now that I think about it, I've only heard of the choice being offered in Israel. Most people seem to learn more from films and TV than from their English classes at school, sadly. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 21 Tevet 5774 03:42, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Danes I know, who have emigrated from Denmark to North America, speak North American English with a strong Danish accent, which approaches a weak German(ic) accent. That is, a German)ic_ who speaks American English will do so with a slightly British-ish accent no matter what, if only because the clipt sounds of German(ic) are closer to those of British than American English. (British consonants are, for the most part, closer to those of other Germanic languages than are those of American English.) I have also met Swedes and Norwegians who speak American English with a Germanic accent. I'd assume Danes who move to Britain take on an even more British accent, but I haven't met any. μηδείς (talk) 04:49, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For any language significant long-standing population of native speakers in particular area is needed to create a different dialect (at least several hundreds or thousands). I doubt such population of English-speakers has been existing in Denmark. Everything else is substratum, accent and interference.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 04:56, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that. But without your giving links I doubt it helps the OP much. μηδείς (talk) 05:18, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've just played CO here.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 12:13, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In Brazil what does it mean if someone went to 'college' ?

Having attended 'college' means different things in different places. When someone from Brazil says that they attended 'college', what level of education, or type of institution, are they probably referring to? Thanks if you can answer and/or provide a reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.173.50.222 (talk) 11:00, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Try google translate. μηδείς (talk) 15:47, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So you've shown that, according to Google translate, high school is rendered as "colégio". But back-translating "colégio" gives "college"; so how does this answer the question? (Mind you, there are confusions between different varieties of English in this area: a Brit asking "Where did you go to school" is unambiguously asking about secondary (or primary) schooling, not about college or university). --ColinFine (talk) 16:06, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)Well, were they speaking Portuguese or English? Medeis's suggestion of using Google Translate may not ultimately prove useful for two reasons. Firstly, it may not be right to begin with (for example, if you put in the French word "collège" and translate it to English, it says "college". This is quite wrong; I would translate it as "Middle School"). Secondly, "college" does not mean the same thing in British English and American English. Google Translate therefore probably won't help much at all. Sadly I only know like four words of Portuguese, so I don't know the answer to your question. Falconus^{p t c} 16:12, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously, folks? Trying to get in your last minute nitpicking before the stores close? The question was obviously, could the Brazilian mean something different from college in the way college is most often used in English. What exactly would have been the OP's point in asking if it were obvious the same thing were meant? When colegio doesn't mean college, it means high school--that's the answer. "University" is used when Engish speakers might say college. Nor did I deny that google translate gives alternative definitions, and or that it should always be used in forward and reverse to check a meaning. μηδείς (talk) 18:10, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we have two editors who independently didn't think your "obviously" was obvious, or your very brief answer helpful. --ColinFine (talk) 18:49, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) The OP asked "what" it means, not "could" it mean something different. You instructed the OP to go to Google Translate. You claim that "colegio" means "high school", so you obviously know Portuguese at least well enough to pick up on that difference. That then begs the question: why would you refer the OP to Google Translate (which is not a reliable reference) instead of just saying that you know the answer? You do speak Portuguese, I hope, and are not just guessing. Falconus^{p t c} 18:52, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It does depend on what language they were speaking and who their audience is. In London, a Brazilian saying that they attended "college" might mean a Further Education college. If speaking in the USA or to Americans, they probably mean higher education. It's rather unlikely that, speaking in English, they would mean secondary school, even though colegio means "high school". Itsmejudith (talk) 20:50, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am not "claiming" colegio means high school and only high school. Nor did the link I provided list high school as the only meaning. These are words, and words have various senses. I am saying that the relevant sense given the OP bothered to ask the question (i.e., noticed there might be a difference between what was heard and what was expected) is likely what is meant by high school in (American) English. μηδείς (talk) 21:11, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad someone's mentioned "(American) English". In my (English speaking) country, Australia, people don't go to college. They go to high school, then, if they're doing further study, they go to university or TAFE, or might get an apprenticeship. This is a bloody good question. HiLo48 (talk) 23:41, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This goes back to the same reason why Australians don't have blackboards; primogeniture. The original American colleges were actually founded by graduates of Oxford and Cambridge, who were satisfied to compare Harvard, Yale, and Queen's College to the constituent schools of those universities, not by ex-inmates of Master Prym's correctional school for Juvenile Reprobates. Not suffering from inferiority complexes, Americans reserved the name university for schools offering graduate degrees, which, at first, the above schools did not offer. This unassuming modesty confuses Europeans and their transportee cousins in the nether continents. μηδείς (talk) 05:21, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. I am the OP. A little disappointed that nobody seems to have a helpful answer to what I thought was a simple question. But you leave me with another simple question. Are you people high? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.106.118.196 (talk) 12:41, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, OP. Did you read my reply? In what context was the Brazilian person speaking? Were they most likely to be talking to Americans, British people or Australians? See our article college for the many meanings that the word carries. Itsmejudith (talk) 12:52, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Might as well hat this thread as trolling if the OP has no interest in clarifying his meaning. μηδείς (talk) 16:03, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OP here. The speaker was Brazilian. Speaking in English, in the Netherlands, to other English speakers who were not British or (North) American. There were responders above who I think understood the point of the question. 'College' can refer to different types or levels of education in different countries. We were trying to figure out what it means in Brazil. Does it mean they went to a university, as it probably would mean if the speaker was from the USA, or does it mean something else in the Brazilian system? The Google Translate suggestion was not helpful, as everyone was speaking English throughout. When the thread turned to Australians, blackboards, primogenture and nether continents...I reckon Medeis was more interested in hearing himself type than in providing useful answer to the question. No need for further consideration, as an answer was useful on Monday, but moot today. I find the reference desk most useful when people provide direct links to authoritative sources relevant to answering relatively straight forward questions. Indeed, writing clear questions is its own art, or science...But replies that are simply speculation or elaborate opinions are usually much less satisfying. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.106.118.196 (talk) 16:31, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry I ruined your Christmas with my joke to HiLo. You seemed to be long gone and uninterested in clarifying your question. Is there some reason to assume that the Brazilian could not possibly have been taken in by the fact that colegio and college are false friends between his native and target language? If it is not possible that he meant high school, what is it possible he meant? What hint caused the question of what he meant to come up in the first place? If I understand you, you seem to be asking what the English word college means. Is the fact he was a native Brazilian irrelevant to the question?

Given Google Translate provides:

college faculdade, colégio, universidade, agremiação, campus
school escola, colégio, faculdade, curso, edifício escolar, corpo docente
high school colégio
campus escola, colégio, terrenos de universidade

I am not sure what could possibly be more helpful than emailing the guy and asking him what he meant. μηδείς (talk) 17:25, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Falconus and I both did our best to give you a meaningful answer. I can sum up for you now. The word is ambiguous in English and there is nothing in the Brazilian education system that can help you through that. I can find you hundreds of links if you like, but the essence is in our article college, an article that I have edited in the past. Itsmejudith (talk) 18:54, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

To the OP: I was using my volunteer time to try to help you out by trying to make sense of your question, which frankly is open to a lot of interpretation, and by trying to address potential pitfalls in the recommendation to use Google Translate. Just a few pointers about the reference desk:

Asking "Are you people high?" is not going to aid us in providing better answers to you or anybody else. Frankly it is a little bit insulting and annoying, and it accomplishes nothing.
We are all volunteers. We post because we want to; we don't have to. Nobody is obligated to answer any question, including yours. The time that I take in answering or commenting on these questions is me being nice to you, the person who asked. If my answer does not help you, I'm sorry... But please be nice. I still took time for you that I didn't have to, whether or not you find my efforts useful.
If the answer was useful on Monday but not today, you have come to the wrong place. It is written at the top of the page that "We'll answer here within a few days." It often takes us a few days to hash out a decent answer. If you are pressed for time, ask elsewhere.
It is much easier to give precise answers to precise questions. Besides not making clear any context for the Brazilian using the word "college", the word "probably" implies uncertainty. How could I possibly give you a clean, academic reference for what an individual from Brazil probably means by the word "college"? I have known several Brazilians, and I have to say that some of them speak British English, some speak American English, some speak almost perfect English, and some speak English with more difficulty. We can discuss your question, and give you some ideas, but we cannot authoritatively answer it with the information that you have given us. Sorry, but please don't blame that on us, because we aren't psychic and we don't know this Brazilian.
You have no obligation to ask questions on this desk. You certainly may, and I welcome you to, but we won't be insulted if you seek a question/answer forum somewhere that you find leaves you less "disappointed".

I hope that this helps! Falconus^{p t c} 04:34, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Our article Education in Brazil suggests that "college" is used for higher education institutions in Brazil, but, as explained above, the exact meaning could depend on who was speaking to whom and in what language. Dbfirs 20:56, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Word for a detail-oriented person

A word keeps dancing around my head but never quite settles: It's a word for a particular type of person who is good at little, repetitive things. It has aspects of persnickety, finicky, particular, and fussy, among others, but without the negative connotations, though the word can be used as such. The word is an adjective, I think. Any clues? Mingmingla (talk) 18:57, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Meticulous? Falconus^{p t c} 18:58, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OCD? KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 19:52, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Scrupulous? Punctilious? Deor (talk) 20:19, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Punctilious seems almost right but it doesn't quite satisfy my itch. If there are any other ideas I would appreciate it. Mingmingla (talk) 20:44, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Perfectionist? I am assuming you have googled whatver word you find closest and looked for synonyms. μηδείς (talk) 21:13, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was unsatisfied with the results, which is why I'm asking here. Mingmingla (talk) 22:26, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the term used on Wikipedia is "gnome" :-). Looie496 (talk) 23:53, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pedantic may fit, though I doubt it is ever used in a neutral meaning. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 00:00, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lower-left brained. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:14, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I found conscientious and a list of synonyms: diligent, industrious, punctilious, painstaking, sedulous, assiduous, dedicated, careful, meticulous, thorough, attentive, hard-working, studious, rigorous, particular; religious, strict. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 09:49, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Could you call such a person a Bartleby ? (It's not exactly a positive reference, however.) StuRat (talk) 14:27, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Only if he doesn't like his job. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:19, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fussbudget? --Shirt58 (talk) 05:14, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm thinking what a detail-oriented sort would say about the ones making fun of detail orientation. Terms like scatterbrained, disorganized, inattentive, slipshod, bull in a china shop, and a host of others. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:52, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

December 25

evolution quote

Hello, I just came across the saying that goes something like (I'm translating from German) "those who don't lose their mind over certain things have no mind to lose in the first place". It's from Emilia Galotti by Lessing. (The German Wikiquote page on him notes that Lessing, being versed in Spanish literature, must have come up with this line thanks to Balthasar Gracian's "Muchos por faltos de sentido, no le pierden" ("many don't lose their mind because they have none".)
My question is, I dimly remember there was a quote to that same effect by some naturalist (Haeckel?) in the context of evolution, but I can't "yahoogle" it up. Does someone by chance know what that quote was? Asmrulz (talk) 03:19, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is a quote by Ernst Haeckel also quoted here with a slightly different wording that could fit in here. On this page it is quoted, illustrated and translated. --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 21:53, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Troll the Halls

In the carol Deck the Halls, what does "troll" mean? RNealK (talk) 07:43, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Troll the ancient Yuletide carols", using "troll" as in "sing", is centuries old:[7] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:49, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

...and if you sing them with purple hair, sticking straight up, all the better. :-) StuRat (talk) 14:21, 25 December 2013 (UTC) [reply]

Readers of this page may find this article from mental_floss interesting: "6 Grammar Points to Watch Out For in Christmas Songs" (though I question whether the meaning of troll is really a grammar point). — SMUconlaw (talk) 09:59, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

One they missed was "Don we now our gay apparel", which has been a joke double meaning since at least the 1960s. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 11:58, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Like — SMUconlaw (talk) 11:59, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OED defines troll as "To sing (something) in the manner of a round or catch; to sing in a full, rolling voice; to chant merrily or jovially", and suggests a derivation from another meaning of the word, "To cause to pass from one to another, hand round among the company present". The etymology of the word (or series of words) is said to be "uncertain" but generally derived from the Old French troller, a hunting term meaning "to quest, to go in quest of game, without purpose". There's a delightful quotation from Sir Walter Scott's poem Rokeby (1813): "But, hark! our merry-men so gay / Troll forth another roundelay." Which brings us nicely back to our gay apparel in Deck the Halls. — SMUconlaw (talk) 12:09, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

sleeping position

If two people share one bed and sleep with their heads toward opposite directions in order to save space, is there any term or specific expression to describe the sleeping position? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.202.187.153 (talk) 08:41, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've always used "top and tail" for this [8] BbBrock (talk) 10:34, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Swedish has the word skavfötters, which means precisely this (and nothing else). [9] /176.10.249.240 (talk) 14:08, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Norwegian also has a word which means exactly this and nothing else: "andføttes" (sometimes spelled "anføttes"). --14:33, 25 December 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.189.65.217 (talk)

Wiktionary calls it "head to toe". --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 21:55, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I never understood that sleep position. I sure wouldn't want my face near somebody else's feet while I try to sleep. StuRat (talk) 22:58, 26 December 2013 (UTC) [reply]

We used to do it when we were small, especially when visiting friends or relatives. There's plenty of room in a single bed for two small children. And we called it "top and tail" too. --Nicknack009 (talk) 23:02, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What is the Arabic for the Lycee Cheikh Bouamama in Algiers?

What is the Arabic for the Lycee Cheikh Bouamama in Algiers? I want to see if I can find a website on it and/or write an article about it.

Thanks, WhisperToMe (talk) 20:54, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be "ثانوية الشيخ بوعمامة". Adam Bishop (talk) 02:50, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! WhisperToMe (talk) 08:48, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

December 26

A little French translation, please

File:Othniel Looker House front (crop to roof).jpg is currently illustrating our solar gain article, and I'd like to add it to the (currently unillustrated) corresponding article in French, fr:Facteur solaire. I'd like to use the same caption, but I don't trust Google Translate at all; could someone please give me an idiomatic translation? The current English caption is "Solar gain is illustrated by the snow on the roof of this house: sunlight has melted all of the snow, except for the area that is shaded by the chimney to the right." Of course, an alternate caption would be fine as well. Nyttend (talk) 18:03, 26 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here is my translation (which needs to be checked, because my French is far from perfect): "La neige sur le toit de cette maison montre le facteur solaire ; le soleil a fondu toute la neige sauf que la neige ombragée par la cheminée à droit." Falconus^{p t c} 04:56, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"La neige sur le toit de cette maison met en évidence [/montre] le facteur solaire. Le rayonnement solaire a fait fondre [/a fondu] toute la neige, sauf celle située dans la zone d'ombre portée par la cheminée de droite [/à droite sur la photo]" (@Falconus, the end of the sentence sauf que la neige... is not grammatical.) — AldoSyrt (talk) 13:56, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, my bad... Sorry! Falconus^{p t c} 16:47, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I should have done it in a more concise way. "La neige sur le toit de cette maison met en évidence le facteur solaire. Le soleil a fondu toute la neige, sauf dans l'ombre de la cheminée de droite." — AldoSyrt (talk) 15:16, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's funny, the French is easier to understand than the English. μηδείς (talk) 16:27, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the translation; image now added to Facteur solaire. Nyttend (talk) 13:28, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

December 27

Is the sound /ouv/ rare in English?

Is the sound /ouv/ rare in English? I've thought about ten words: bovine, cove, hove, jovial, over (& co. overtake, overwrite etc.), overt, overture, rove, soviet, wove. Any other suggestions? HOOTmag (talk) 07:11, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

'Mauve' - at least in most British English dialects. AndyTheGrump (talk)

'Dove' (past tense of 'dive', not the bird). 'Strove' (past tense of 'strive'). 'Jove' (the Roman God - alternative name for 'Jupiter'). 'Covert' (the opposite of your example 'overt'). KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 07:48, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Clover. AndyTheGrump (talk)

Stove, clove, treasure trove, oval, mauve, Fauvism, grove, slithy tove, Hove and "hove into view". Ovingdean but not Oving. Alec Nove. Slovenia. The current UK Secretary of State for Education. Itsmejudith (talk) 08:02, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Itsmejudith, Why did you indicate "hove" after I indicated it? HOOTmag (talk) 08:47, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cause I missed it, like I missed that Andy had already said mauve. I also assumed that there was only one Oving, but now I see that there's another one, which may be pronounced with an ove. Hope you're getting the answers you were hoping for. Itsmejudith (talk) 11:26, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Shrove (Tuesday), drove, drover, droving, Novocastrian. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 08:24, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

'Supernova', and anything else with 'nova' in it. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 08:50, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Loaves, fovea, Maury Povich, Ed Jovanovski, tovarishch. Adam Bishop (talk) 08:53, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Is that the usual 'English' rendition of 'tovarishch'? 'O' before a stressed syllable in Russian is pronounced 'a'. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 09:04, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Correct. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 11:03, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I've ever actually heard anyone say that word before! Adam Bishop (talk) 12:24, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

'Ovary' and the corresponding plural. It looks like this sound combo is quite common, so I am curious about the reason for the question. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 12:50, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm curious what sound "/ouv/" is supposed to stand for. It looks like it should rhyme with "cow" plus a "v". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:12, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I guess that the reason for the question is the existence of words like love and oven which have that spelling but a different pronunciation. Compare also other and mother, dozen and cozen. There does indeed seem to have been a process that often but not always changed /o:/ do /ʌ/ before a voiced fricative. Cousin probable belongs in there too. --ColinFine (talk) 13:28, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The "o" in those words is not pronounced "ou", it's pronounced "uh". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:52, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There was a tendency to replace a spelling "u" with a spelling "o" before "v" in basic non-Latinate vocabulary, because "u" and "v" were the same letter before the 17th century, and a double letter would have been confusing in that context. Some other replacements of "u" with "o" were to avoid a sequence of minims in Gothic/fraktur handwriting... AnonMoos (talk) 14:46, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

'Cardiovascular' and lots of other examples where the first part is a prefix or combining form ending with -o and the second part is a root word beginning with v-. 'Borogoves' as well as 'Slithy toves'. Dover, Andover, (North American) 'plover'. 'Beauville', 'Astrovan'. 'Snowville', 'Crowville'. --Amble (talk) 13:35, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not British plovers, of course (it's /plʌvə/ here). (Some people on this side of the pond say "hover" with the oʊ vowel, but it's not standard.) (I was going to challenge "cardio-vascular" because I say it with a slight pause to represent the hyphen, but when I say it aloud I can hardly tell the difference.) Dbfirs 16:11, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Innovate, "to put in an oven". Borogrove, a cemetery in Brooklyn. Brove, the past tense of breeve. Slithy toves, what Sarah Ferguson and Dick Morris have in common.μηδείς (talk) 16:23, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How does one pronounce in English the name of the constructed language of Novial and the Latin phrase Novus ordo seclorum? --Theurgist (talk) 17:23, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Latin is /ouv/ when said in English. I assume the same for the constructed language, but haven't heard it said. Any other pronunciation would be unexpected. μηδείς (talk) 18:22, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Slovenia already having been mentioned, there's also Slovakia. See the list of all Wikipedia page titles beginning with "slov-" (there is another constructed language there, Slovio). Check out also wikt:Rhymes:English:-əʊv and wikt:Rhymes:English:-əʊv... at Wiktionary. --Theurgist (talk) 22:41, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A borderline case is "introvert". -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:13, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We've had oval and ovary, but there are many other ov- words, incl.: ovation, Ovid, oviduct, oviferous, oviform, ovine, oviparous, oviposit(or), ovoid, ovoviparous, ovulate. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 23:50, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The use of the english word INHERIT

Can I use the English word INHERIT in this way ? :

"They earned a reputation as greedy ‘rock-dwellers’ that had a sickly weakness for wealth and all things shining. Their desire and hunger for it seemed to be part of their nature, and were said to be INHERIT in all dwarves."

(I have shortened the text to only include the most important sentences to show how I have used the word, so if it seems a bit out of context you know why)

I can't quite figure out if this is a correct use of the word. It sounds good to me, and I want to use this word and keep the sentences as they are now, but only if it is correct use of the word. HERITABLE or INBORN is obviously alternatives, but were I to use one of these words I might need to change the sentence(s) as well, which I don't want.

"They will inherit" is definitely correct use of the word "It was said to be inherit in all dwarves." Not sure, and that's why I'm asking... Wordbooks doesn't always offer all the grammatical variations of a word.

109.247.62.59 (talk) 09:37, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think the word inherit in your sentence has been mistakenly used; the correct word is inherent. (Ha, ha, and I've just noticed that Wiktionary has a note stating "do not confound with inherit".) — SMUconlaw (talk) 09:49, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was confounded by that confounding use of 'confound', so I've changed it the the more idiomatic 'not to be confused with..' AndrewWTaylor (talk) 10:26, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! — SMUconlaw (talk) 11:18, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Of course !! Inherent it is :D:D:D Thnx a lot 109.247.62.59 (talk) 10:13, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're most welcome. — SMUconlaw (talk) 11:18, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Accuracy of NYT dialect survey

Can anyone comment on the accuracy of this 25-question survey from the New York Times which purports to determine your American English dialect geographically? It turned out to be very accurate in my case, but not based on the diagnostic questions I would have expected. Other such surveys for comparison would be helpful. Thanks.

Very accurate for me—of the three towns identified as most nearly matching my responses, one was the city in which I spent the first 25 years of my life (St. Louis) and the other two (Rockford & Aurora, IL) are within 100 miles or so of the city in which I've spent the 40 years since (Chicago). Of course I'm fairly familiar with these sorts of questions and the responses that match different regions, but I tried to answer them honestly. Deor (talk) 20:53, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Medium accurate for me--of the three towns identified as most nearly matching my responses, one (San Antonio) is quite close to the city in which I grew up (Austin), but the other two (Des Moines and Madison) are nowhere near where I grew up; I've never been anywhere near either of those cities. Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:56, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Madison, Wisconsin? You'll notice at the end it gives both the cities and the diagnostic reason for that city. For me it chose Yonkers, Newark and Philly, based on sneakers, Mischief Night, and Hoagie, with South Jersey (which is correct) in the deepest red. I have also taken the test twice, and it does ask different questions each time. (It didn't ask about hoagies the first time.) It would be interesting to see a list of questions with maps rather than having this quiz format. I am surprised it didn't ask how I pronounced water, if I called them jimmies or sprinkles, and whether I rhyme halve and have, which I don't.μηδείς (talk) 22:13, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The maps corresponding to the questions are here. Deor (talk) 22:37, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hit me right on. My 3 cities were "Worcestor", "Providence", and "Boston", and I grew up about 50 miles northwest of Boston and the same distance northeast of Worcester. The killer words for me were "bubbler" and "rotary". --Jayron32 05:45, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I got Boston, Worcester, Springfield. Probably because I never use "bubbler" Hot Stop 08:39, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I just took it again (slightly different questions), and this time it came up with Des Moines, Madison, and Milwaukee. The two Wisconsin cities are because I say "kitty-corner" and Des Moines is because I put "other" for the night of October 30. (I call it "Hell Night" if I call it anything at all, but that wasn't one of the options.) Maybe the test is accurate, but my dialect is wrong for the region where I grew up. I obviously need to cultivate the term "catty-corner" lest people mistake me for a Cheesehead. Aɴɢʀ (talk) 08:10, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That would be disastrous. Which reminds me: What do you get when you have 60,000 Packers fans at Lambeau? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:07, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It kind of "hung" on the last step and I never got a map. But on the individual answers, it mostly had me pegged wrong. So it's hard to tell. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:19, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest you try again, I did it three times and it got stuck on the third. μηδείς (talk) 17:17, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The reason it takes so long is it's running a script. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:56, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I tried it and it put me in Spokane, Seattle, or Portland. I guess that's as close to Calgary as they could get. --NellieBly (talk) 21:47, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I, who have never been to the United States, tried it and apparently I'm from the Newark-New York-Jersey City area. Medeis, kindly get your guest room ready. I like my eggs boiled for exactly 8 minutes. Thank you. :) -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:13, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I have my nephews over (no beds available), and when the youngest was just offered pizza, he said he'd rather have a hard-boiled egg! The North-East does often have the most conservative phonetic values, outside lower-class ethnic accents. I am curious what you called the night before halloween, and rubber-soled athletic shoes. It is very interesting to see how people outside the US do on this. I'd like to take a British test. I am guessing I'd come out rural West Midlands. μηδείς (talk) 22:54, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Rural West Midlands" is an _extremely_ small area, the Meriden Gap, that I don't think could be isolated by a dialect test. Herefordshire/Shropshire/Warwickshire/Worcestershire would be a more idiomatic way of putting it. Tevildo (talk) 23:36, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Totally wrong for me. I grew up in and spent almost all of my life in California (though my mother and my father's parents came from Oklahoma), and the quiz gave me Albuquerque, New Mexico, Baton Rouge, Louisiana and Jackson, Mississippi. RNealK (talk) 00:28, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

December 28

Meaning of the word "pussy" in 1931 and before

Harry Roy recorded "My girls pussy" in 1931. I am aware of two meanings word "pussy", one of them being "cat". Does anyone know whether the word had both meanings in 1931? DanielDemaret (talk) 14:51, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

http://etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=pussy&searchmode=none KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 15:13, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reading the lyrics [10], he seems to be using the double meaning of cat and vagina. And if that song appeals to you, you might like this similar cultural gem: [11].StuRat (talk) 16:06, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your usual colloquial alternative sense has been in use since 1699 according to the OED. There have been several other meanings attached to the word more recently. See wikt:pussy for some of them. Dbfirs 17:33, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Norwegian translation

Can someone do a good translation of these two passages for me? Thanks.

Han nevnes tidligst i 1354-55, og allerede i 1358 fikk han et vanskelig oppdrag av sin far, idet han ble sendt til Nyborg for å forhandle med utsendinger av opprørske jyder. Han ble inndratt i de fleste regjeringshandlinger, og kalte seg Hertug av Lolland, Daners og Slavers sanne Arving.

Til gravmælet ble det et sted i Mellom-Europa bestilt et minne som forestiller en ung ridder i full rustning besatt med juveler og omkranset av Danmarks, Hallands og Lollands våpen. Christoffer selv er trolig begravet under kirkegulvet - gravmælet ble først oppstillet i 1878

--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 19:10, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to contact user NorwegianBlue, who is a native speaker. He has not been around since September, so let´s hope he is not an ex-parrot. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 22:10, 28 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]