Welcome to the language section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

Select a section:

WP:RD/L

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

How can I get my question answered?

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

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

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

May 24

Treasure Island

I'm surprised that the good doctor says when talking to the captured Hawkins, "By Jupiter". This in a book that talked Christianity, unsurprisingly from that era. Can anyone tell me more about this? Thanks. 24.215.188.243 (talk) 03:21, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard it before. Yelling "Jesus Christ !" was considered to be "taking the Lord's name in vain", so they substituted a "god" they didn't care about offending. StuRat (talk) 03:50, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"By Jove" was a similar expression, Jove being a form of the word Jupiter, and giving us the word "jovial". -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 06:53, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See minced oath. Djbcjk (talk) 07:21, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Or "Jovian", pretty much anything to do with Jupiter. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:29, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

To add some context: during the periods in which the book was written and is set the study of classical Latin (and often also Greek) language and literature usually formed a substantial part of an advanced education (hence the origin of the name "Grammar school"), such as that which a doctor would necessarily have received. Consequently, the British upper/educated classes were familiar with Classical culture and religion, and references to them were considered respectable. This made it acceptable, for example, to depict naked women in art, provided that the scene was taken from Classical history or myth, and to swear by Classical pagan deities when to do so by Christian entities would have been considered coarse or blasphemous.

Of course, no-one imagined that those so swearing actually believed in the Pagan deities being referenced (if any actually did, they would have kept quiet about it!) Expressions like "By Jove!" remained current as recently as the 1970s in the UK, kept alive in popular children's literature such as W.E. Johns' Biggles and other series, and Anthony Buckeridge's Jennings books: I myself learned and used to use them for that reason. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.218.13.119 (talk) 16:47, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if this is related to those exclamations that sound as though you're about to swear, but are turned into something innocuous half-way through, like the polite people who say "Oh sugar!" when they make a mistake. Alansplodge (talk) 18:52, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As made fun of in the old song, "Shaving Cream".[1] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:13, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And peripherally related to that concept is the "You bet your sweet Aspercreme" marketing campaign from a few years back. Evan ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:24, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My 92 -year-old father still uses lots of amusing euphemisms, rathering than using outright profanity. One of his favourites is "holy good old Sebastian", which I've never heard anyone else use. OttawaAC (talk) 00:17, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My late Dad, who would be 94 now, used to say "Gosh old fish hooks". Again, that seems to be unique in my experience. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:16, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For more on covert and/or implied cursing, see Mind rhyme and Mondegreen ("If you see kay..."). Evan ^{(talk|contribs)} 20:26, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

More recently, "Polka Dot Undies". —Tamfang (talk) 07:58, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hungarian translation

In Krisztina Egerszegi's article, it gives two nicknames ("Egérke" in the infobox, "Egér" in the body), both supposedly meaning "Mouse". Many searches translate the former as "Little Mouse", some have both as "Mouse", and one or two even claim the latter means "Little Mouse". Could somebody give a definitive answer? Clarityfiend (talk) 08:27, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"egér" is the basic form and means "mouse". The suffix "-ke" (sometimes "-ka" is used, depending on the base word's vowel, see link) is a Hungarian diminutive, hence "egérke" is "little mouse" (or "tiny mouse"). ---Sluzzelin talk 10:52, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I suspected. Thanks. Clarityfiend (talk) 12:09, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese help: Names of organizations

I have added content to Japanese community of Mexico City so that Spanish speaking editors can translate it into Spanish. Since the Chizuko Watanabe thesis does not print the Japanese characters, I'm trying to figure out what they would be. I used the dictionary at http://jisho.org.

Kokusui Doshi-kai ("Ultra-Nationalist Comrades Association") = 国粋同士会 ? (NOTE: it was established by Japanese who celebrated a Japanese victory in World War II and did not accept Japan's loss in the war)
meishin-kai ("Year of the Monkey Club" - a reference to people born in 1908)
Bokuto Sogo Fujo-kai ("Association for Mutual Aid")

Thanks, WhisperToMe (talk) 17:32, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

May 26

fructus est fullonius

what is the meaning of "fructus est fullonius" (Plautus Pseudolus 781). thanks,--84.108.213.48 (talk) 15:24, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

According to google translate, it literally means "fruit of the washer". Does that make any sense in the context of that item of literature? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:46, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It was translated variously as "to receive a fustigation", as "to swallow ink", "to be stamped upon" or as "to be raped orally". --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 16:01, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fructus est is the third person active of the deponent fruor: "he has enjoyed". Google translate (which sounds odd to me) suggests "the fuller" which gives: "The fuller has enjoyed himself." μηδείς (talk) 16:17, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The whole line is "Cras mihi potandus fructus est fullonius". Fructus is a noun, with the verb being potandus est: "Tomorrow I'll have to drink fructus fullonius", with the "fuller's product" being of somewhat unclear denotation, as the varying translations cited by Pp.paul.4 above indicate. (Lewis & Short even suggest [s.v. fullonius] that fucus rather than fructus may be meant.) Deor (talk) 17:04, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't ancient fullers use urine as a whitening agent? To my eyes the whole phrase means something like "Tomorrow I've got third-hand piss to drink", while the fragment quoted by the OP doesn't mean anything at all. AlexTiefling (talk) 10:53, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The fragment quoted by the OP means "It is the fuller's fruit", the full sentence, however, is constructed in a different way and means "Tomorrow I'll have to drink the fuller's fruit". The meaning of this sentence has been obscured by time and by our incomplete knowledge of vulgar Latin idiomatic phrases. My guess is that prudish translators of the 19th century might have explained it to their school pupils as an euphemism for kicks and bruises, whereas it is presumably much more vulgar (you don't drink kicks), as the modern interpretation (linked above) might suggest. It would be interesting to know how the modern English translation of Plautus' Pseudolus by David Christenson (2008) (review) translates it. --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 22:22, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I answered this on the Humanities desk, where it was first posted before the OP was redirected here. To repeat, the Perseus site has a footnote explaining that "the fuller's fruit" is a euphemism for kicks and bruises, because fullers work by beating cloth. "Fruit" basically means "product" here. The full phrase is a slangy way of saying "I will have to take a beating". The entire sentence it comes from is basically saying, "If I can't make the payment I owe, I will have to take a beating". Looie496 (talk) 12:39, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

May 27

interpretation question

What is this video on youtube actually about? It is in a foreign language. Thank you. --Badder Ińsk (talk) 09:00, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's a mixture of English and Afrikaans. Gauteng is a province in South Africa, and 'Gautengeleng' seems to be a funny variation on that. The lyrics basically say that it's good to live in 'Gautengeleng' even though crime is rampant. Can't find the full lyrics, but this summarizes it: ""Gautengeleng Gautengeleng, I wanna stay in Gautengeleng, Die crime is streng (crime is severe), but what the heng (what the heck) dis lekker om te lewe hie' in Gautengeleng! (it's good to live here in Gautengeleng)" - Lindert (talk) 09:18, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Not like it wasn’t the first time."

So was it the first time or not? 98.27.255.223 (talk) 10:47, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Some context would help, but logically the phrase means "Like it was the first time" because the double negative cancels out. However, double negatives are so common among uneducated people, that the meaning often becomes ambiguous.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:59, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(e/c) I think someone's mixed up two expressions: (1) Not like it was the first time, and (2) It wasn't the first time. These both mean it wasn't the first time. But the one you gave us means it was the first time. I suspect it was meant to say the opposite of that, but without a context it's impossible to be sure. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 12:00, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No. When your kid is late for school every day for a month, the latest incident could be described as "Not like it wasn't the first time". The literal meaning is the opposite, but the extra negative ("wasn't") is either hyperbolic or simply due to carelessness. Matt Deres (talk) 19:47, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How can you possibly know that the intended meaning is opposite to the literal meaning? To me it's just a nonsensical sentence. HiLo48 (talk) 20:59, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See here and here and here and here for a discussion of some dialects of English where the negative construct is understood idiomatically to be positive, all the time, and without further explanation. It does happen in some dialects of English where the understood meaning is the exact opposite of the literal meaning. --Jayron32 01:41, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I admit that I find "not like it wasn't the first time" difficult to parse literally, even when imagining it within a fitting context. But what about "it's not like it wasn't obvious (yet he kept believing no one had noticed)", or "it's not like it wasn't allowed (but lighting a cigar in the doctor's waiting room still would have been frowned upon in the 1930s)"? Wouldn't these intuitively be understood literally? ---Sluzzelin talk 11:34, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Supposedly there is a phrase "wicked good". Is that similar? Bus stop (talk) 11:51, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not really. Same dialect, unrelated idiom. In New England English, "wicked" is an exact synonym of "very"; that is a general adverbial (never adjective) intensifier. Wicked good, wicked awesome, wicked huge, wicked long time, etc. etc. --Jayron32 22:43, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it is a feature of a New England dialect to contain jarring contradictions. Perhaps people speaking this dialect take a perverse pleasure in the shock value of certain uses of terms or ways of speaking. "Good" and "wicked" are almost opposites if one is not thinking of "good" meaning "very". Bus stop (talk) 11:00, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps, but "wicked" meaning "cool" or "very" isn't confined to just that area. Seems to me that it enjoyed wider popularity in the early 90s, maybe late 80s. "That band is wicked!" (i.e. "the band is very impressive", not "the band has sinned", though I suppose it would be easy enough for a good rock band to do both at once). I'm from SW Ontario and would understand "wicked good" the way intended. Matt Deres (talk) 11:26, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In these cases I think the intended meaning is always clear—even to one unfamiliar with the particular usage. Nevertheless there could be a lingering thought in a listener's mind as to the oddity of a particular sentence construction or word choice. Bus stop (talk) 11:58, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@HiLo - the very fact that's it's nonsensical read literally flags it so. Matt Deres (talk) 11:26, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese versions of English names

I've been looking and comparing English names and their Chinese pinyin transliterations.

Peter becomes Bǐ dé.
Paul becomes Bǎo luó or Bǎo ěr.
James becomes Zhān mǔ sī.
Maria becomes Mǎ lì yà.

Can anybody tell me why the P changes into a B or the T changes into a D, even though there is actually the B sound and T sound in Mandarin? Even in native English speakers, the T sound may be silent, so the name Peter sounds like Peler. The same P-to-B transformation applies to Paul. Personally, I think Pó would sound closer to the original English name. Why does the J turn into a Z in James? And why does the R sound in Maria turn into a L sound, even though there is actually a R phoneme in Mandarin? Can anybody tell me who made up these transliterations? Are there pinyin transliterations of other foreign names (Spanish, German, Russian, etc.)? 69.174.58.108 (talk) 17:08, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You should look at pinyin, especially pinyin#Rules given in terms of English pronunciation, b and d in pinyin are not the same as English: b is between English p and b, while d is between English t and d. Zh meanwhile is pretty good approximation for English j - the j in pinyin is quite different.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 17:35, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The sound spelled in pinyin as 'b' is actually an unaspirated /p/. English does not have that sound at the beginning of a syllable. Likewise, pinyin 'd' is an unaspirated /t/. The distinction between 'p', 't', and 'k' on the one hand and 'b', 'd', and 'g' on the other, is not between unvoiced and voiced stops as in English, but between aspirated and unaspirated (unvoiced) stops. Mandarin does not have voiced stops as phonemes (though they sometimes occur as allophones). Maria is not transliterated into Mandarin using a character with the pinyin spelling ri because that syllable has a very different vowel from the /i/ in Maria. In pinyin, 'r' represents a retroflex approximant that, to my knowledge doesn't occur in any European languages. So a character with an initial 'r' in pinyin would be be a good transliteration for a European syllable with an intial 'r'. In Mandarin phonotactics, the retroflex approximant cannot be followed by a front vowel such as /i/. Marco polo (talk) 17:49, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that Mandarin doesn't have voiced stops tells me non-native English speakers, whose native language is Chinese, have a tendency to pronounce English words in chunks. Instead of lettuce, they may lai bu shi. Instead of thank you, they may san ke you. Instead of thank you very much, they may say san ge gou wei ma chi, which may then sound hilarious in Chinese, because it'd sound like "three dogs are fed to a horse". 69.174.58.108 (talk) 18:13, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"English does not have that (b) sound at the beginning of a syllable" – Actually, for many English speakers, initial b, d, j, g are partially devoiced, so they are as (or maybe more) similar to Mandarin b, d, j, g than they are to Continental European b, d, j, g. — kwami (talk) 18:35, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

69.174.58.108 -- "Peter" may make more sense if you look at it in Wade-Giles (the most commonly used method of transcribing Chinese into English until at least the 1950s). Also, some of these equivalences of common Biblical names may have originally been established between Cantonese and Portuguese, or whatever (not between Mandarin and English)... AnonMoos (talk) 04:51, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

One reason I believe there is some fishy with Marco polo's analysis is that the pinyin transliteration Pūkè for Poker actually has a P sound. Also, the claim that the Zh will sound like a J seems to be how Americans would pronounce the Zh in names like "Zhang", even though native Mandarin Chinese speakers do pronounce the Z in Zhang like the Z in English. 69.174.58.108 (talk) 12:38, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Native Mandarin Chinese speakers do pronounce the Z in Zhang like the Z in English." – I don't think so. English z is usually [z]. As far as I know, Pinyin zh as pronounced in Modern Standard Mandarin is a retroflex affricate, and not (or only slightly?) aspirated. Examples: syllable 4 of 5, syllables 5 and 10 of 15. Pinyin zh is a digraph, so it doesn't make sense to say native speakers pronounce "the z in zh" some way; it's not z+h but zh. 82.83.68.77 (talk) 17:26, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I saw this question shortly after reading this post, which deals with an amusing result of the P/B confusion, on Language Log. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 13:03, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

May 28

The Dark Knight Rises

In the movie The Dark Knight Rises there are several lines in the prologue scene that don't seem to make much sense. I don't know if it is a language issue or just supposed to not make sense as an artistic statement. I am having trouble understanding these specific lines;

"Dr Pavel, I'm CIA"

It is a peculiar sentence. Is he saying he is the entirety of the Central Intelligence Agency? Does it even refer to the CIA at all, or is his name Seeyiah or something? If he works for the CIA shouldn't he say "Dr Pavel, I'm a CIA agent" or "Dr Pavel, I'm from the CIA"?

"He didn't fly so good!"

This is stated by CIA after interrogating a prisoner by holding his head out of an aircraft. But the prisoner is brought back into the aircraft and stowed at the back of the plane, so what exactly "didn't fly so good"? And why didn't CIA remove the bags before interrogating them? If the bags were never removed to check whats under them and CIA never heard them speak until Bane started talking to him, how did CIA know they weren't all gagged?

CIA: If I pull that off, will you die?
BANE: It would be extremely painful.

CIA: You're a big guy.
BANE: For you.

This is even more confusing. Initially I thought it was to get across to the audience that Bane is supposed to be a huge guy. Instead of trying to show it, it was probably easier just to directly tell the audience that this person is supposed to be a "big guy", as the actor who played Bane was only 5'9. But even a really muscular person at that height wouldn't be described as a big guy. So was he saying he is a big guy in comparison to CIA? Is he talking about his stature in the criminal world? When bane responds "for you" is he saying that his size (either figuratively or literally) doesn't mean much to the average person, but to CIA it means everything? Because the wording it makes it seem like Bane is just saying that he is a big guy for CIA, implying the agent is tiny and that Bane isn't really that much of a big guy to a normal sized person. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Themosquitoman (talk • contribs) 14:52, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"I'm CIA" is a way of saying "I work for the CIA." As for "he didn't fly so good," I haven't seen the movie but it sounds like he was trying to trick the hooded prisoners into thinking the guy was pushed out of the plane and "didn't fly so good."--Cam (talk) 18:40, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have three questions here. Here are some possible answers:

1: When someone is a member of an organization whose name may be an acronym, many times he or she will refer to the organization anarthrically, that is without an article. Cam is correct in the CIA agent's meaning.
2: I agree with Cam again. It is a type of irony.
3: This is a form of ellipsis. It is as if the CIA agent interrupted Bane's line. Bane is saying "it would be extremely painful for you if you pull off my mask." It is also a form of irony.

Hope this helps and lead to some good reading! Schyler (exquirere bonum ipsum) 20:03, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't seen the movie, but from the context I think "you're a big guy" means "you're a grown man [who shouldn't be afraid of some pain]". See wikt:big boy (sense 3). "For you" is Bane clarifying his previous line, as Schyler said. -- BenRG (talk) 07:18, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Politically correct term for Indian/Pakistani people?

I live in the US and work with a lot of Indian/Pakistani people. Is it considered offensive if I call someone "Indian" if they're really Pakistani (or vise versa)? IOW, is there a safe umbrella term for Indian/Pakistani people? A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 15:18, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It may be considered offensive, although I obviously can't speak for any actual Pakistani people. Here in the UK, the term 'Asian' is often used without qualification to mean people from the subcontinent; I'm aware that in the US the same term is usually interpreted to mean 'Chinese/Japanese/Korean'. My answer is therefore to say 'South Asian' for the former group and 'East Asian' for the latter. Others - including those who are actually from these groups - may have more or different opinions.

And don't feel you have to couch a request for this sort of advice in the language of 'political correctness'; you're only doing a sensible and humane thing, which oughtn't to be seen as political or adhering to an externally imposed idea of 'correctness' at all. AlexTiefling (talk) 15:23, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ask them what they would like to be called. As regards getting the country wrong because they sound and look the same, ask a Canadian. - X201 (talk) 15:33, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to "South Asian" there is "desi", but I don't know how appropriate it is. 82.83.68.77 (talk) 16:52, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

However (in)appropriate "desi" is, it has little currency outside the continent. I'd use "Asian" in BE, "South Asian" in global context. There is a similar dichotomy between the BE/AE uses of "oriental". I've even been criticised by an American for using the term in a geographical sense. And, of course, "England" is synonymous with the UK... Jimfbleak - talk to me? 17:16, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Desi" is very current among the young Asians in the UK, as a word to refer to themselves. The BBC has even had programmes with Desi in the title, so that shows you how current it is! --TammyMoet (talk) 20:29, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your best bet is to ask them (and write it down so you don't forget). They will likely be pleased that you asked, and may be able to give you some insights as to how to recognize Indian vs. Pakistani surnames, for example. I've worked with many Indians and some Pakistanis, and they are nearly always willing and interested to talk about their homeland. And it makes for good team-building too. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:01, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"The sub-continent" is a term still used in cricket commentary to describe the area. I wonder if a non-offensive term can be derived from that? HiLo48 (talk) 22:00, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think referring to my co-worker Ankit as a "sub-continental American" would seem a bit off. At the very least, there's the embedded linguistic notion that "sub" equates to inferior, e.g. subprime, sub-par, etc. I've heard educated and tactful people of subcontinental ancestry, Mexican ancestry, and Arabic ancestry (all in the USA) refer to themselves and others as simply brown people, meaning essentially "not white, but explaining or assuming specific ethnicity is not useful in this context" - but our article doesn't have any mention of this more modern, neutral sense of the phrase. SemanticMantis (talk) 16:47, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How common is the "in the year of our Lord" phrase in present American use?

Do people use this phrase when marking dates typically in courtroom settings? Where else do people stamp dates with this type of fancy phrase? 69.174.58.108 (talk) 17:11, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Seems rather archaic, and any government usage of that term might run afoul of the "separation of church and state" doctrine. StuRat (talk) 18:39, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The common use is the abbreviation for that phrase in Latin, AD: Anno (year-in) Domini (lord-of). It's by far the most common formulation. The closests alternative is C.E. (Common Era) which speaks of nothing common to the ancients, Jews, Muslims, Hindus or Chinese. μηδείς (talk) 05:13, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, CE originally stood for "Christian Era", which has fewer theological presuppositions embedded in it than Anno Domini, but still calls out Christianity by name. The "Common" bit seems to have been a rather strained attempt to keep the same initialism, sort of like when Claremont Men's College decided to start admitting women, and had to find someone with the initial M that they could put into the name. --Trovatore (talk) 05:24, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Strained, perhaps, but it's been in common academic use for more than 40 years: I first encountered it in the History textbooks I was issued with at school (in the UK) around 1970. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 212.95.237.92 (talk) 12:57, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Trovatore, do you have a source for the statement that CE "originally stood for" Christian Era? It doesn't seem to be supported by our article Common Era. Deor (talk) 13:13, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Possible entomology connection for the word fuck

In the article for the word fuck it said some possible entomology for the word fuck was Indo-European in origin meaning to strike. In the Laotian language of which I am a fluent speaker, fuck means to chop something by striking it with a knife. \uc0\u3743 \u3761 \u3713 people use that word when they need to chop Mangos or papaya. It's a different word then chopping onions onion or carrots. It's a special way to chop something especially for making papaya salad. I never took a class on the Laotian language but the older people have told me that a lot of the Laotian words borrowed from Sanskrit and Pali due to the influence of Buddhism. So when I read that the word had an Indo-European entomology I made the connection}

I believe you mean etymology, not entomology. StuRat (talk) 18:36, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I like to think of "etymology" as looking for bugs in the language. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:59, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And I believe you mean "than" at It's a different word then chopping onions. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:55, 28 May 2014 (UTC) [reply]

The Lao word ຟັກ (IPA: [fak]), meaning 1) v. "to chop", "to mince" 2) v. "to hatch an egg" (trns) is a native Tai (or at least Southwestern Tai) word. In Thai, it is ฟัก (IPA: [fák]), but only has the meaning "to hatch an egg". The meaning "to chop" probably derives from the act of "hatching" (breaking, cracking, etc.) the eggshell (or vice-versa). It is not derived from Sanskrit or Pali. On a side note, most Sanskrit/Pali-derived terms in Lao are multisyllabic and are related to religion, government, royalty or poetic use (ex. ວາດສະໜາ [wâːt sánǎː] "fate", ປະທົມ [pá tʰóm] "sleep" (royal), etc.) while native Lao words are usually single syllables and used for things related to everyday life. Not a hard and fast rule, there are many exceptions, but in general still very helpful to know.--William Thweatt ^Talk^Contribs 20:56, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here's EO's lengthy take on it:[2] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:59, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

68.9.127.42 -- Due to thousands of years of accumulated sound changes etc., it's quite unlikely that the Laotian pronunciation of a Sanskrit or Pali word would be recognizably similar to the English pronunciation of an etymologically cognate word... AnonMoos (talk) 21:05, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In particular, because of Grimm's Law the Sanskrit cognate of fuck would most likely be something like pug. —Tamfang (talk) 07:19, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, a naive method in etymology is to compare words in different languages and identify similarities; an advanced method is to look at the history of the words in different languages and identify cognates. Within the West Germanic languages, the English verb fuck, the New-Dutch verb fokken and the German verb ficken are similar in appearance and meaning, but we do not really know if they are cognates for they are not well attested in medieval literature. The German word de:ficken has a broad spectrum of meanings and in its non-taboo meanings like to move to and from it is attested earlier than the taboo word. If the words are cognates, the vocalism of the root is presumably an u and would lead to Germanic *fug- and IE *peuk-/peug-. --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 12:28, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Expatriate, migrant, or immigrant?

What are the differences among "Expatriate", "migrant" and "immigrant"? In what cases can each word be used? 140.254.226.181 (talk) 20:59, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's all about what relation you bear to the person migrating and the countries he or she is migrating to and/or from. "Migrant" is most neutral. You'd most likely use that about someone moving from one country you don't live in to another country you don't live in. "Immigrant", basically "in-migrant", is used about someone moving into your country from another country. "Expatriate" is used about someone who left your country and moved to another country, a compatriot who went away. --Nicknack009 (talk) 21:05, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

IMO "migrant" is the least neutral. It conjures up an image of someone one step up from a vagrant, as in "migrant worker", and is the least used of the three to describe a person moving from one country to another, versus from one region within a country to another. Another difference is that "immigrant" (and "emigrant") has the connotation of permanency, an "expatriate" may move back, and a "migrant" is generally moving around constantly. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:37, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for not spelling "expatriate" as ex-patriot, a very common error. The two words have very different, and sometimes opposite, meanings. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:52, 28 May 2014 (UTC) [reply]

I've sometimes stuck with this problem. If we have the originating country A and the destination country B, should we call these from-A-to-B people A-ish emigrants or A-ish immigrants?--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 04:38, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

They're A-ish emigrants to B, if speaking from an A-ish or whole-world perspective. But if speaking from a B-ish perspective, it's just A-ish immigrants. Or immigrants from A. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 05:09, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I hear expatriate and immigrant used, but I've only ever encountered "migrant" to refer to migrant workers -- workers who travel around to do seasonal work, typically being either legal or illegal immigrants. I suspect a definition outside of this is on the way to being obsolete. Bali88 (talk) 13:07, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

May 29

The city is a container that holds a stage for challenges and embraces in daily life.

Can "container" be used metaphorically to refer to a city, as in "The city is a container that holds a stage for challenges and embraces in daily life"? Thank you. -- 00:53, 29 May 2014 114.249.208.208

Almost anything can be used as a metaphor for almost anything else. Not sure what else to tell you. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 01:05, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It might be better to just say "The city is a stage ..." Also, "embraces" is a bit of an odd word choice. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:07, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is a bit of a mixed metaphor. That is to say, you are using to different, unrelated things to make your metaphore. In this case, you've said that the city is a "container" that holds a "stage". There are no containers in real life that holds stages, so it's a strange-sounding combination. As Clarityfiend points out, "stage" is good enough. Mingmingla (talk) 02:54, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. Condensing the ideas slightly, why not just "The city is a stage for challenges and embraces in daily life"? However, in either version "embraces" seems inappropriate — "for embracing the challenges of . . ." is a more common construction. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 212.95.237.92 (talk) 13:04, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Container" can be used metaphorically. But I am not sure the solitary sentence provided above is supplying us with reason for thinking of a city as a container. Are "challenges" and "embraces" associated with "containers"? It could be that surrounding sentences shed light on the notion of a city as a "container". This might lend validation to the metaphor of city as container. One can certainly think of a city as a container. But I think the question concerns whether or not thinking of the city as a container contributes in some way to the verbal communication one is endeavoring to accomplish. Bus stop (talk) 13:29, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

translating wikipedia page

i have found a wikipedia article on a german author i am interested in. unfotunately the article is in german. can you tell me if there is an easy way to translate it into english? regards kim halik -- 10:16, 29 May 2014 User:Kimhalik

Which author? Presumably you are looking at the German Wikipedia. If you look on the left hand side of the page there is a section where it says "In anderen Sprachen". If English is listed there you can just click the link for the English Wikipedia article on the author. Or else you can just look him/her up on the English Wikipedia, but maybe you've already done that. For easy translation you can put the article into Google Translate, this will give a pretty approximate translation with lots of mistakes but will give you the general gist of the article. --Viennese Waltz 10:38, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And if there is no article in the English Wikipedia, please let us know. Either you can create it, or one of us can. 86.146.28.105 (talk) 18:15, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]