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.

June 22

Adjective "organ"

Is there an adjective "organ" that is related to the verb "organize" and the noun "organization" like other "-ize"/"-ization" words? GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 05:09, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not according to Merriam-Webster, one of the more comprehensive and well regarded dictionaries of American English (somewhat analogous to the OED for British English). Under Merriam-Webster, only three noun definitions are commonly recognized. Since the full online OED requires paid membership, I'll let someone who has one look it up there. --Jayron 32 05:16, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No adjective "organ" in the OED Online either.

The usual adjective corresponding to "organization" would be "organizational", although "organic" has some limited uses also, such as in the phrase organic law. --69.159.9.187 (talk) 07:18, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What part of speech is 'organ' in contexts like Organ concerto and Organ Symphony? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 12:57, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Our article is at Noun adjunct, Jack, though terminology like "attributive noun" is also used. Deor (talk) 14:10, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes. Thanks, Deor. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:58, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What of Organ Morgan, of Under Milk Wood fame. Noun phrase or adjectival use of organ? --Tagishsimon (talk) 11:20, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Computer Language Dictionary & Thesaurus sought

Something that provides alternative words of whatever I insert in the software/app. -- Apostle (talk) 11:19, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You're going to need to supply more details than this. What software? What app? What is your program written in? How detailed do the definitions need to be? Is there a reason why you can't Google it yourself? And so on. Matt Deres (talk) 16:10, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Russell.mo, is accessing google illegal where you live? μηδείς (talk) 01:16, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes Medis, you won't understand. I'll still tell you: It takes a lot of kbs if I go through all the links. - I'm on pay bite as you go. -- Apostle (talk) 10:49, 23 June 2016 (UTC) [reply]

And yet you can load and reload the RefDesk to ask dozens of questions without using up those bytes? A curious system. As an aside, I'd suggest an ad-blocker such as NoScript to reduce the size of loaded pages by halting the loading of animated advertisements and so on. Matt Deres (talk) 13:48, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Medeis, is it acceptable to be rude and churlish for no reason where you live? You are free to ignore these questions if you don't like them. You're not helping, you're just getting in our way. The funny thing is you could be helpful if you wanted to, I know you could. SemanticMantis (talk) 18:29, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My internet is for study purposes only, and this is the only place I learn via communication, that's why I use my bytes here first, and I got use to it... I get 1GB pay bite as you go every month, therefore "WP" and "Adult Videos" are the only two things I could possibly use my internet for...still I do some rubbish to have fun, sometimes with you guys... I'm guessing you won't understand until I lie my way out here, or create more than a dozen account in order to camouflage myself. Beside, you are more than welcome to give others an opportunity to assist me (who like doing the internet searches) rather than creating an issue about it in order to make me look bad with your comments...

Anyway, I'll add you with Medis.

-- Apostle (talk) 03:56, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I never studied Greek, but I know enough to know that the user's name is User:Medeis and not as written above. 80.44.160.251 (talk) 10:36, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

-- Apostle (talk) 19:19, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I know a bit of Greek, but I also don't bother spelling user names correctly when said user has been rude and unhelpful to me. SemanticMantis (talk) 18:29, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Are you just looking for any thesaurus application? Our article lists a few free/open ones. Wiktionary works as a thesaurus, and there are many freely available apps for smartphones too [1]. SemanticMantis (talk) 18:29, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Dictionary" and a "Thesaurus" (separate and or included). I want talk like a Computer...

-- Apostle (talk) 19:17, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So you don't want a general thesaurus (a think that tells you that "creek" is another word you can use instead of "stream")? You want way to take normal language and make it sound like a computer program? I am a little confused too. I don't know of anything like that, but you may enjoy a vocoder, that will make your voice sound like a computer. If you can make an example of input and output, I might be able to help further. Feel free to ping me though because I won't keep checking back on this. SemanticMantis (talk) 22:27, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

SemanticMantis: E.g.: When I type "Yes" in the app, I want it to display "Affirmative" (and other possible computer language used in Robots) with its meaning, and if possible a "thesaurus" too. I want to pretend I'm a "Robot".

-- Apostle (talk) 04:45, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Russell.mo Oh, ok, I get it now. For the record, this response here I think would have been a good way to start. I don't know of any apps like that but you might like to read up a bit on "robo speak" [2] [3]. SemanticMantis (talk) 18:06, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Software sought. -- Apostle (talk) 18:23, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

fabric

I am not so sure about the meaning of "fabric" in the following context: "More often we see only the interweaving darkened lines that lazy hoofs have traced on the silken fabric of the dew." Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.249.215.130 (talk) 13:53, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is a metaphor; the author is comparing bedewed ground/meadow/pathway to a "silken fabric". --LarryMac | Talk 14:06, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

He could be thinking of the way dew clings to spiders' webs in the grass. Wymspen (talk) 15:31, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bear of little brain

ESL Question: In the article on the Kim dynasty it is stated on Kim Jong-Un that he “… reportedly bore a daughter, Kim Ju-ae, in 2012”. The Wiktionary article gives the definition of the verb bear at 7 as “(transitive) To give birth to someone or something (may take the father of the direct object as an indirect object)”. Is it acceptable in (US or UK) English to use this construct, i.e. “X (the father) bore a daughter / son” ? Of course, Kim Jong-Un may have many superhuman characteristics which invalidate general linguistic usage and semantics. Thank you. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 18:43, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is not correct in normal usage. You could say he "fathered" a daughter, or more poetically - which might be relevant for myth-making dynasties - he "sired" her. Carbon Caryatid (talk) 18:55, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe something got lost in translation. You could say that Kim begat a child. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:16, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... "begat" is a rather archaic in my opinion, rather King James Bible. I'd go with "fathered". Alansplodge (talk) 22:18, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've never seen bear/bore used in connection directly with the father. It always refers to the mother, who 'carries' the baby with the result that she gives birth to it. The Wiktionary article (sense 7) says, "(may take the father of the direct object as an indirect object)", which is somewhat misleading but is illustrated in the example quoted: "In Troy she becomes Paris’ wife, bearing him several children ..." Akld guy (talk) 22:48, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Was delivered of a son/daughter" is the only proper corresponding term. To sire or father refers to the conception, or to the act in the very abstract, not to when the mother delivers. μηδείς (talk) 01:13, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe he bored a daughter. On the other hand, if his father could shoot 34 (in golf, not with a firearm), anything is possible. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:15, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Provided you make it clear that it is the mother who was delivered (hence "delivery room"). The medical term is "parturition". 80.44.160.251 (talk) 13:33, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That is inherently clear, I believe, given the well-documented significant differences between women and men. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:22, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

June 23

the meaning of 'Joint Head of School'

Would you please tell me the meaning of 'Joint Head of School'in the next sentence?

  But there was nothing I could do about it, and so at the end of August 1943
  I entered the third-year sixth and became Joint Head of School.--
  Margaret Thstcher, The Path to Power, p.34123.221.73.147 (talk) 02:58, 23 June 2016 (UTC)dengen[reply]

She was one of two or more head girls. Rojomoke (talk) 03:04, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure it's not usual to have two Head Girls. Far more likely that there was a Head Boy and a Head Girl, but which one Thatcher was, I don't know. Akld guy (talk) 06:14, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Akld guy, she was at Kesteven and Grantham Girls' School. There were no boys. Rojomoke (talk) 06:41, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. The article Margaret Thatcher says she became 'head girl', which makes her 'Joint Head' statement in the book a puzzle. Kesteven and Grantham Girls' School is located very close to the boys' school, King's School, Grantham, and today they have shared classes. Is it possible that the two schools had a close relationship even back in 1943, and this is what Thatcher meant when she said she was Joint Head (with the Head Boy from King's)? Akld guy (talk) 07:03, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely, IMHO. The tendency in those days would have been to keep the two bodies of pupils apart as much as possible (so as to keep... bodies apart as much as possible). More likely that the headmistress appointed two girls to share responsibility, for some reason. Rojomoke (talk) 07:53, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What's a "third-year sixth"? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 08:29, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

An extra year of sixth form, for candidates taking Oxford or Cambridge entrance exams (see the linked article). In short, the final year before university, specifically to prepare for the entrance examinations of the top-tier universities MChesterMC (talk) 08:34, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also used to accommodate students who were unable to complete (for various reasons) their required studies during the usual two years of sixth form, not necessarily for the sole reason of gaining entrance to those universities. Bazza (talk) 10:24, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On User:Akld guy's point ("it's not usual to have two Head Girls"), St Paul's School, London has "two Head Boys and two Head Girls". Alansplodge (talk) 12:21, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

More to the point is whether it was usual to have two in earlier decades and specifically in 1943. And I don't think it was, at least in New Zealand, which had very much the same public school system as in Britain. Akld guy (talk) 13:33, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Be aware that public school may not mean the same to everyone. The school referred to in the original question was a state school. Bazza (talk) 15:32, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@ MChesterMC: Thanks. I had heard of the Upper and Lower Sixth, but always assumed that meant the class was split into two because of numbers or some such reason. I didn't appreciate that a single form could take 2 years to complete (since none of the earlier forms did). Strange, different, unusual. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:17, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Even weirder, many schools still have a sixth form, even tough they no longer have a first to fifth forms (we now use "Year 7" instead of first form). Nobody has ever accused us of being logical. Alansplodge (talk) 21:04, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

When the grammar schools were largely abolished and comprehensive education came in, the "sixth form" of the grammar school system disappeared. To cater for the able children now taught in comprehensive schools "Sixth Form Colleges" were established, separate from the normal stream. 86.177.172.210 (talk) 00:36, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That may have happened in some cases, but is not generally true. My grammar school became a comprehensive while I was there, but the sixth form remained and I was in the sixth form of that comprehensive school.--Phil Holmes (talk) 07:41, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[Banned user's contribution deleted] Tevildo (talk) 19:53, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"next in earlier preference"- what does that mean?

the names of two or more candidates whether continuing or not are marked with the same figure and are next in earlier preference; Seen here What has earlier got to do with this? --14.139.185.2 (talk) 11:06, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What difference does it make, if you say "next in earlier preference" instead of "next in order of preference"? Does "next in earlier preference" make any sense at all? --14.139.185.2 (talk) 06:36, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

stake one's reputation on a particular cause

There's an idiom that I'm searching for. Google [and/or my brain] is failing me. The meaning is, roughly, to make a stand about a particular issue and/or stake one's reputation on a particular thing.

The context goes like this:

Person A - "Person X is making bogus claims about such and such. I've seen it happen long enough and I'm taking a stand!"

Person B - "I don't think [______]. Person X may have made some bogus claims in the past, but it looks like they have a bit of a point here, so by making a stand this time you're not being effective and you might even be the one to look bad."

Something like "[verb] your [noun] to/on that [noun]".

E.g. "hitch your wagon to that train", but not that. It is metaphorical, though, so also not the straightforward "stake your reputation on that claim".

Does that even make sense? :) — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 20:25, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hitch your horse to that wagon? Loraof (talk) 22:50, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The google search box returns "don't hitch your wagon to a [falling] star". Loraof (talk) 22:53, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/stake+reputation+on.

—Wavelength (talk) 22:59, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Don't hang your hat [on]? Akld guy (talk) 23:22, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I did try Google and went through various keywords on that idioms site with no luck. "Hitch your wagon to a star" (falling or otherwise) seems more along the lines of "riding coattails" or "following someone off a cliff" or somesuch, which isn't really what I'm going for. "Hang your hat on" seems like it might be a version of what I'm thinking of, but I could've sworn there was something more involved, like if there were a particular noun which followed "hang your hat on [other/continued metaphor]"... this is killing me :) — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 00:32, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Nail your colours to the mast" is the traditional British expression, but I don't know if it's common in the States. In your sentence, it would be "I don't think you should nail your colours to that [particular] mast", which is not the sort of expression that most style guides encourage. Tevildo (talk) 07:51, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jump on the bandwagon? --TammyMoet (talk) 11:07, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bet the farm on? 195.89.37.174 (talk) 11:51, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Is that a hill you want to die on?"/ "that's not a hill you want to die on"? [4] SemanticMantis (talk) 18:18, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Do people routinely die on hills, or are you confusing it with mountains? KägeTorä - (^影_虎) (もしもし！) 20:10, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The metaphor is military - see, for example, Hamburger Hill and The Hill. Tevildo (talk) 21:40, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Being picky, but the second film is not a good example as it refers to a sand heap in a military prison which the inmates were required to run up and down, rather than a place to make a last stand. Battle of Bunker Hill or Battle of Malvern Hill might have been better. Alansplodge (talk) 01:10, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's indeed a common pattern; in our country, we had the renowned Battle of Ammunition Hill --80.4.147.222 (talk) 10:21, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. I still might argue that the title of the Sean Connery film employs the concept - hills have never been congenial places for soldiers, whether or not the enemy is actively involved. Shall we compromise on "not as good an example? Tevildo (talk) 01:33, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We shall. Alansplodge (talk) 15:46, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, thanks, and it also has the feel of tying oneself closely to another thing, which is I think what OP was going for. Also sort of related in terms of military metaphor to "choose your battles wisely" and variants. SemanticMantis (talk) 22:39, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Die in a ditch": That's not the sort of thing you want to die in a ditch about. Perhaps? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 09:40, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There are lots of variations that could be used there. "You don't want to... put all your chips on that, pin all your hopes on that, bet your bottom dollar on that, take a stand on that, etc." Not something you'd want to hang your hat on. Matt Deres (talk) 16:24, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

June 24

Beyond the pale

What is the name for the container typically used in UK for a Chinese or Indian take-away meal? It is made of aluminium foil with a thin cardboard lid. The edges and corners of the foil wrap around over the lid. It can go in the oven for a re-heat (well, once anyway). It's not "oyster pail", which seems to be the name of the US version, but which is subtly different. (It's being rapidly replaced, in many take-aways, by the transparent all-plastic, lidded container, whatever the name for that is.) 217.38.85.75 (talk) 22:15, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, this is not the answer you want, but I think they are sold as "TakeOut To-Go Round Restaurant Disposable Aluminum Foil Pan sets with Flat Board Lids". Or maybe that's not what you're describing? I do get those sometimes for Indian or Chinese takeaway in the states, so I assumed that's what you meant. There are also rectangular versions that are not round. Also interesting to hear you don't have the oyster pails in UK - they are wonderfully handy, work far better in a bag or bike IMO :D SemanticMantis (talk) 22:34, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would call it a "carton", and this SDMB thread confirms the usage, but "container" or "box" both sound equally reasonable. I've not heard the plastic ones called anything other than "Tupperware", despite the disapproval of Tupperware Brand's lawyers. Tevildo (talk) 23:08, 24 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In UK they are ubiquitously rectangular. ~~But now that Boris and Nigel have dragged us out of Europe, they're probably no-longer called 94/62/EC 42-9. sub para 4.2.~~ Martinevans123 (talk) 23:17, 24 June 2016 (UTC) it's this[reply]

Would you kindly not waste our time by providing irrelevant links in an attempt to be funny. It's irritating and this is not the first time you've done it. Akld guy (talk) 02:57, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry you had to waste all that time reading them, Akld guy. You do sound quite irritated. I thought the last one was relevant. I didn't realise foil takeaway containers were such a serious subject. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:40, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Foil takeaway containers" gets a lot of Google results. Rather prosaic, but the phrase occurs in several recent novels including Death's Doorway by Crin Claxton (2015), Running on the Cracks by Julia Donaldson (2010) and Snapshot: Inspector Longman's First Case by Barry Scott Pullen (2013). Alansplodge (talk) 00:42, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is standard food packaging. A well - known supermarket supplier packages this way. 80.44.162.99 (talk) 13:23, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dare you tell us which one? Martinevans123 (talk) 15:39, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

June 25

Medical question to be diagnosed

The webpage of the Huffington Post reports that a commentator (his name is vaguely familiar to me) has described one of the US presidential contenders as “America´s inner arsehole”. I have never heard / read this term, Googling seems to reference solely this specific TV-quotation and I can think of no intuitive guesstimate to interpret this phrase.
Question (ESL): What does it mean? --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 14:07, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's presumably a play on the concept of inner child. Just as everyone supposedly has a childlike aspect, often buried deep within, the candidate exemplifies the assholish aspect of the U.S. "personality". Deor (talk) 14:25, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll ratify Deor, and add that parodies of "inner child" are innumerable; e.g., "unleash your inner Gene Kelly" could be a jocular way to say "dance". —Tamfang (talk) 09:52, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

in their order and time of first song

"Next the wren explodes into song. Half a dozen other wrens give voice, and now all is bedlam. Grosbeaks, thrashers, yellow warblers, bluebirds, vireos, towhees, cardinals---all are at it. My solemn list of performers, in their order and time of first song, hesitates, wavers, ceases, for my ear can no longer filter out priorities." Does the phrase "in their order and time of first song" simply mean in the order of their first song? What does "time" mean here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.128.175.160 (talk) 14:54, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There are a number of possibilities, but if we had more context we could pin it down. Was the author trying to make a list of the birds entering the dawn chorus, in order of appearance? We could tell that if you could give us the source of the quotation. --TammyMoet (talk) 22:57, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A Sand County Almanac by Aldo Leopold, apparently, but this is based on an answer the OP obtained to the same question on another forum. Google doesn't give any other hits for the verbatim text of the quotation. Tevildo (talk) 23:41, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I only found it using portions of the OP's quote. The complete paragraph, without omissions, goes "Next the wren—the one who discovered the knothole in the eave of the cabin—explodes into song. Half a dozen other wrens give voice, and now all is bedlam. Grosbeaks, thrashers, yellow warblers, bluebirds, vireos, towhees, cardinals—all are at it. My solemn list of performers, in their order and time of first song, hesitates, wavers, ceases, for my ear can no longer filter out priorities. Besides the pot is empty and the sun is about to rise. I must inspect my domain before my title runs out." ---Sluzzelin talk 02:38, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and for context, preceding paragraphs indicate that Leopold stepped from his cabin door at 3.30 a.m., armed with a coffee pot and a notebook, and started protocoling what he heard at which minute, e.g.: "At 3:35 the nearest field sparrow avows, in a clear tenor chant, that he holds the jackpine copse north to the riverbank". I'm guessing the "solemn list" not only includes the order of appearance of first songs by species, but also time of first appearance as recorded by the author (e.g. 3.35 a.m. ) (even if he didn't delight us with this exciting data in his Almanac :-) ---Sluzzelin talk 03:35, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And based on that, "time" apparently means the time that each species starts to sing. Our dawn chorus (birds) article has a list (unreferenced) of birds in the UK in the order in which they start to sing. Aldo Leopold was writing about Sauk County, Wisconsin. Alansplodge (talk) 16:33, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The two things - order and time - are really the same - it is just a literary style which says the same thing trwice in order to make the writing sound better. This is not quite poetry - but the language used is at time quite poetic, and is used for effect rather than for a specific meaning. Wymspen (talk) 17:30, 26 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

June 27

Expressions that don't mean what they say

Is there a formal term for expressions that don't correspond to the literal meaning of what they say, or even mean the opposite of what they say, but have come into common usage? I'm thinking of things like "I could care less" when someone means they couldn't care less, or "two-party check" for "third-party check." These are expressions that are formally wrong, but have become so common that objections are derided as pedantry. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 01:58, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Idiom--Jayron 32 02:48, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Idiom is correct, but I'm thinking mostly of expressions used in the opposite sense of their literal meaning. This would include the "couldn't care less" example, or someone "doing an complete 360" when they have reversed their opinion (literally, this would mean they had returned to their previously-held opinion). Sort of a sub-class of idiom. Maybe I need to make up a new term! Unfortunately "idiotism" is already taken. Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 03:10, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I can't help with the question, but I'd like to provide a better example (because it's a widely known idiom whose usage isn't disputed): "head over heels". --69.159.9.187 (talk) 05:00, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sarcasm and irony apply to subsets of such expressions. But others are not either of those. "I could care less" is just dumb; no redeeming qualities whatsoever. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 06:07, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Similar to mondegreens or eggcorns, but not quite. A person who says "I could care less" could be committing a mumpsimus. --2606:A000:4C0C:E200:C915:F679:15DB:E494 (talk) 07:26, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Americanism Iapetus (talk) 09:00, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fowler uses the term "sturdy indefensible" for an expression that is in general use despite being technically "incorrect" (by some criterion). AndrewWTaylor (talk) 11:53, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The word for the seller and the store

Someone who sells pet animals, birds and aquarium must have a name for his profession. And there must be a name for his large shop. --Rainbow Archer (talk) 08:18, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

~~I don't think there's a fancy word for "pet seller", or for "pet store/shop". Time to coin a new word? Petmonger.~~ Clarityfiend (talk) 08:41, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rats. Petmonger has already been published.[5] Clarityfiend (talk) 08:48, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rainbow Archer didn't specify what language he/she is interested in, so I'll just add that the Polish term is sklep zoologiczny (literally, "zoological shop"). — Kpalion^(talk) 12:16, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In French the store is called an "animalerie" (I remember seeing one that was selling chipmunks, labelled as "Korean squirrels"), but there does not seem to be a one-word term for the person who runs it. Adam Bishop (talk) 00:04, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Having worked with people in this field, I'd say the common American English terms are pet store owner or pet store employee. They are said to be in the pet business (or sometimes pet retail), though those terms all apply as well to those who sell only products for pets, not live animals. For aquarium specialists, the word pet can be replaced by aquarium, fish, or (for even more specialized businesses) reef. Similarly, pet can be replaced by bird or pet bird for aviculturists. If they sell animals they have raised themselves, they are a breeder (here to breed implies also selling the animals that are bred). But for all its huge vocabulary, English doesn't seem to have a commonly used (at least in American English), simple word for this profession. --Ginkgo100^talk 22:07, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pish tosh. Some guys who worked in a pet shop even created a band named after their noble profession - Pet Shop Boys. (You can safely ignore the obviously false made-up backstory given credence by the shamefully mendacious Wikipedia article.) -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:12, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

string

There is another word that is puzzling me in Aldo Leopold's "A Sand County Almanac". Does here "strings" more probably mean "threads" or "plant fibers"? The context is as follows. "The robin's insistent caroling awakens the oriole, who now tells the world of orioles that the pendant branch of the elm belongs to him, together with all fiber-bearing milkweed stalks near by, all loose strings in the garden, and all the exclusive right to flash like a burst of fire from one of these to another." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.249.211.254 (talk) 14:07, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nest indicates string can be one ingredient. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:16, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Plenty of perfectly ordinary string in a garden - used to tie up plants, etc (though less so today as we tend to use more plastic ties). Plenty of birds will happily use it as nesting material - because as far as they are concerned it is just another bit of fibre. Wymspen (talk) 18:14, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In England, we call it garden twine. Alansplodge (talk) 20:16, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

... but it's double the price when bought by that name, so some of us just use string instead. Dbfirs 11:52, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Difference between g and voiced k

The article voiceless velar stop mentions several variations on [k], one of which is the "voiced" version [k̬]. What is the difference between this and the "regular" voiced velar stop [g]? --Ginkgo100^talk 21:55, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'd add a clarification tag, it seems like whoever set up the chart just used every combinations of bases and diacritics available. IsiZulu has an implosive k phone which, intervocalically, sounds quite like a g to an English speaker, so that the infinitive prefix written uku- is pronounced [uɠu]-, and to me very much like an intervocalic g /ɣ/ agua in Spanish. To make the "normal" aspirated /k/ of English, "kh" is written, so, "to speak", ukukhuluma sounds almost exactly like "ugukuluma" to an English speaker. μηδείς (talk) 04:35, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

June 28

Job (biblical figure)

Would I be right in claiming that Job (biblical figure) is the only English word (singular if a noun) whose spelling ends with an o followed by a consonant and the o is pronounced long?

For the purposes of this question, the w in -ow- or -ew- (low, mow, sew, sow ...) is considered a vowel.

All other words that end in a long o sound plus a consonant sound seem to fall into the following classes in relation to their spelling:

final e: bode, bone, brose, choke, chose, chrome, clone, close (adj.), clove, code, coke, cole, cone, cope, cove, crone, dole, dome, dope, dose, dote, dove (v.), doze, drome, drone, drove, froze, globe, grope, grove, hole, home, hone, hope, hose, hove, joke, Jove, lobe, lone, lope, mauve, mole, mope, Nome, none (sing. of nones), nope, nose, note, ode, ope, phone, poke, pole, pone (?), pose, prone, quote, robe, rope, rose, rote, rove, slope, smoke, smote, snope, sole, spoke, stoke, stole, stone, stove, strode, stroke, strove, toke, tome, tone, tope, tote, trope, trove, vole, vote, woke, wove, yoke, zone

extra preceding vowel (or vowels): bloat, blown, boat, Boaz, bowed, cloak, coal, coat, coax, croak, Croat, foal, gloat, goad, goal, goat, groat, grown, grows, hoax, hoed, Joan, load, loaf, loam, loan, lowed, lows, moan, moat, mowed, mows, Noel, oaf, oak, oat, own, road, roam, rowed, rows, sews, soak, shoal, shews (regards to Ed Sullivan), showed, shows, Sloan(e), sloat, slowed, slows, snows, soap, soul, sowed, sows, stoat, stowed, stows, toad, towed, tows

extra consonant: comb, folk, gross, loll, moll, Ohm, poll, quoll, roll, toll, troll

other: mauve, rogue, vogue (borrowed from French)

I don't claim the above lists are exhaustive.

Any counter-examples to my thesis? If it's true, how did its spelling arise, given that Noah, Boaz and similar biblical names all got -oa-? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 00:59, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The answer is know (bow, tow, low, mow ...). Clarityfiend (talk) 01:37, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Job is a proper noun. There are all sorts of oddities in the pronunciation of proper nouns; take for example Menzies or even Ralph (traditional English pronunciation). Shock Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 01:50, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"For the purposes of this question, the w in -ow- or -ew- (low, mow, sew, sow ...) is considered a vowel." -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 05:26, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

May vary by regional pronunciation, but control and possibly vitriol depending on exactly what the rules are. Warofdreams talk 02:02, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In the CMU Pronouncing Dictionary I found control, extol, Interpol, patrol, petrol, sol, cosmos, kudos, Laos, Phobos, Michelob. Of course the boundary between English and foreign words is always fuzzy. E.g. I rejected Kronos, but included Phobos because it's a satellite of Mars. And I only included sol because I happened to know a non-Spanish meaning; I may have wrongly rejected other words for looking Spanish.

I think Boaz and Noah are red herrings since according to the articles the Hebrew pronunciations are ʾIyyôḇ, Bṓʿaz, Nōăḥ. -- BenRG (talk) 02:27, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I pronounce them /'boʊ.æz/ and /'noʊ.ə/, respectively, neither of which ends in a "long o followed by a consonant". Are there other pronunciations in English? --Trovatore (talk) 07:23, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't Deimos also derived from an ordinary Greek noun? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:13, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would reject Interpol, petrol, cosmos, kudos, Laos and Phobos because I don't think they're generally pronounced with a long final o. But I like control, extol, patrol, sol and Michelob. Thanks. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 05:26, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Really? I can sort of see petrol, which isn't in my active vocabulary, but if you said it with a reduced vowel in the second syllable I suppose I'd know what you're talking about, and Laos could be just /laʊs/, I guess. But I really don't know how to say "Interpol", "cosmos", or "Phobos" without an /oʊ/ in the final syllable. --Trovatore (talk) 07:11, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In British English the two vowels in "cosmos" have the same (short) value (and the second vowels of "Interpol" and "Phobos" also have this value). We (well, some of us) find the American "Kahz-moce" very strange. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 07:46, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As long as we're doing proper nouns, don't forget Lompoc, California. -Trovatore (talk) 07:06, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Syllabification of "Citra" (Indonesian word) using spaces

Anyone knows the syllabification of "Citra" (Indonesian word)? Use spaces to separate the syllables of "Citra". 111.95.114.227 (talk) 12:02, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]