Language desk
< August 29	<< Jul \| August \| Sep >>	August 31 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

August 30

Daffynitions

Normally I understand most Daffynitions quite readily. But, despite the hints presented I'm sorry I haven't a clue about the following listed on that page. Could someone explain them please: baby; garbage. Thanks -- SGBailey 08:04, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The list includes different types of puns. For most examples, the pun lies in the word itself (dynamite: To take a flea out to dinner. (dine-a-mite)) With baby and garbage the pun is in the definition. Same for hula dance: Wild waist show. ---Sluzzelin talk 08:19, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK. That still doesn't explain them (and I know that analysing these things stops any semblance of humour existing...).

"Baby - a very young child" What does that have to do with "wet" and What with "newly-weds". If the answer to the latter is nine months after the honeymoon then fine but not funny. But why Wet?
"Garbage - unwanted items being disposed of" If the unwanted items are food then they may well smell. But I don't see a direct link and have no idea what the backards is about. -- SGBailey 08:38, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ok, here's my lame attempt: The newly-wed/newly-wet evokes associations such as the one you mentioned, and a baby is pretty wet when newly born. The garbage definition, "Eatables smelled backwards", refers to funny definitions such as "stressed is desserts spelled backwards", and the stench of course, as identified by you. Maybe they were lame to begin with, and, again as you already pointed out, dissecting doesn't make them less lame. ---Sluzzelin talk 08:46, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks -- SGBailey 09:53, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not so much that it's wet when it's newly-born, but, as any parent would confirm, you change their nappy (diaper) for the twentieth time today, and a second later it's wet again (or worse) - ie. newly wet. -- JackofOz 01:35, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Another one. Why would oboe be an English tramp? Surely French would make more sense? Skittle 20:51, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because in various English dialects such as Cockney, they tend to drop the "h" at the start of words like house, here, hobo, and, of course, "'allo, 'allo, 'allo, what's all this then?". -- JackofOz 01:35, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, so a cockney tramp. I was trying to picture the standard American stereotype of an English person, but I couldn't make it fit. Thanks Jack :P Skittle 12:22, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're most welcome. Btw, I'd be interested to know what that standard American stereotype of an English person is (at least as far as you understand it). -- JackofOz 04:53, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose I was thinking of the Hollywood 'standard' as used for villains, love interests and cold intellectuals. I forgot they also had Dick van Dyke :o Skittle 22:13, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. Here's a tongue-in-cheek American assessment of the English, from an article called "Foreigners Around the World", by P. J. O'Rourke, that I kept from a copy of National Lampoon magazine from the mid-70s. It's extremely un-PC nowadays, but it still makes me smile:

Cold-blooded queers with nasty complexions and terrible teeth who once conquered half the world but still haven't figured out central heating. They warm their beers and chill their baths and boil all their food, including bread. An intensely snobbish group, but who exactly they are snubbing is an international mystery. Lately they've been getting their comeuppance world power-wise, as their shabby, antiquated and bankrupt little back alley of a country slowly winds down like the ill-crafted clockwork playthings of which their undersized children are so fond. In fact, last year their entire government had to kiss the ass of the fat aboriginal nig-nog who runs Uganda to retrieve a single flit hack writer from the clutches of that august nation. They all have large collections of something useless like lamp finials or toad eggs, and they would have lost both world wars if it weren't for us. They like to be spanked with canes and that's just what they deserve.". (The section about the Australians is pretty damning too). :) -- JackofOz 06:45, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A for orses, B for lamb ... —Tamfang 19:49, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Or A for horses, if you're assuming a hypercorrection :) Skittle 22:13, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

D HARTE BOI!

What is this charming fellow getting at? What does "D HARTE BOI!" mean?? What language is it? I sure hope it isn't rude! Capuchin 10:46, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My guess would be a Denglisch use of the gay slang term boi. Or maybe the author is ignorant of the gay slang but knows the word "boy" from English-language pop music. In this context, "hart" is likely to mean something like English "rough" or "tough". In other words, something like "the rough boi". Maybe this is the author's nickname for himself. Marco polo 13:57, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

After you saying that it might be gay slang, It's occured to me that he might be another one of those rowdy friends of homosexuals, wishing to proclaim how much D "hearts" boys. Cute. Capuchin 14:07, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's hard to see how "HARTE" could be a verb meaning "to heart". "Hart" is the Dutch spelling of English "heart", but, assuming that the writer has invented a Dutch verb "harten" (meaning "to heart"), the 3rd person singular form of that verb would "hart", not "harte". This is why I think it is more likely to be an inflected form of the German adjective "hart" (meaning "hard, rough, or tough"). Marco polo 16:08, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It could also be a fanciful spelling of "The Hardy Boy". —An gr 16:19, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Marco, my hypothesis rests on the assumption that the person is not familiar with english but trying his very best. Capuchin 07:10, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"To be lame" meaning

What does the expression "to be lame" (apart from lacking one leg) mean in English? People use it as implying low quality or something similar, but I don't get the exact meaning. --Taraborn 11:13, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Weak and ineffectual; unsatisfactory", "lacking needful or desirable substance" or "not being in the know", "(especially of an excuse or argument) weak and unsatisfactory". The first time I used it in the thread above, I was referring to my unsatisfactory and likely ineffectual attempt at explaining a pun, which, as I suggested further down, might have been lame in the first place. A lame joke or a lame pun is a joke that is ineffectual; though it might elicit a groan, it won't make you laugh, even if you fully understand it. ---Sluzzelin talk 11:36, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The literal meaning of lame applied to a body part is: being non-functional, and applied to a person: having some lame body part(s) – especially the legs, and thus being incapable of normal locomotion. There is no specific connotation of the afflicted body parts having gone missing. --Lambiam 15:44, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much to both. I thought that it meant both lacking a leg or having a non-functional one because in Spanish the word "cojo" means both and people use the same word for those who lack a leg and those who have a non-functional one. --Taraborn 16:30, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not so much a non-functional leg as a poorly functioning one. For example, if you had an injury that kept your knee stiff, you would be lame. Similarly with jokes. You can tell what the joke is trying to do, and it might be just a little funny, but not really funny. --Anonymous, 22:45 UTC, August 30, 2007.

Also it can be used for animals,particularly the horse.hotclaws 11:14, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More of a youth slang meaning of the word is "uncool" as in "dude, that game is sooooo lame". StuRat 23:20, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to you two. By the way, I think you Anonymous should register, you've been here for a while now :) --Taraborn 11:23, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Translations

I need translations of the following words:-

Paper Presentation
Education status of...(a country)
Globalisation
Developing...(a country)
Reservations(social/economical/religious/caste based)
Celebrity-...(a question)
Agriculture
Risk/ management
Political chaos in...(a country)
(a city)-A hub for bomb-blast/terrorist/extremism
Nuclear deal
Current issues/General topics

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.96.98.179 (talk) 13:16, August 30, 2007 (UTC)

Are we meant to be able to guess the language that you want them translated into? Since this is the languages desk on the English wikipedia, I would presume you want them translated into English, but they already seem to be in English. Am I missing something here? Capuchin 13:25, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Going by the IP, the OP is in India, which gives us a few hundred possibilities... Algebraist 19:04, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I added bullets for legibility. —Tamfang 19:47, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since it's not specified, I can only assume it needs to be translated into faux-Swedish ([1]). Bork bork bork!

Peper Presenteshun
Idooceshun stetoos ooff...(a cuoontry)
Glubeleeseshun
Defelupeeng...(a cuoontry)
Reserfeshuns(suceeel/icunumeecel/releegiuoos/ceste-a besed)
Celebreety-...(a qooesshun)
Egreecooltoore-a
Reesk/ munegement
Puleeticel cheus in...(a cuoontry)
(a ceety)-A hoob fur bumb-blest/terrureest/ixtremeesm
Noocleer deel
Coorrent issooes/Generel tupeecs

SaveThePoint 21:55, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

torinese/torinesi

In the Wikipedia article "breadstick," the breadstick grissino torinese appears grissino torinesi. Is this an error, or are both the singular and plural forms used? 69.201.141.45 16:55, 30 August 2007 (UTC)Linnaeus[reply]

It looks to me like an error, as the plural would be grissini torinesi. Marco polo 18:08, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To pluralize only the last element of a foreign phrase is a not uncommon error. (Is the magazine Femme Fatales still going?) —Tamfang 19:46, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Internet"

My spell-checkers insist that the word Internet be capitalized. Who decided that the word warranted being capitalized? 69.201.141.45 17:06, 30 August 2007 (UTC)Linnaeus[reply]

It's a proper noun. There's only one of it (despite what GWB might think). --Nricardo 18:05, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This varies according to the style books of individual publishers and publications. In the past, there has been a tendency to capitalize "internet", as if it were a name. However, there has been a trend in recent years (still a minority trend) to lower-case it. This makes more sense to me personally, because I see the internet as a medium or technology like television or "the press". Also, the names of unique referents are not necessarily proper nouns. For example, "sun" is usually lower-case, as is something like "world trade" or, for that matter, "cyberspace". Proper nouns, in my view, should be reserved for the names of persons or of entities with a distinct and singular, recognizable identity. The internet is neither, in my view. However, you should conform to your publisher's style guide. Marco polo 18:17, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In a context like "the last rays of the sun" lower case is more common, but in a context like "the planets revolve around the Sun", where the Sun is viewed as a physical object rather than a light source, upper case is more common. In general, the rule "there's only one" does not work; conventionally we have the upper-case North Pole and the lower-case equator. But historically and conventionally it has been "Internet" when referring to the Internet, and that is what most style guides recommend. Some people argue that it "should" be "internet", but I do not buy such arguments for the a priori reason that right or wrong is a matter of somewhat arbitrary convention in such cases, not of logical argument. See also Internet capitalization conventions. --Lambiam 21:42, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Confusion arises with blurring of the distinction between "the Internet" and "an internet". The latter is a network which interconnects a group of devices; the former being an example of this. The rules used to transmit information between such devices are "the internet protocol", or IP. Bazza 11:52, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've always thought it should be lower case, too. The argument that "there's only one" to me would only work if "there could only ever be one". However, I see no reason why China can't create their own internet, if they give up on censoring the current version. Similarly, when there was only one passenger pigeon left, there was no reason to then call it "the Passenger Pigeon". StuRat 23:12, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify (not entirely sure about the details - I'm no expert): A network connects different computers, such as in an intranet (eg in an office). For this one can have different protocols (languages). To connect networks that use different protocols, one needs another protocol, a lingua franca, that allows them to each other. There can be several such internet protocols, but one of them, IP (the Internet Protocol - therefore capitalised?), has become the worldwide standard (largely because it is free). This is what is called the Internet (capitalised). Of course, one can also distinguishing it from the other internets (or rather internet protocols) by the fact that it is called the Internet, so that is no reason to capitalise it. Still, I usually do. Funny, btw, my spell checker marks the plural 'internets' as wrong. I disagree. Then again, it also marks my English English as wrong, so it's a crappy spell checker. :) DirkvdM 18:52, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An interesting comparison is the White House. There are many white houses, but there is only one White House. If you don't count Casablanca, that is. :) DirkvdM 18:55, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A more relevant comparison would be the telephone, which used to be the Telephone. --Kjoonlee 19:06, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's odd. Did people use the word 'Telephone' for the connections in stead of the device one has at home? Or rather the whole international system of connections, even before they were interconnected? Because that's the reason for capitalising 'Internet' - there is (and can be) only one of it. Doesn't sound likely that people viewed the telephone system like that, so there must be a different reason then. DirkvdM 06:23, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Um, when telephones started getting installed, they weren't interconnected. For a glimpse into the early history of the telephone, The Hacker Crackdown might be helpful. (It doesn't mention anything about capitalization, though.) --Kjoonlee 07:46, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The space between

When the "o" of Santo is dropped as in Sant' Angelo and Sant' Ambrogio, I find some writers place a space after the apostrophe and others don't. Is one form older? 69.201.141.45 18:30, 30 August 2007 (UTC)Linnaeus[reply]

Without a space is standard and has been in use for a long time (1715 example), though typography is never perfectly consistent (both ways on this 1768 page, compare A, B, C, D). Both usages have a pretty good pedigree; here are three 16th century books that all seem never to use a space, so that has my vote for older & better practice: 1, 2, 3 (let me know if you find an exception). It may help to think about the list of words that elide in Italian. Most are little function words like di, la, ci, ne. I'm sure these would look odd to you if given a space after elision. There are relatively few more significant words (santo, come, senza) that elide. Thus, in my opinion (though I'm not sure whether you're asking because you're looking for a policy to follow yourself) one should probably at least be consistent. Wareh 18:49, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.69.201.141.45 15:24, 1 September 2007 (UTC)Linnaeus[reply]

Puzzle

I want to see if peoples brains here work well with logic as well as facts and resource.

ABCDEFG HIJKLMNO PQRSTUVWXYZ

Rearrange these to make a 5 letter word, using all the letters, or perhaps those singled out, you decide. I`m such a git. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.110.178.100 (talk) 19:24, August 30, 2007 (UTC)

I won't post the answer to spoil it for others - but it's not exactly a new puzzle ;) Worm ^{(t | c)} 19:42, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All I can think of is that the middle section, H to O, sounds like H2O, which is water. Is that it? Trouble is, why the word 'rearrange'? Xn4 20:27, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It certainly looks like a mucked-up version of that puzzle. 86.144.144.222 20:31, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I give up - please give the answer213.249.232.202 06:27, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, after a little bit of thinking I got it. Remember, ambiguity is a neat trick for puzzles! -Wooty [Woot?] [Spam! Spam! Wonderful spam!] 11:21, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hint 0: The puzzle is not formulated very well. It should have been something like: "ABCDEFG HIJKLMNO PQRSTUVWXYZ: which five-letter word is hiding in here?". Hint 1: the (presumed!) solution of this puzzle is a five-letter word occurring in the above responses. Hint 2: it is not any of spoil, think, which, and looks. --Lambiam 11:24, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Still screwed, more clues please.87.102.88.202 13:51, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I found this. But don't click it if you don't want a spoiler and answer.-Andrew c ^[talk] 14:31, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's not worded very well, as the original says to make a five letter word using all the letters (i.e. 26), which would be impossible even if 21 of them were silent.--Manga 16:50, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My answer: "these" -> "sheet". Clarityfiend 22:48, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is the exact same thing that I thought of. The phrasing of "Rearrange these..." made me think the alphabet was just a diversion.-Andrew c ^[talk] 23:15, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think the key phrase is or perhaps those singled out, which are H to O. But if the wet solution is the intended one, Rearrange is definitely misleading. --Lambiam 08:46, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Clarity, that's what I got as well. -Wooty [Woot?] [Spam! Spam! Wonderful spam!] 09:57, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually having read the spoiler above I came up with "A to Z" which can be a "guide" or "atlas"?87.102.87.15 11:13, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possible, but I would have guessed the most logical answer to be "H to O", i.e, water, given the purposeful spacing of the letters. A pretty naff puzzle if you ask me, given the wild array of possibilities (or maybe it was just the original phrasing of it). In my mind you should KNOW when you've just cracked a puzzle. --Micheals 11:49, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The word exercise

I need the word "exercise" translated into the following languages-French, Spanish, German, Italian, Hebrew, Japanese, Chinese, Kenyan, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.15.28.218 (talk) 22:54, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is (I suspect) going to depend on what exercise you mean: there's a big difference between jogging once a day and doing a homework exercise or exercising an option. Assuming you mean physical exercise, and given that I speak only English, the interwikis from our article point to de:Training (Sport) for German, and es:Ejercicio físico for Spanish. Algebraist 23:06, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't use Training for sport in general in German. I'd use Bewegung or Sport itself. —An gr 04:37, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is no "Kenyan" language. Perhaps you mean Swahili? -Elmer Clark 04:24, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Physical exercise is "undoo" (or "undou", depending on your romanization of 運動), with "to do exercise" as "undou o shimasu", in Japanese. And no, it's not pronounced "undo" like the Ctrl-Z function but "uun-doe"! -Wooty [Woot?] [Spam! Spam! Wonderful spam!] 11:17, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We still have no disambiguation. We don't even know whether this is a noun or a verb. Unless the questioner supplies more information, ideally a full sentence containing the word "exercise" in the intended context and meaning, these responses are possibly pointless. --Lambiam 11:34, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]