Language desk
< June 21	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 23 >

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.

June 22

Correct third-person past tense of scream

Is 'screamt' an acceptable variant of 'screamed', as 'burnt' is of 'burned' or 'dreamt' is of 'dreamed'? If not, why? Also, what are the general rules for determining whether verbs ending in -l, -m and -n take -ed or -t? Ratzd'mishukribo 02:53, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, "screamt" is not a word. The only past-tense verb that ends in -mt is "dreamt" and its derivatives (undreamt, etc.). In fact, it's the only common English word with such a property. See English words with uncommon properties#Unusual word endings. Some people spell the past tense of "spell" as "spelt", but others disagree, believing this word refers to a type of grain, and the required past tense is "spelled".-- JackofOz 03:03, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pray tell, on what grounds do these "others" contend that "spelt" is unacceptable? The OED and the AHD both give "spelt" as a valid past tense form alongside "spelled". --Ptcamn 03:39, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you'd better ask them, Ptcamn. I don't know their names, unfortunately. I prefer to write "spelled" because that's what I was taught at a young age, but I know that others write "spelt". I was merely making reference to the fact that there is disagreement about this. See Talk:American and British English differences/Spelled v Spelt, for example. -- JackofOz 04:07, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I guess this question has to do with final obstruent devoicing and English orthography. It depends on how you pronounce the final obstruent, and whether you want to render your pronunciation phonetically. Cheers.--K.C. Tang 03:43, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And we can't forget that there is spelt :P-Andrew c 23:23, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not only have we not forgotten it, but I mentioned it 5 posts above. :) -- JackofOz 01:37, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all - but I ought to pose my query more clearly. Verbs ending in -l, -m, or -n, which was once took the past tense in -t, now take -ed, but -t is usually still accepted (take the above example of 'spelt'). On an online list, examples of such verbs are given but 'screamt' is omitted. Indeed, I do not recall having read 'screamt'. However, if 'screamt' never did exist, it requires explanation, as it is phonetically identical in this respect to 'dreamt'. In short: why doesn't 'screamt' have the same linguistic status as 'dreamt'? To my understanding, this is not addressed in the paragraphs above. Ratzd'mishukribo 04:14, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In my part of the world, we pronounce "screamed" as skreemd, not skremt, and I've never heard the skremt pronunciation anywhere, so I disagree that the fictitious word "screamt" requires any explanation. -- JackofOz 04:38, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(Edit conflict) I don't know much English, but I'd think in this way: why do some verbs end in -t in the first place? It seems that they end in -t in order to reflect the actual pronunciation (-d devoiced into -t). So how is "screamed" pronounced? does it end with a -d or a -t? (I'm not sure, I don't really speak English.) If the former, then there's no problem; if the latter, then we can say that the spelling doesn't reflect the actual pronunciation, which hardly surprises us, as English is well-known for its irregular orthography. So are you sure "dreamt" and "screamed" are "phonetically identical"? If they are, well, then the irregular English orthography is to blame. Cheers.--K.C. Tang 04:55, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

KC, if you can write a paragraph like that in a language you don't speak, you must be a bestselling novelist in the languages you do speak! -- Mwalcoff 22:52, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The issue is that while many verbs ending in -n, -m, and -l do take an (irregular) past tense in -t, because these are irregularities this generalisation is not productive. It's a closed set that does this, you can't introduce it to other words (e.g. I sunned myself, I framed a picture, I filled a hole.) It's just that some verbs have irregular past tenses, which is generally because they reflect an old regular way of doing things that has since been replaced. There's a tendency for more common verbs to keep this old ways of doing things (irregularity) more than rarer ones. English-speaking children just have to learn which ones are exceptions, though there are some patterns which help to remember them. The ones they fail to learn get regularised... (e.g. shew -> showed). Drmaik 05:31, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In (American) English, "screamed" has a clearly enunciated "d" on the end. On the other hand, "skrimped" is pronounced liked "skrimt" or perhaps "skrimpt." Edison 22:20, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean "scrimped"? I don't know "skrimped". The pronunciation of the final syllable is heavily influenced by the awkwardnes of "imp" plus a hard "d", or whatever that is in phonetics. Thus, the "d" comes out sounding more like a "t", though it is never spelled that way, to my knowledge. Bielle 05:13, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Or to put it more technically, after voiceless sounds '-ed' is pronounced 't', which is also voiceless. This is the pattern of regular English verbs. Drmaik 06:19, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, screamt seems to have been in use in Scots, if not in English. I can produce two citations: William Nicholson, "The Country Lass" ("The tod screamt eldricht frae the cleugh"), via Google Books; J. Learmont, Poems ("The howlet screamt, / The liche fowle [=nightjar]'s hoarse, / Did fairly deave [=deafen] her ear."), via Dictionary of the Scots Language. Wareh 19:52, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

what is the meaning of "how about a hand for Harry"

I am a non-native english speaker. When I visited at the universal studio in LA. The host of an animal-show said "how about a hand for Harry(an orangutan)"- at least it sounded like to me- at the end of the show, but I could'nt understand the exact meaning of the sentence. Could you please let me know it in easy english! Thank you, have a nice day. Leemhvic 04:55, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It means "to clap your hands", "to applaud". Cheers.--K.C. Tang 05:04, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that you probably heard correctly, and that the host was asking you to applaud (clap for) the orangutan. I'm not aware of any alternate meanings of this phrase, although I'm willing to be enlightened. Carom 05:40, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The usual idiom is "Let's give him (or her) a hand". As it is, this expression has two quite different meanings, and you need the context to see which is intended. One meaning is to urge an audience to applaud someone by hand clapping. However, "to give someone a hand" can also mean: to help that person with performing or finishing a task. --Lambiam ^Talk 09:13, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To sum up the above and to add some clarification, there are two idioms in use here. The first is "how about...". This idiom always begins a question. It means "What do you think about..." or "How would you feel about...", but it can also be an informal way of saying "Could you please do..." or "Could you please give...". The second idiom is "a hand". These words express one of (at least) two idioms. One, as others have said, means "help". The other means "a round of applause". Since it came at the end of a performance or broadcast appearance, the meaning is almost certainly "a round of applause". Marco polo 16:38, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shortly after the release of the movie Jaws, there was a comedy mix song with fragments of songs like "Wouldn't you give your hand to a friend ?". The double meanings made me laugh. Perhaps that's when I first became addicted to puns. StuRat 13:47, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is a very old pun that wannabe comedians often make: Someone is working on something difficult and asks a friend to "give me a hand." The friend responds with applause rather than assistance, to the chagrin of the first person. — Michael J 23:08, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's not quite the same, as Jaws presumably wanted the hand for a meal. StuRat 03:58, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In (i think) Asimov's The Naked Sun, a murder was done using the detached arm of a robot as a club; the robot who lent a hand then had a breakdown because of the conflict between the First and Second Laws of Robotics. —Tamfang 05:07, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hanged versus Hung

Is there any distinction between the words "hanged" and "hung" ... or are they interchangeable? Specifically, when referring to a prisoner's execution, would one say: "John Smith was hanged last night" or "John Smith was hung last night"? And what about other uses of the verb "to hang" -- such as hanging the clothes out to dry on the clothesline, etc.? Thanks. (JosephASpadaro 18:34, 22 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

It's a distinction that some people make and others don't. Those that make the distinction view those who don't as unlettered yahoos. Those that don't make the distinction view those who do as nattering pedants. Different dictionairies will give you their different views on the subject; Merriam-Webster's 11th Collegiate Dictionary, the one most readily nearby, says, with regard to being hanged by the neck until dead: "For both transitive and intransitive senses, the past and past participle hung, as well as hanged, is standard. Hanged is most appropriate for official executions <he was to be hanged, cut down whilst still alive...and his bowels torn out - Louis Allen> but hung is also used <gave orders that she should be hung - Peter Quennell>. Hung is more appropriate for less formal hangings <by morning I'll be hung in effigy> Ronald Reagan" - Nunh-huh 18:42, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know, hanged is never used for the meanings of hang unrelated to killing someone. I hung a picture on the wall, hung a flag outside my window, and hung my laundry out to dry; I can't imagine any native English speaker over the age of 8 ever using hanged in those sentences. —Angr 20:00, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I still remember writing some essay in an elementary school class, using "hanged" when I should have used "hung". My teacher drew a little picture of a noose next to my writing. :) Corvus cornix 23:18, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My grandmother insisted that "hanged" was only for people and "hung" for meat. However, as a hanged person soon becomes meat . . . and that is the sort of remark that would lead me to be in serious trouble in my grandmother's house. I do agree with —Angr about how "hanged" isn't used. Bielle 21:26, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the main purpose for the distinction between the two words is to facilitate pun-making. As in, "They said you was hung!" ... "They was right." Friday (talk) 21:30, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If anyone who doesn't speak English as a first language is reading, the reason why we don't use "hung" in relation to humans is that "hung" also has a colloquial meaning relating to a man's endowment. "The prisoner was hung" is a very funny joke when you're 12 years old... --Charlene 18:10, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, I was wondering how old that usage is - and the OED has a citation from the 1640s: "They cut off his genitories, (and they say he was hung like an ass)." But there are other uses for the word: a hung jury, for example, never a hanged jury; hungover, never hangedover. In fact, the only time anyone would ever use "hanged" is for an execution, and even then few would dispute the use of "hung." zafiroblue05 | Talk 19:27, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

May/December Marriage

I know that this term refers to a younger person marrying an older person, presumably because May is toward the beginning of the year and December is at the end of the year. I assume the phrase is metaphoric for the younger person being at the "beginning" (early stages) of his/her life and the older person being at the "end" (later stages) of his/her life. Question: Is there any significance to the actual months named, May and December? Or are they just random place holders for an early month and a late month? Further, are the connotations of Spring versus Winter invoked? Thanks. (JosephASpadaro 18:40, 22 June 2007 (UTC))[reply]

I think that Spring and Winter is a lot more relevant than "early month" / "late month", because at the time when such expressions were first coined, December wasn't always considered to be the last month of the year. In Chaucer's "Merchant's Tale", there are two characters literally named January and May! AnonMoos 03:14, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The idea appears to be that May is when everything is fertile and blooming, but in December everything is dormant and barren. --Charlene 18:11, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

help with a printing term?

Hi--

I'm wondering if there is a specific term for the printing phenomenon in which one can see the type on the reverse side of page on the page that one is reading--that is, is there a term that denotes when the text on a verso is visible through the recto that precedes it?

I realize this is a rather esoteric question. Any advice/thoughts woudl be much appreciated.

With thanks -- Benzocane 20:10, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Show-through" - cited in numerous glossary sources by querying _define: show-through_ (without the underscores) in Google. -- Cheers, Deborahjay 21:10, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I learned to call it "bleed through", back in the dark ages of hot type, though I have also found the term used in desktop publishing[1]. The term came from a tendency of ink that was too thick for the paper (or paper too thin for the ink) to leak or bleed right through to the back of the sheet. This is not the same as "page bleed", however, which refers to a design technique of taking an image or border right to the edge of the paper, leaving no margin. Bielle 21:39, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That had been my first thought, actually - but when I performed the same "define" query, the results indicated that "bleed-through" evidently refers to a physical phenomenon involving the interaction between ink and paper. The results for "show-through" seemed more convincing to describe the visual aspect. -- Deborahjay 21:44, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please take a moment to review the 'How to ask a question' section at the top of every reference desk page, especially the portion about not cross-posting your questions to multiple reference desks. 65.203.61.77 21:51, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry about the x-posting. I posted it twice because it seemed equally related to both topic areas. Also, I altered my question some for the second post, as I was worried its initial phrasing was not entirely clear. Many thanks for the help above! I'm much obliged. Benzocane 22:07, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it would possibly be called print-through., This term is commonly used with regard to tape recording and describes a similar effect of unwanted information being presented at the wrong time.--Tugjob 23:21, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Technical Term for Italicized Thougts in Literature

Does anyone know what the technical term for italicized thoughts in literature?

Here is an example:

---Example Start---

John opened the door; there was a squeak.

This door needs repair.

John went to the garage to retrieve his tools.

---Example End---

I would be very appreciative for an answer! I know there is a term for it, I just cannot seem to remember to find it via Wikisearch. --67.177.170.96 22:12, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if this is the term you're looking for, but giving the thoughts of a character as if spoken is known as monologue intérieur ("inner monologue"). I don't think this is necessarily rendered in italics; an author who employs such monologue intérieur regularly and always uses italics for it is Philip K. Dick. --Lambiam ^Talk 23:13, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally I once read something by a scifi critic that implied that the practice of "flashing italicized thoughts at the reader" can be blamed on one well-known author. (I don't know whom the critic had in mind but Poul Anderson sometimes did it to excess.) —Tamfang 05:16, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology

What's the etymology of jungle fever. ~~: for one sense (interracial relations), see Jungle Fever.~~ iames 22:23, 22 June 2007 (UTC) There was nothing either I, or Control F, could find in the article Miscegenation to which Jungle Fever, the movie, redirects, about any use of the term for interracial relationships. I have removed the link from the Disambiguation Page for this reason. Bielle 02:19, 26 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

jungle is from Hindi or Marathi (originally meaning wasteland), and fever is from Latin febris, according to my nearest etymological dictionary. —Tamfang 05:12, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And of course putting the two together gives a disease (fever) you'd get in a jungle. I'd guess the combination originated with Westerners first exploring the jungles of Africa and South America and catching new and unnamed diseases. In the racial sense as mentioned above, I assume the jungle part is a reference to Africans coming from the jungle (similar to jungle bunny and probably not considered politically correct) and the use of fever related to the earlier expression. Cyta 09:08, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]