Language desk
< May 31	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 2 >

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 1

reëxamining

Is it a spell or an alternative spell for reexamining? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.168.0.151 (talk) 03:57, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The correct spelling is "re-examining".--Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:01, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

wait until next shoe drop

dear sirs

i would like to know the origin of 'wait until next shoe drop'. whose shoe and why... thank you

my email address is [removed for privacy] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bedepoon (talk • contribs) 05:41, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The idea is that when you live in an apartment house, you can hear the person who lives above you take his shoes off before going to bed. Every night you hear first one Thud! and then a few seconds later a second Thud! and you know he's taken his shoes off. The point is that once you've gotten accustomed to hearing this every night, then after the first Thud! there are a few seconds of suspense where you know the second Thud! is coming, and you can't do anything until you hear it and the suspense is resolved. So "waiting for the shoe to drop" or "waiting for the other shoe to drop" has become a metaphor for waiting for something that you know is coming any second now. —An gr 05:57, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As a loaded term about inevitability, it means to wait for something bad to happen, example here[1] Once a company starts laying off employees, those who are still working feel they are waiting for the other shoe to drop. Julia Rossi (talk) 08:05, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not the source, but many people became familiar with the expression on "Sesame Street" in an "Ernie and Bert" sketch (on TV a couple of decades back). The saying was known before that, but I don't recall it being that popular. BTW I had never heard of "the next shoe" I'm more familiar with "the other shoe". --76.111.32.200 (talk) 11:20, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Feldherrnhalle

The page starts thus: "The Feldherrnhalle (sometimes also written Feldherrenhalle, "Field Marshall's Hall")..." My query: is "Field Marshall's Hall" the translation of Feldherr[e]nhall regardless of the German spelling? Alternatively, does each spelling have a different translation in English? -- Thanks, Deborahjay (talk) 12:06, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article is wrong on two counts: first, "Feldherr" is not a field marshal (which is a clearly defined military rank) but the commanding officer of an army in the field, regardless of his rank (the Feldherr might be a field marshal, a general or the country's king who doesn't carry any military rank at all, as long as he's in charge of the army in the field). And second, while "Feldherrnhalle" and "Feldherrenhalle" both mean the same, the contracted form is a proper name - it's always spelled that way when referring to the building in Munich, a "Feldherrenhalle" would be some generic hall-like building where army leaders meet. -- Ferkelparade π 12:37, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So might we correct this to "field commander's [sing.] hall"? -- Deborahjay (talk) 13:07, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd stick with the plural in that case (German is a bit ambiguous in that respect, the contracted form can go both ways...and even a non-contracted form could implicate a singular meaning, cf. "Frauenkirche" or "Fürstenhof"). The statues of Tilly and Wrede seem to imply that the hall was built to honour more than one specific army leader, so I'd guess that plural is correct. -- Ferkelparade π 13:17, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The German WP article on the building does say "fälschlicherweise oft Feldherrenhalle genannt". Is that incorrect? Deor (talk) 12:45, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What does that mean in English, please and what conclusion might we draw from it in correcting the translation of Feldherrnhalle? -- Deborahjay (talk) 12:54, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It means "often wrongly called Feldherrenhalle". I'm not so sure about "often"; I've done a quick Googlefight which indicates that the misspelling appears quite frequently; however, a detailed look at the search results seems to indicate that many sites list it as a common misspelling, so I'm not sure how many people who spell it "Feldherrenhalle" actually think they are correct. By the way, I'm from Munich myself, so I'm maybe more inclined than other people to regard the second spelling not as a legitimate variant but as a stupid misspelling by clueless non-natives :P -- Ferkelparade π 13:04, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As for Field Marshal's Hall, it is also the official site's English translation. And I found this translation as well as "Hall of the Field Marshals" given in various books on Munich and architecture [2]. Nevertheless, Ferkelparade is correct of course. Another WP:V challenge brought to us by Deborahjay. ---Sluzzelin talk 13:37, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

65 Google book hits for "Feldherrnhalle" + "Hall of". You will notice a couple of field-marshal translations, but these are clearly wrong.
25 hits for "Feldhernnhalle" + "Hall of the Generals". Among them, Nazi Language and Terminology by Richard Wires, a paper on museology, and many travel publications. Google books winner by numbers.
The Dictionary of Architecture by James Stevens Curl translates it as "commanders' hall". Christoph Hackelsberger's Subway Architecture in Munich has "military commanders' hall" which is perhaps more precise, but duller too. [3]
Only Norman Goda's Tales from Spandau: Nazi Criminals and the Cold War gives "Hall of the Commanders" [4].
My dictionary (PONS Großwörterbuch, Ernst Klett Sprachen, 2005) translates Feldherr with "general, strategist". ---Sluzzelin talk 17:16, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ferkelparade is clearly savvy, and Sluzzelin raises pertinent considerations of verifiability and a synthesized (contrived? bastardized?!) conclusion. What, my fellow editors, do you advise as an improvement on the present "Field Marshal's Hall"? My preference for "_[Field] Commanders'_ Hall" is based on its descriptive nature rather than a bona fide :de:en: translation of the word feldherr. I hesitate to make the edit without some consensus, or at least further guidance. And I intend to post this discussion on the Talk page for Feldherrnhalle for good measure. -- Deborahjay (talk) 20:36, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retro-translating for context: German also has "General" for "general" and "Befehlshaber" for "commander".

Carl von Clausewitz (who died ten years before the Feldherrnhalle was built) specified Feldherr with the words "d.h. einem entweder an der Spitze eines ganzen Krieges oder eines Kriegstheaters stehenden General" ("that is (between) a general at the head of either a whole War, or of a theatre of War". It's in this awkward dative form because of its position in the sentence). (On War, Book 1 - On the Nature of War, Chapter III, "The Genius for War")

The full clause is: "Eine sehr große Kluft liegt zwischen einem Feldherrn, d. h. einem entweder an der Spitze eines ganzen Krieges oder eines Kriegstheaters stehenden General, und der nächsten Befehlshaberstufe unter ihm". Colonel J.J. Graham's translation has: "An immense space lies between a General—that is, one at the head of a whole War, or of a theatre of War—and his Second in Command". You see the problem. Clausewitz uses the word "General" in his explanation of what defines a Feldherr, while Graham translates Feldherr directly with general and doesn't use "general" at all anymore in his explanation. (It would be circular: "a general—that is a general at the head of a whole War, or of a theatre of War".)

Long story short: Personally I like "Commanders' Hall", but the data gathered sofar seem to favor "Hall of the Generals". Both could be mentioned (e.g. "The Feldherrnhalle (Commanders' Hall or Hall of the Generals)", with the former referring to the Dictionary of Architecture and the latter perhaps to the terminology book and also to dictionary definitions. The fact that it is often falsely translated as "Field Marhal's Hall" can probably only be mentioned if referenced; otherwise I'd just remove it without further ado, and maybe leave a hidden comment so no one changes it back after having seen Bavaria's official site. ---Sluzzelin talk 03:47, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure that any evidence has been presented here that "Field Marshal" is incorrect. The fact the there website uses it and the state of our confused articles on marshal and field marshal rather argues for leaving in place the only translation which is actually source-able. Rmhermen (talk) 13:53, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The other translations are sourceable and have been sourced, though not comprehensively cited, something I can still do later if requested. I just wasn't able to link directly to all the pages in google books. Field Marshal and also Field Marshal General are military ranks (see template:Military ranks or Category:Military ranks). A Feldherr is a general more in the sense of commander-in-chief (and strategist), not a defined rank of a particular army. But you're right, I haven't been able to verify that "Field Marshal" is incorrect yet. Negative proof is often difficult to find. ---Sluzzelin talk 14:10, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

May I add that all along I've sensed that the "Field" part is a faux ami (with Feld). Otherwise I (= OP) am duly inclined to follow Sluzzelin's trail in tracking the matter thus far. -- Deborahjay (talk) 14:17, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Learning a language online

Is it possible to learn a language through Livemocha? Are there other similar sites out there?217.168.0.192 (talk) 16:50, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about Livemocha, but I do know that people have taught themselves languages using a grammar book, a dictionary, and a text. It wouldn't be easy, but it's definitely possible. How much easier do websites make it? I don't know; I have never tried, but be careful of a couple of things. 1. Not all websites are good; I doubt that you'd find one to try to steer you wrong, but you may find one that has very wrong information and 2. Not having a native teacher can lead to problems. In a dictionary, for example, it will tell you what a word means, but English has a lot of words that mean multiple things, and you may end up translating the wrong intent, but a native speaker will catch that. Also, some languages, I believe, such as Japanese, have social things with them that require a proficient speaker to teach you about so that you don't end up insulting someone. Falconus^{p t c} 20:40, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Phrases sharing initials

Is there a term for two phrases or names that share the same initials? As in "Very Fancy Doilies is an X of Volunteer Fire Department", or "John Smith and Jerome Salinger are X's". The most relevant terms I can think of are "backronym" and "snowclone", neither of which fits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.111.189.55 (talk) 18:46, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't even a word for the opposite of an acronym, let alone what you're asking. I mean, Anzac is an acronym for "Australian and New Zealand Army Corps", but there's no word for what "Australian and New Zealand Army Corps" is in relation to "Anzac". Sorry. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:29, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that's what the anon was asking about, Jack; I think what he means is a special case of alliteration where there are several words in sequence sharing their initial letters. However, I also think there is no special word for that :P -- Ferkelparade π 22:48, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't quite see it that way, Ferkelparade. Except for the above example, you'd hardly be likely to find "Very Fancy Doilies" juxtaposed with "Volunteer Fire Department" in the same sentence. I think 69.111 was using these as examples of two unrelated terms that just happen to have the same abbreviation or acronym, and trying to find a word that describes that connection. He could just as well have asked about Central Intelligence Agency, Culinary Institute of America, Cleveland Institute of Art and Canadian Institute of Actuaries, all of which can be referred to as "CIA". -- JackofOz (talk) 23:06, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, the VFD examples come from the A Series of Unfortunate Events books, which also contain several other examples of phrases with the same initials. 207.233.86.25 (talk) 17:30, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mnemonic? Sort of? Adam Bishop (talk) 00:58, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I guess they would be homonymic acronyms, so you could call them homacronyms (or homocronyms?)--Shantavira|^{feed me} 06:32, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nice try, Shantavira. That might describe the relationship between the VFD that stands for Very Fancy Doilies and the VFD that stands for Volunteer Fire Department. But it doesn't describe the relationship between Very Fancy Doilies and Volunteer Fire Department. This problem is a little like the lack of a word to describe the relationship between the 2 sets of parents of a married couple. In some languages there is such a word, but in English there isn't. (Don't ask me how I came up with that analogy, but they don't call me the Analogy King of Australia for nothing.) -- JackofOz (talk) 13:18, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Meaning of word 'skin horse'

In the book, The Velveteen Rabbit, one of the toys is called a 'skin horse'. What does 'skin horse' mean? There are other literary references also. And how is the word 'skin' pronounced? Is it pronounced like skin as in epidermis reference? Thanks, just1mtJust1mt (talk) 21:07, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I sort of assumed it was a toy horse made of some kind of leather. Was I wrong? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:10, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is a quotation from the story: He was so old that his brown coat was bald in patches and showed the seams underneath... I guess it is a sort of nickname based on these skinny patches. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 22:20, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like the horse was just "skin and bones". (And maybe not a lot of the latter either?)Lisa4edit (talk) 18:05, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In mid-1950s Brooklyn (three decades after the book's initial publication), I had a toy of this sort, a stuffed donkey covered with what seemed to be horse hide, i.e. short, coarse, smooth, hair. I don't recall having rubbed any patches smooth (though I vaguely recall its having split its seams in a few spots and lost stuffing as a result), but later on when I encountered the book, I imagined the "skin horse" to be just like my donkey. -- Deborahjay (talk) 21:04, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]