Language desk
< April 11	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 13 >

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.

April 12[edit]

spanish translation[edit]

how do you say or how would you say wedge issue in spanish —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.198.192.120 (talk) 00:27, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You could call it an asunto divisivo or asunto polémico, but there doesn't seem to be an equivalent idiom using the 'wedge' metaphor. LANTZY ^TALK 09:02, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conservative bias[edit]

If a person is said to have 'conservative bias', would this usually refer to them being biased in favor of or against conservatives? 72.200.101.17 (talk) 02:24, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The word "bias" without qualification usually means a bias towards something, rather than a bias against something. A bias against conservatives could be an "anti-conservative bias". -- JackofOz (talk) 02:29, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

X bias could reasonably be taken to mean a bias typical of X; this reading will usually make the sense obvious. (A counterexample: as a heterosexual male, do I have a male bias or a female bias? I'd avoid the form altogether!) —Tamfang (talk) 22:38, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Media bias supports the above claims, with "X bias" used in various senses, although it's not a great article. --Maltelauridsbrigge (talk) 12:45, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Which word is correct (on or of)? Or are both correct (on and of)?[edit]

Here is the sentence I am asking about:

Your entries in this forum are a reflection on all of your writing. Your entries in this forum are a reflection of all of your writing.

Should this problem have a Wikipedia entry? If so, should I research this also? How do I start putting together a Wikipedia entry? Zensunim (talk) 08:22, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The sentences mean different things. The first phrasing, "reflection on all your writing", suggests a piece of writing that might produce an impression or prejudice about the author's body of work, in the same way that one might say "These entries reflect poorly on your abilities as a writer." The second phrasing, "reflection of all your writing", suggests a piece of writing that is emblematic or typical of the author's body of work, as in "These entries are typical of your writing style."

I don't see how this is a "problem" in need of a Wikipedia entry. (Indeed, I'm puzzled as to why you use the word "problem" at all). "Reflection on" is different from "reflection of" because they employ different prepositions. LANTZY ^TALK 09:16, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

language[edit]

Do non written languages exist? (meaning languages that are only spoken) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.212.4.39 (talk) 12:32, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, all languages were unwritten until a little more than 5,000 years ago... AnonMoos (talk) 12:38, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, of course. In fact, of the roughly 6800 languages spoken today, very few of them have writing systems. However, it is difficult to give a precise figure due to limited data. This is a natural consequence though: all natural languages begin verbally; only some develop writing systems. 124.214.131.55 (talk) 12:59, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And of course, there are also non-written languages that are not spoken: sign languages. LANTZY ^TALK 13:15, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sign languages are now written languages. See http://www.signwriting.org/. -- Wavelength (talk) 15:11, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See also http://www.dancewriting.org/ and http://www.movementwriting.org/. -- Wavelength (talk) 15:26, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Translation needed from French: "lices"[edit]

I'm trying to translate the word "lices" from French (no no, nothing to do with Louses), which proves pretty tricky, I just cannot find a suitable translation.

The French word relates to one of three things (medieval context):

The enclosure demarcating a fortified place.
An enclosed, outdoor area delimited by such an enclosure, which gave the expression "entrer en lice" meaning "entering the competition ground" in the context of a tournament.
(plural) the area between and delimited by two sets of defensive walls.

That's the third idea I'm interested in, though it's nearly equivalent to the second. As it happens, the English vocabulary for medieval architecture/warfare is largely borrowed from French, however, that particular word was not, and I'm currently thinking there is just no equivalent word in English. Being quite a specific term, I'm having a hell of a trouble coming up with something better than "the area between the walls". Any idea ? Equendil Talk 13:15, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think the word is lists. --Cam (talk) 13:56, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, here is a diagram of Carcasonne where the space between the enceintes is called the "lists". --Cam (talk) 14:01, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lists is the equivalent of "lices" but that is usually limited to the competition ground for jousting, as in Equendil's second definition. I don't think that's quite right for a part of a castle. According to the French article it could be either "barrier" or "palisade", although a palisade is just a wooden fence, in my mind. Originally this was the bailey part of a motte and bailey castle, but I'm not sure if that term was used for concentric castles. Adam Bishop (talk) 14:09, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I had dismissed that word as having too narrow a usage (tournaments) and for being probably unknown to the vast majority of english speakers (though not being one myself, I'm not quite sure about that), but it's interesting you found it on a diagram of Carcassonne (can't see it from the link though). Would a native speaker recognise that word at all (as something else than the plural of a common list of course) ?

Pragmatically, maybe I should just stick with the French word italicised (and defined on first use), that way there won't be any confusion. How does that sound ? Equendil Talk 14:17, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think a native English speaker would recognize what "lists" meant, unless they happened to know the terminology associated with duels and jousting. Adam Bishop (talk) 18:48, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In writing on specialized subjects, sometimes it's best to use a word that some people don't already know. —Tamfang (talk) 22:29, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This plate uses the word ballium, which I suppose is also not a widely known English word. However, I agree with Tamfang in that it might be entirely appropriate to use a not commonly known word if it exactly matches the original word. This is kind of begging the question how many native readers of French would instantly recognize the word lices - if not too many (as I suspect), using an uncommon but exact word in the translation would be very appropriate. -- Ferkelparade π 22:49, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, that's just the Latin(ish) form of "bailey", which might be more recognizable than "lists". Adam Bishop (talk) 23:57, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fortification is not my specialty, but wouldn't, at least in some cases, "outer ward" describe such an area? Deor (talk) 00:09, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lists is indeed a specialist term used for tournament or jousting enclosures, and would not be appropriate for an architectural term. The English equivalent for use 3 is outer ward, as Deor suggests. See, for example, this plan of Beaumaris Castle. Gwinva (talk) 01:32, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Outer bailey" also shows up as an equivalent on Google (I'm still sticking to bailey!). Adam Bishop (talk) 01:50, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, she was my favorite character on WKRP in Cincinnati. Hubba, hubba! Ward (Leave It to Beaver), on the other hand, not so much. Deor (talk) 22:57, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Overuseismism? Ismism?[edit]

I feel that sometimes or often I hear -ism "overused" to create sort of obscure -isms. So is there a -ism or other term for overusing -ism? (If it exists, I hope it ends in -ismism) chan dler ··· 21:40, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It might be considered a snowclone. —Tamfang (talk) 22:26, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a form of lexical reification. The best neologism I can think of on the spot would probably be "over-ismification" (sorry it doesn't end in "ism"). AnonMoos (talk) 02:08, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We can soon fix that. A person who regularly does this could be an "overismificationist", and he would be said to be promoting the cause of "overismificationism". :) -- JackofOz (talk) 22:40, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Too many letters to use in Scrabble, though. Deor (talk) 22:53, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

'Over-ismification' immediately suggests the Arabic word اِسْم (ism: 'name') and makes me think of some sort of Arabic nominalisation. --ColinFine (talk) 09:49, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

spanish translation (2)[edit]

how do you say hut in spanish? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.198.192.120 (talk) 23:05, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is it easier to say "there are hundreds of online dictionaries out there", or is it easier to say una choza or possibly una cabaña. Tonywalton ^Talk 23:19, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

LOL thanks for the sarcasm!! hey with the online dictionaries you can never tell if its a good translation or not plus wiktionary was silent on the issue mutha fucka —Preceding unsigned comment added by IamGoshathehomosexual (talk • contribs) 19:57, 14 April 2009

So what makes you think the quality of translation is better here. I have witnessed some horrible translations on these pages. Think it through, think it through. Richard Avery (talk) 08:19, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]