Language desk
< April 16	<< Mar \| April \| May >>	April 18 >

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 17[edit]

Is There A Word For Stories That Are Different But Have A Simlier Thing?[edit]

I have a thing for elements, so all my stories deal with elemental things. Like, one story talks about elelemental wolves, another is elemental crystals, & more. I want to know if there's a word that will go to it. Like there are books that have series, (ex: The Earth Series). Like a title for my group of stories, but have a smaller title, (ex: The Earht Series: The Birds). Well, something like that. If you can't answer my question, I understand. I'm confusing. Thanks for your help anyways! =D —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.88.1.253 (talk) 02:00, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think you mean stories that contain a similar object. This is somewhat related to the work of Vladimir Propp, who wrote the classic study Morphology of the Folk Tale, which tried to find the common structures of different stories. Some of these structures he identified involved objects in a similar way to how I think you mean, although I do not think there is a word for them. See also narrative structure or plot. 78.146.249.32 (talk) 12:13, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you mean by "elemental." How are the wolves and crystals different from plain old wolves and crystals? My guess is that you want a series title like "The Archetype Series," but I think you need to make yourself clearer. Deor (talk) 02:59, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See Aarne-Thompson classification system. -- Wavelength (talk) 03:06, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See Morphology (folkloristics). -- Wavelength (talk) 03:08, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Motif (narrative) says: "In a narrative, such as a novel or a film, motifs (pronunciation) are recurring structures, contrasts, or literary devices that can help to develop and inform the piece’s major themes." -- Wavelength (talk) 03:17, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Beanz meanz Heinz[edit]

In this advertising slogan, are these three words meant to rhyme in British English? Rmhermen (talk) 03:10, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's just an ?amusing repetitive use of the letter 'Z' Richard Avery (talk) 06:37, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are also different types of rhymes. The slogan lies somewhere between a half rhyme and an eye rhyme. ---Sluzzelin talk 07:19, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Which article (eye rhyme) may be an example of itself. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 17:08, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Years ago I commonly heard "Heinz Beans" pronounced "Heenz Beans" (as "Heinz" would be in German, were it spelt "Hienz"); whether the mispronunciation of the name came from a misapplication of the slogan, or whether the slogan came from a then-common mispronunciation of the name, I couldn't say. Tonywalton ^Talk 09:10, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, the three words have the advantage they're similar in syllabic length (I mean in the words themselves) and hence the rhythm works. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 14:20, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My mother always assumed that Formula One drivers sponsored baked beans. She still called him Beans up until he retired from F1. Vimescarrot (talk) 14:24, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How are "Heinz"'s last two consonants pronounced in English, by the way? "-nz" as in "loins", "-ndz" as in "friends", "-ns" as in "rinse", or "-nts" (the way it is pronounced in German)? ---Sluzzelin talk 07:03, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say it's phonologically /nz/ as in "loins", but phonetically, and depending on dialect, there may be a short [d] sound between the [n] and the [z] (which is true of "loins" and other words in /nz/, too). —An gr 07:56, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It (unsurprisingly) rhymes with the -ns from "beans" and "means". Bazza (talk) 14:13, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There was a series of TV ads about 20 years ago, featuring Robert Morley, who used what sounded like the German pronunciation, with the "-nts" ending. It sounded odd to Australian ears, which are used to hearing (and the mouths of their owners speaking) the "-nz" ending. The name Heinz has become anglicised into Hines. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:59, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Say what?[edit]

Can somebody come up with a more understandable section title than "Contemporary vitae" in Pierre Terrail, seigneur de Bayard? Clarityfiend (talk) 08:30, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Contemporary biographies? —An gr 08:38, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How about "Contemporary accounts"? (The stuff about his appearance in modern novels doesn't belong in the section, though.) Deor (talk) 13:12, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not all contemporary (unless he lived into the 1800s), so I think the best solution is to stick most of it into a Bibliography section and the novels elsewhere. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:42, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IPA transcription of centralised Scottish short I?[edit]

Hello there, everyone:

I've noticed that in many Scottish dialects, the short i, /ɪ/ in GAm or RP, is not pronounced as such, but as what appears to me to be a more centralised vowel. Does anyone know how to transcribe it? If necessary, I can try to find a recording in which it appears.

All the best

--134.151.34.100 (talk) 12:54, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are a variety of ways of transcribing the near-close central unrounded vowel, which has no dedicated IPA symbol of its own. Your primary choices are [ɪ̈] and [ɨ̞]. See the article for details. —An gr 13:17, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot! I always felt that it was somewhat like ɘ but closer. I've been wondering about it for quite some while, so thanks again. --134.151.34.100 (talk) 14:14, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Choosing e-mail subject lines[edit]

What are some useful guidelines for choosing e-mail subject lines? -- Wavelength (talk) 16:29, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe this and this are useful. Pallida Mors 17:50, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I found them both to be very useful. I especially appreciate this recommendation mentioned on the first linked page: "Make the first word an important, information-carrying one." Some of the e-mail subject lines which I have previously chosen could have been improved by a rearrangement of the words. -- Wavelength (talk) 20:09, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Choosing section headings on Wikipedia talk pages and on Wikipedia Reference Desk pages[edit]

What are some useful guidelines for choosing section headings on Wikipedia talk pages and on Wikipedia Reference Desk pages?
-- Wavelength (talk) 16:30, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is Wikipedia:Talk_page_guidelines#New_topics_and_headings_on_talk_pages what you want? Zain Ebrahim (talk) 17:54, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I appreciate the following point: "It should be clear from the heading which aspect of the article you wish to discuss." Is there a set of guidelines specifically for section headings on Wikipedia Reference Desk pages (which, I acknowledge, might be considered to be a subset of Wikipedia talk pages)? -- Wavelength (talk) 20:24, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Section headers on the desks are determined by the questioners and they are advised to choose meaningful titles (see the header at the top). Are you referring to the practice of editting the section headers after the questioner has posted? Zain Ebrahim (talk) 21:19, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I checked there after I read your last response and saw the advice to "write a few words that briefly tell the volunteers the subject of the question". I was referring to the choices made by the original posters (the questioners), but I am indeed uncertain about the practice which you mentioned. -- Wavelength (talk) 22:03, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's generally frowned upon to change any part of another editor's post, but when it comes to headers, if the OP just writes "Question" (which happens all too often), there should be carte blanche for any other editor to convert it into something meaningful. After all, on the Ref Desks particularly, all original posts are questions; that's what we're here for - to answer questions. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:26, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]