Language desk
< February 23	<< Jan \| February \| Mar >>	February 25 >

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.

February 24[edit]

Greek Terminology[edit]

Hi I have a question I came across Sigma Kappa Chi and the at the end __/ but that has a striaght line not slanted at the end I am thinking inverted gamma?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.220.9.61 (talk) 15:09, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If this was on the web, could you please provide a link? -- Flyguy649 ^talk 15:18, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For the sake of clarity, are you saying you saw the Greek letters sigma, kappa and chi followed by a symbol that looked like _| resembling an inverted upper-case gamma? Σ Κ Χ _| 86.176.48.127 (talk) 15:49, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(_-|~33|< 1337? (greek 'leet?) --Polysylabic Pseudonym (talk) 07:25, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vedda language[edit]

I expanded this article, I am not a trainned linguist. I would like some linguitss to take a look at it. Thanks Taprobanus (talk) 15:24, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please post this request at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Languages, which is the appropriate venue for discussing collaboration on language articles. +An gr 15:54, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"A Future Fair for All"[edit]

Isn't the new UK Labour slogan slightly strange? Wouldn't "A Future - Fair for All" or "A Fair Future for All" be better? --Non Zero-sum Ed (talk) 15:59, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"A Future Fair for All" sounds more poetic to my Canadian ears, but I agree your suggestions seem clearer. Or maybe they are proposing that everyone can attend a carnival -- Flyguy649 ^talk 16:23, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If only... :) - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 16:28, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's odd that they'd choose half a quote from a Firesign Theatre album. --LarryMac | Talk 16:26, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict)x2 I think your second suggestion is grammatically what they mean. I would then suggest they went with "a future fair for all" for stylistic reasons, given the commonness of the "* for all" mantra. - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 16:37, 24 February 2010 (UTC) (should be 16:28, sorry.)[reply]

On a further point, it's not new. It was used by Brown in 2003, which is mentioned here along with a point of view on the word choice. - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 19:07, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair can be a post-positive adjective, and Fair for All can be an adjectival phrase. -- Wavelength (talk) 16:56, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

At least they didn't say free for all. :) Woogee (talk) 19:01, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing wrong with the slogan — grammatically. It is on a par with All Creatures Great and Small: the predicative adjective is used when the relative pronoun and the copula (which plus are/is) are left out. Obviously, it might be objected that the sentence is homonymic, should readers be inclined to interpret fair as a noun. In spoken English, the homonymy disappears as sentence stress overrules the differences. Bessel Dekker (talk) 19:11, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that the choice was made, at least in part, for rhythmic reasons—the plain iambic trimeter of "a future fair for all" sounds better than the stumbling "a fair future for all". Deor (talk) 19:13, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Bessel Dekker (talk) 19:55, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Australian national anthem is Advance Australia Fair. -- Wavelength (talk) 19:58, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"A future fair for all" and "A fair future for all" have slightly different meanings, too. The former is talking about a single future that is fair for everyone. The latter could mean that or it could mean a different future for each person that is fair for them. In practice, there isn't much difference between the two, of course. --Tango (talk) 21:57, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cangjie decomposition[edit]

Why does 肉 decompose as OBO rather than BOO? I understand the rule to be, go from the outer to the inner and the top to the bottom, but the B-component is outside (and above) the two O-components, isn't it? Or is the little flick on the top part of the O-element? I would appreciate help. Thanks! --Qu e ntin Smith 19:19, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

肉 is 內 with an extra 人, basically, as far as decomposition is concerned. 內 has the radical 入 (OH) which has the same shape as 人 (O). 內 's Cangjie code is OB as the radical takes precedent. So logically 肉 would be OBO. --Kvasir (talk) 21:43, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

dash, hyphen or space?`[edit]

Resolved

– ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 20:38, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Should the term provincially maintained have a hyphen or ndash between the words in the following sentence? Provincial Highway 3 is a provincially maintained highway in the Canadian province of Ontario.

Cheers - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 20:13, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would use a space. It certainly shouldn't be a dash. A dash is used to separate clauses in a sentence; a hyphen is used to join two words together. --Tango (talk) 20:22, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) No, the usual rule (as given in the Chicago Manual of Style and elsewhere) is that a modifier consisting of an adverb ending in -ly plus a participle requires no punctuation, so "provincially maintained highway" is OK as it stands. Deor (talk) 20:24, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, I figured it may have been the opposite ("-ly" requiring a hyphen), but it's good to know I've been doing the right thing. - ʄɭoʏɗiaɲ ^τ _¢ 20:38, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Non-ly adverbs are a different matter. Most style guides recommend a hyphen in expressions like "best-attested reading" so that the reader doesn't think that best is an adjective modifying attested reading rather than an adverb modifying attested. When the adverb ends in -ly, there's (usually) no chance of misreading, so no need for the hyphen. Deor (talk) 21:16, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a word for an admiral's hat?[edit]

In olden times, admirals wore a distinctive hat, such as the one worn by Lord Nelson in File:HoratioNelson1.jpg.

Is there a word for this kind of hat, besides "admiral's hat"?

Thanks, --ESP (talk) 23:36, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that particular hat is a bicorne (or perhaps a tricorne), though its use was not limited to admirals or navy personnel. If not, there is a list of hats where one might find a more accurate or specific term, though the descriptions there are rather meagre. Intelligentsium 23:47, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cocked hat [1] is the term you're looking for. A name probably used to good effect in a Carry On Film. Alansplodge (talk) 09:36, 25 February 2010 (UTC) I found this picture of King George VI wearing one in 1937[2]. Alansplodge (talk) 11:17, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks all! Bicorne and "Cocked Hat" seem right on the money! --24.203.218.162 (talk) 16:17, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]