Language desk
< June 20	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 22 >

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 21

Must be the season of the which we spoke earlier

“

... to rest his deadly rifle when it wasn't seeking gore
The which it must have often been, for Major Percy Brown....

”

— Robert W. Service, The Ballad of the Ice-Worm Cocktail

What is this the which? Is it any different from just plain which? For example, is it more likely to have as referent a state of affairs than a concrete object? Is there anyone here who uses it productively, and can report intuitions about it? --Trovatore (talk) 08:56, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My immediate sense is that the "The" helps the rhythm of the words. Take it out and read it out, and see if you don't fail not to disagree with me. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 09:04, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) I found the passage easier to understand in the context of the whole poem - see here. I have no particular source or anything, but my gut feeling is that Mr Service is just adding the extra word to better fit the rhythm. Simply 'which' would make better sense, or maybe 'the likes of which' - not so good, but better than 'the which'. I'm guessing that he just really needed a one-syllable word that wouldn't really upset the meaning too drastically, sucked on the end of his pen for about 30 seconds, got bored, stuck 'The' in there and got back to work. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 09:09, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's simply an archaism. e.g. Acts 20:28 (KJV): "Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers." --Viennese Waltz 09:13, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Probably calqued on French lequel. Itsmejudith (talk) 09:14, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that actually leads into a subordinate point I'm interested in. In Italian you say il quale in pretty much exactly the way you might use lequel in French. But there's also il che, which I think is for abstract situations rather than concrete objects: Gianni promise di arrivare in anticipo, il che fece fedelmente. When we covered il che in class, I thought of it as basically an exact translation of "the which". But both are used so rarely that I can hardly be sure.

I note by the way that, later in the same poem, Service uses it for a concrete object, which casts doubt on my hypothesis:

Then deeply in a drawer he sought, and there he found a jar

The which with due and proper pride he put upon the bar

So maybe it's all nonsense. But if anyone has any more precise information, I'd love to hear it. --Trovatore (talk) 21:33, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can but offer another immediate subjective impression, namely, that the reason is exactly the same as I suggested for the first excerpt. But as well as that, we now have the principle of parallel construction. As you know, poems exist primarily as spoken rather than read texts, and it is the sound of the poem and its impact on the listener - rather than the look of it and its impact on the reader - that's the important thing. Had Service NOT used "the" in the second example, a keen-eared listener with a reasonable memory would have noticed the mismatch, and that would have derailed their attention (if only momentarily), and that would have been fatal (if only momentarily). -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 21:47, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And no thoughts on il che? --Trovatore (talk) 19:07, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My knowledge of Italian does not extend to such things. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 01:28, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

because Jesus

The website Wonkette often gleefully adopts and recycles language associated with the political and social groups it ridicules, and so for example it goes from this to "Glenn Beck says Obama’s not a Muslin but a perverted-Christian whatever". One frequently occurring formula is because + noun phrase, e.g. "Exodus International, an organization founded to “help” LGBT people not be gay anymore because Jesus, will now cease to exist" (my emphasis). In my own idiolect, because doesn't license a noun phrase (or determiner phrase, if you prefer). And I don't think I've ever heard an example of because+NP, or read one outside Wonkette. Is it just a Wonkette invention, or is it part of some real-world US lect? -- Hoary (talk) 13:52, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen this as a recent piece of online slang in a number of places, especially in a generic form - "because reasons", meaning 'for reasons that are either poorly-explained or insufficient'. I don't think it's part of any established spoken dialect. AlexTiefling (talk) 13:55, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I concur with Alex. It occurs mostly in blogs and fora, although I've now begun to see it in science fiction fanzines as well. I've never encountered it in spoken English, and am not sure it would work in that format. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:14, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard and used it in spoken English, and never thought of it being strange until reading this. The most common form in my social group (native English speakers living in China) is "because China", meaning "because of some aspect of Chinese culture / politics / society which is completely different from the West"; the implication is almost always negative. It's definitely a recent thing - perhaps native English-speakers abroad are more likely to adopt internet slang into spoken English because most of our English interaction is online? 111.192.158.166 (talk) 05:01, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See http://www.onelook.com/?w=because+of&ls=a.

—Wavelength (talk) 16:19, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For me it comes across as flustered, at a loss for words ("I did it because...because....because something!"). I wonder if that's where it came from, to mock the thing being described (in your example it's probably being used to make Exodus International sound as stupid as I imagine it is). 108.207.118.57 (talk) 23:17, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It reminds me a little of the Italian response perché sí to the question perché?. Doesn't work as well in English ("Why? Because yes."), but you get the idea. --Trovatore (talk) 00:40, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree in part with 108. I've usually seen in used mockingly, to say the target of the mocking is unable to come up with any legitimate response (except maybe emotional nonsense or repeating what's already been said), often when a belief has no standing and they're trying desperately to hold onto what they believe. Lsfreak (talk) 06:08, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A variant often seen on cracked.com: "because fuck you," i.e. because they can get away with it (they don't got to show you no stinkin badges). —Tamfang (talk) 20:00, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, all. -- Hoary (talk) 14:20, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would use because + noun in shorthand text messages, where I don't bother with grammar: "Not coming to work today because sickness. Hope to be better tomorrow. Any urgent problem, call mobile." --Lgriot (talk) 10:21, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You couldn't write "because sick"? —Tamfang (talk) 00:18, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is 'Hannibal Lecter' actually a plausible Lithuanian name?

Question as topic. Just having a discussion with someone about the Hannibal quadrilogy and the new TV series today and this subject came up. Thanks. --91.125.145.38 (talk) 23:06, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the surname was created out of whole cloth by Thomas Harris. There are only three people in either the U.S. or Canada with the surname Lecter in the public White Pages, which would make it an exceedingly rare surname. I have no idea what ethnicity they are (prior to being Canadian), but the name is rare enough that it seems likely that Harris just invented it for his books rather than took it from any name he knew. --Jayron32 01:07, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lector and Lektor are rare, but exist, and would parallel last names such as Priest, Proctor and Cantor. There are both Catholic and Jewish Lithuanians, so a name with such a religious origin would be possible. But there's nothing about Lecter that makes it plausibly Lithuanian except as a misspelling of the terms in -or. μηδείς (talk) 01:34, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That mispelling would be possible in English, but not Lithuanian, first of all because "c" would never be substituted for "k", and also because the "er" doesn't sound anything like "or", unlike in English. Much more plausible is that it is the Lithuanianized or Polonized spelling of the German surname "Letzter" (the last guy). Plenty of people with German surnames in Lithuania and Poland adapted to the local spelling, like Szulc, Fryc, Szwarc, Buc etc. It's entirely plausible that the name "Lecter" could be a Lithuanian name. Whether it actually occurs is a different matter. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 02:06, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It may be infinitesimally plausible that Letzter has been borrowed into Lithuanian as Lecter. There is no chance that it is native Lithuanian. You might as well call it plausible Cymro-Lithoanian for that. μηδείς (talk) 02:47, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Let me just consult my Welsh-Lithuanian Dictionary that's been gathering dust on my shelves for the past 40 years. I always knew that $500 wouldn't be a wasted investment. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 02:51, 22 June 2013 (UTC) [reply]

A very large portion of ethnic Lithuanians do not have native Lithuanian names [[1]]. Polish names are very common, and German names common enough. Welsh names, on the other hand, are not. A Lithuanian with a German last name is very plausible. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 02:55, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When I said it was not a Lithuanian name, I didn't find it necessary to say some Lithuanians don't have non-Lithuanian names. I have Ruthenian great-grandparents with Russified German and Hungarian names. I am sure you are aware that final -er in Germanic is either a root-internal inheritance from PIE (English star, far) or an ending developed through rhotacism after Germanic separated from Baltic. In either case, Lecter itself could not be Lithuanian, although, as you point out, if a Welshman with the name were to move to Lithuania there would be a Lithuanian with the name. The OP can let me know if anything I have said needs further qualifying. μηδείς (talk) 03:25, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not just "some" Lituanians. A LOT of ETHNIC Lithuanians, perhaps most, bear surnames that originate from Polish or German. Lithuanian was a minority language in Lithuania at the time surnames became fashionable. This was definitely most in the Vilnius area, where the Lecter estate was said to be. A Welshman moving to Poland is not an ethnic Lithuanian. All in all, by far the most plausible explanation of the surname Lecter in someone living in Lithuania is a Lithuanized/Polonized spelling of the German surname Letzter, all the more so as the surname occurs in Poland. Lektor is not a possible source. By the way, my maternal grandmothers name was Radziwiłł, a Polonized genuine Lithuanian name.

Now, the big question is how the Lecter estate could have been in Lithuania at all during the interwar period if it was "just outside Vilnius". That would have been in Poland at the time, and the population of that area was overwhelmingly Polish, and Lithuanians were a tiny minority. [[2]]. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 03:45, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

the big question is how the Lecter estate could have been in Lithuania at all during the interwar period if it was "just outside Vilnius" - "geographic" Lithuania? (I don't keep up with the series so I'm not sure if that's plausible) Volunteer Marek 05:00, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If one wants, one can reread me; I haven't said there's no name Letzter or that in Lithuanian spelling that could not very nicely be rendered Lecter. Believe me, I am all for Lithuanian pride, I know all about the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth and know plenty of people named Litwak, Maceikis, and so forth. What I have done is try to answer the OP's question, could such a name plausibly be Lithuanian, to which the answer is, no. It could be a transliteration of German, as you say, into Lithuanian itself, or it could be a misspelling, I said, of lector/lektor in English. I hope that is clear. μηδείς (talk) 04:40, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Allright, thanks. What about 'Hannibal' as a first name though? Are there people in Lithuania with that name? As far as I can remember, Hannibal Lecter is supposed to have been born into the Lithuanian aristocracy. And that is his real name - because there's reference in the books to his father 'Count Lecter' and to 'Castle Lecter'. I don't know if Thomas Harris knew what Hannibal's ethnic background was when he first created the character though. Lecter was actually quite a minor character in the Red Dragon book. --91.125.145.38 (talk) 21:01, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hannibal is not the spelling used in either Latvian or Lithuanian. But as a surname it's rather pan-European. The moveі to America is the complication. For example, I know a Hanna Fricki (Ганна фріцки) whose American name was Anna Fritsky. Do the books actually give a Lithuanian origin? I read from Red Dragon (before SotL) through Hannibal, but don't remember that, and always assumed it was an anagram. μηδείς (talk) 22:33, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

His mother, Simonetta Sforza, was italian, from a very ancient bloodline. She (and Hannibal as wells) descend from both the Visconti and Sforza families in Milano. It is very possible she named him Hannibal after Hannibal of Carthage. Why not? —AndresGuazzelli (talk · contribs) added this paragraph today and bizarrely placed it so that Medeis appeared to be responding to him. I restored Medeis's original indentation. —Tamfang (talk) 00:16, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, in Lithuanian Wikipedia the character's name is translated as lt:Hanibalas Lekteris. lt:Hanibalas is the Lithuanian form of Hannibal; as can be seen, grammatical endings have been added to allow the name to be declined. Double sharp (talk) 09:10, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]