Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2019 December 8
Language desk | ||
---|---|---|
< December 7 | << Nov | December | Jan >> | December 9 > |
Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives |
---|
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages. |
December 8
[edit]In this sentence, "convert" vs. "converting"
[edit]Original (source):
- "Try this one instead of convert enum to int:"
Shouldn't it be the following?
- "Try this one instead of converting enum to int"
What would be the argument for the correct version? And perhaps conversely, why is the other wrong? --Mortense (talk) 17:01, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- Yes, the second is correct. I'm not sure that there's any simple and easy explanation as to "why", other than that construction in English takes the gerund, not the infinitive. In some contexts they're somewhat interchangeable ("Falling off a log is easy" / "To fall off a log is easy"), but in other contexts only one or the other can grammatically occur... AnonMoos (talk) 17:58, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- Could be referring to a function named "convert enum to int". Jmar67 (talk) 06:51, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- Doubtful. Bad grammar seems much more likely. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:36, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- User:AnonMoos is correct. "Try this one instead of converting enum to int" is correct grammar. JIP | Talk 10:03, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- I think AnonMoos and Jmar67 both have part of the truth here. It does seem to be discussing functions in a program. It seems to me that what was really meant was "Try this one instead. Convert enum to int." I think the author got two or more different phrasings of what they were trying to say confused and wound up typing a mishmash. --Khajidha (talk) 14:12, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- Here is the context. This is a thread concerning conversion of enum to int. The answer cited by the OP is somewhat down into the thread. Now clear to me that it should be "converting". The poster of the answer is likely not a native speaker, judging from his name. Jmar67 (talk) 05:02, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- I think AnonMoos and Jmar67 both have part of the truth here. It does seem to be discussing functions in a program. It seems to me that what was really meant was "Try this one instead. Convert enum to int." I think the author got two or more different phrasings of what they were trying to say confused and wound up typing a mishmash. --Khajidha (talk) 14:12, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- User:AnonMoos is correct. "Try this one instead of converting enum to int" is correct grammar. JIP | Talk 10:03, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- Doubtful. Bad grammar seems much more likely. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:36, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- Could be referring to a function named "convert enum to int". Jmar67 (talk) 06:51, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- Yes, the second is correct. I'm not sure that there's any simple and easy explanation as to "why", other than that construction in English takes the gerund, not the infinitive. In some contexts they're somewhat interchangeable ("Falling off a log is easy" / "To fall off a log is easy"), but in other contexts only one or the other can grammatically occur... AnonMoos (talk) 17:58, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
Italian / Sicilian proverb
[edit]I am looking for an Italian / Sicilian proverb. I can't seem to find anything with Google. The gist of the proverb, in English, is something like this. The proverb discusses how the length of the day (i.e., daylight hours) gradually increases during the month of December. From a certain day to another certain day, the increase is a small step, similar to "the pace of a caterpillar" (or some insect). From a certain day to another certain day, the increase is a little bit of a larger step, similar to "the pace of a dog". From a certain day to another certain day, the increase is even a little larger, similar to "the pace of a man". The "days" that are referenced in the proverb -- I believe -- are Saint Lucy's Day; maybe the "beginning of the month"; Christmas; etc. So, in English, it might go something like this. From the beginning of the month until Saint Lucy's Day, the length of the day increases in a very small increment, like the steps (pace) of a caterpillar. From Saint Lucy's Day until Christmas, the length of the day increases in a somewhat larger increment, like the steps (pace) of a dog. From Christmas until the New Year, the length of the day increases in a somewhat larger increment, like the steps (pace) of a man. That's the gist of it. I am pretty sure that the terms passu del cane (pace of the dog) and passu del uomo (pace of the man) are contained in the proverb. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 20:29, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- As in English ("At New Year's tide, the days lengthen a cock's stride", "Days lengthen a cock's stride each day after Christmas" etc.), there are several versions in Italian, such as "Da Santa Lucia a Natale, il dì allunga un passo di cane" or, more specifically to what you asked: "Di la 'Mmaculata a Santa Lucia quantu 'n passu di cucciuvia. Di Santa Lucia a Natali quantu 'n passu di cani. Di Natali all'annu novu quantu 'n passu d'omu" (Sicilian language) = "Tra l'Immacolata e Santa Lucia il tempo è breve come il passo di un'allodola. Da Santa Lucia a Natale è quanto un passo di cane. Natale e l'anno nuovo distano quanto un passo d’uomo" (standard Italian). "Cucciuvia" and "allodola" are types of lark. ---Sluzzelin talk 20:45, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- Yes, that's it! Thanks so much. I had never heard of the English versions that you cited. Also, as I was reading your reply, I was all set to ask you "what do the words cucciuvia and allodola mean?" ... which you had answered, by the end of my reading your reply. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 04:18, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- The proverb is about 4 centuries out of date, since Saint Lucy's Day no longer approximately coincides with the winter solstice after the Gregorian calendar reform... AnonMoos (talk) 23:09, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
- Whether Julian or Gregorian, the length of the day does not increase every day in the Northern Hemisphere starting from the beginning of December (it decreases). The length of the day starts to increase around winter solstice (+/- one day, depending at the exact hour winter solstice happens), approximately 21st December Gregorian.
- However, the time of the earliest sunset is about 7 days before winter solstice (and time of latest sunrise is about 7 days after winter solstice). Could it be about sunset (more noticable), not the day length? --Mortense (talk) 00:45, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
- That would require knowledge of the analemma. It might not be obvious that solar noons aren't spaced 24 hours apart. 31.45.226.6 (talk) 16:28, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- Mortense's description is correct in terms of the way we measure times of day nowadays, but if there is such a proverb, it might be older than our way of doing things. (As an example of another way, in ancient Rome an hour was 1/12 of the length of time from sunrise until sunset that day.) However, I can't think of any way that it could make sense to describe the days as getting longer in early December in the Northern Hemisphere. On the other hand, proverbs don't have to make sense: consider "Lightning never strikes twice in the same place." --142.112.159.101 (talk) 00:29, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- This article (Saint Lucy's Day) says: Her feast once coincided with the Winter Solstice, the shortest day of the year before calendar reforms, so her feast day has become a Christian festival of light. So, if Saint Lucy's Day coincided with the Winter Solstice (at some earlier point in time, many years ago), the proverb would make sense ... right? Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 05:57, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, all. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 18:45, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
Swedish IPA
[edit]Can someone tell me how to transcribe Amanda Kernell according to our Swedish IPA key? FWIW here's her own pronunciation, though not enunciated. I presume it's something like [a¹manːda ²ɕæːɳɛlː] but I'm not sure. Nardog (talk) 22:31, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
@Ardalazzagal, Jeppiz, Lundgren8, and Peter Isotalo: Perhaps can any of you help? Nardog (talk) 15:29, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- Almost correct. The vowel is short in the surname and the stress is on the second syllable [ɕæˈɲɛlː] (or [ɕæ¹ɲɛlː] which is apparently used in the IPA key on Wikipedia). The name Amanda is accent 2 in Central Swedish but can be accent 1 in Southern Sweden and I believe also in Northern Sweden where she’s from. It sounds to me like she’s saying Amanda with accent 2 in the clip, but it’s a bit hard to hear. --Lundgren8 (t · c) 16:10, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Lundgren8: Thank you!! Incidentally, the symbols for the accents were unilaterally changed today. Your input would be appreciated at Help talk:IPA/Swedish#stress on monosyllabic names. Nardog (talk) 17:44, 11 December 2019 (UTC)