April 1[edit]

== question ==does anybody know the website that i can go to find the kanji/chinese symbols? iam looking for the symbols meaning luckygirl in kanji. thank you

what is the actual,pronunciation of the word " Rabbi", I know it's "Rabaee" but my friend says it's Ribbi.Can u help me eith the correct spelling

In English, everyone says rab-buy. I imagine it might well be pronounced otherwise in other languages, but that's as correct as English gets. --Diderot 10:50, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See also Rebbe. --Lph 12:46, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Rabbi article points out that the modern Hebrew pronunciation is "Rah-bee." -- Mwalcoff 00:49, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As you can see, there is no single right answer to this question. The original Semitic pronunciation is /ˈrɑb.bi/. The Ashkanazi pronunciation, which has become a somewhat separate word, is /ˈrɛ.bɛj/ or /ˈrɛ.bə/. In English, the pronunciation has also become assimilated as /ˈɹa.baɪ/. — Gareth Hughes 12:29, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, the English pronounciation is /ˈɹæ.baɪ/. Or at least in American speech. Linguofreak 15:57, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In any case, it's certainly not "Ribbi"!Loomis51 19:48, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Meaning of word[edit]

What is the meaning of the word fallacious??

Our article Logical fallacy seems to cover the subject pretty well. If your just looking for a generic defenition, try clicking this link. schyler 13:39, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure why you don't just look in a dictionary. In any case, the above explanation is way too complicated. Put simply, the definition of the word "fallacious" is very similar to the definition of the word "false". The difference being, while the word "false" is used in the case of an alleged fact, the word "fallacious" is used in the case of an allegedly logical argument.Loomis51 02:33, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'Know of' versus 'Know'[edit]

I: I know Joseph Henry. He was the first major physical scientist of the United States.

Jack: It is incorrect to say "know." You must say "know of" or "know about" Joseph Henry because you've never known him personally or met him.

I: You are technically right, but in an informal conversation it is okay to omit the of or about after know.

Jack: No, you must always say of or about after know if you've never met or personally known someone.

According to American English, who is right?

Patchouli 23:16, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say you are, and Jack is being pedantic. Angr (talk • contribs) 23:22, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, "do you know?" can mean "have you heard of?". Jameswilson 23:41, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's interesting to me as an English person. In English English Jack would be right. If I were to say "I know Joseph Henry", anyone who'd heard of him would assume I was mad or joking; "how can you know Joseph Henry? He died a hundred years before you were born.". --Hughcharlesparker 17:06, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In American English (the only language I speak) saying you know someone means you know that person personally, but people would likely know what you meant by the context. Another words, there is no rule that you must speak with perfect clarity and grammatical correctness, but in American english, it is still (or also) the norm to only say you know someone if you know them personally. You mustn't always speak correctly but--yes, even in an informal conversation, you may cause confusion if you ignore normally understood convention. --Fuhghettaboutit 18:23, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It seems thers no agreement here. It cant be a UK/US difference though cos we have people on both sides of the Atlantic arguing either way. Hugh, surely you have been asked "Do you know (not very well-known actor's name)?" and answered "Yes". Jameswilson 23:13, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, in the form of a question it is different because the context is much clearer. If I say do you know John/Mary? I must be speaking of someone local so I am asking (correctly) about your personal "knowing" or not personal knowing; if I say do you know George Bush, it's still incorrect in formal convention, but it's obvious that I am ellipsing the "of" because everyone knows of him, and the question is going to be rhetorical unless you're someone who might actually know him. By contrast, when making a declaratory statement that you know someone, the context is much less clear, so the error is more glaring. In fact, if someone asks you whether you know someone and the situation is ambiguous (you might or might not personally know the person), a standard response is to indicate whether the knowing is personal in nature or not by inserting or not inserting "of." --Fuhghettaboutit 17:02, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I agree its ambiguous. Jameswilson 22:46, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

James: Nope. I can't guarantee that this is true for everyone in England - the language varies quite a lot throughout the country - but I've never been asked that in that way. If someone wanted to ask me that, they'd ask "have you heard of...", or "Do you know who ... is" or, if something specific had happened, "have you heard about...". I'm pretty sure that the form you're using is an American one. I'll now wait for you to tell me you're from Bolton :) --Hughcharlesparker 22:34, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Somerset actually! Jameswilson 22:46, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that would explain it :) Joking aside, it really would - that must be a regional difference I'm not aware of. As a matter of curiosity, how broad is your accent? --Hughcharlesparker 15:46, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not very. You'd know I was from the West Country, I'm sure, but not real Zummerzet. Jameswilson 23:46, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalization of Title Words[edit]

Was I supposed to capitalize the word "versus" in the title of the previous question? If so, why?Patchouli 23:21, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming you're asking for the sake of clarity, I'd say no; but you might have put the expressions in question in quotation marks or italics. We have a decent article on Capitalization. --Halcatalyst 22:52, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I used single quotation marks because it the "know of" and "know" are part of a title. Let me know if I was wrong.--Patchouli 23:26, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Single quotes (i.e. ' ' ) are used in the UK. Double quotes (i.e. " " ) are used in the US. Otherwise, there is no difference. For quotations embedded in other quotations, the opposite quotes are used (e.g. ' " " ' in UK and " ' ' " in US). As for your question, you could have also used italics, but excessive use of italics can be annoying to read, even though English grammar books consider them the only correct choice for this situation.--El aprendelenguas 00:00, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know that in the United States double quotations are used, but I think I remember a headline in the Los Angeles Times where one word had single quotation marks around it — it was not a quote within a quote. Patchouli 01:01, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A glance at some US newspapers confirms that single quotes may be the preferred style in some of their headlines (perhaps because they take up less space?), even though double quotes are standard in the body text. --Lph 12:35, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

April 2[edit]

Alternative name of Poland[edit]

In Hungarian, Lithuanian and Turkish, Poland is "Lengyelország", "Lenkija" and "Lehistan". Which seem to have something to do with eachother, but nothing to do with "Polska". So who were these "Lendyel" or "Lenki" or "Lehi" people? What's the origin of the term? --BluePlatypus 00:39, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lechia is alternative name of Poland, like Albion is for England. Eivind ^t ^@^c 00:52, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's seems it came from the Lędzianie tribe, all info on them on the net seems to be in Polish. --Eivind ^t ^@^c 01:06, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thanks. Unusual/archaic country names are fun; At least the Poles have the honor of being one of only three out of eight countries on the Baltic for which the Finnish name is the same name as most others. :) (Finland itself not being one of them) --BluePlatypus 01:26, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that must be why the football team is called Lech Poznan. Jameswilson 03:16, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And this guy, Lech Wałęsa. --DLL 16:53, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Takamine[edit]

The guitar brand "Takamine" is Japanese. What does the word "Takamine" mean in Japanese? -(Nait)

It looks like a family name meaning high ridge or high peak, according to Babelfish. Isopropyl 05:49, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Translation[edit]

Possibly not the right place for this, but I did my first real attempt at translation the other day, at Abdourahman Waberi. Did I get anything wrong? La version Francais as un interwiki sur l'article. Merci beaucoup. Proto||type 04:54, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My French is not very good but the one thing that looks like it might be an error to me is translating "il est admirateur déclaré du Somalien Nuruddin Farah, auquel il a consacré une thèse" as saying Waberi's thesis was based on Nuruddin Farah; are you sure it shouldn't say it was dedicated to Nuruddin Farah? Aside from that, you might expand the article a little more; the French version mentions a few things you left out. Also, you don't need to link "Paris" and "Serpent à plumes" so many times (the fr version shouldn't have done that either), and you might check for English translations of the books and update the list with them. Phr 05:59, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, thanks. I'll look into that.

That was me. Silly Proto. Proto||type 07:03, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

aide[edit]

je le langage de ma machine

That sentence doesn't have a verb. You what the language of your machine? Angr (talk • contribs) 12:10, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Litterally translated: "I the language of my machine"....don't ask me what it's supposed to mean though...Loomis51 19:51, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Magazine Dilemma[edit]

What is the professional name for the part of the magazine with the featured article in it? Thnx82.148.107.250 20:57, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

-Yo, which magazine are you talking about?

Not any magazine in particular, just in general. I know this is not "supplement", nor "addendum", nor "appendix" ...etc. but I can not find the right word. Need professional expresion.82.148.108.96 18:04, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gold Prospectors Magazine has a professional look with wording that you touched on − FEATURES − DEPARTMENTS − COLUMNS − THE GREAT OUTDOORS (subtitle) - Athrash | ^Talk 05:55, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't help but thank you anyway. Take care 86.62.198.189 21:52, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Names of letters of the Persian Alphabet[edit]

I'd appreciate a list of the names of the letters of the Persian alphabet, along with English transliteration, and with diacritics (Harakat?), if possible.

The current article doesn't help much, and omniglot is problematic:
It says that the letter ا is called الف, and tranliterates it as alef. So far so good. ب is به be. shouldn't it be "beh"? Moving on to پ, pe په, and to ت te ته. And here we reach ث se - but the name of the letter is just ث ("s"), and not ثه ("seh"). Is it intentional? Am I missing something?
And ج is called jim, but writes ججی ("je"). Too much wierd stuff.

It would realy help me if someone gave me a hand with those letter names. conio.h • talk 20:59, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You really need to find a Persian speaker to go over the alphabet with you because many of those letters have quite a bit of subtlety in their pronounciation that you can't get by simply reading unless you have a firm command of the IPA, which still can only get you 90% of the way. In general though, 'be' and the like have an e like 'whey', the 'jim' is like 'jeem' and the bit about the ث wasn't intentional. -LambaJan 03:50, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The names of the letters are as follows: alef, be, pe, te, se, jiim, chiim, he hotii, khe, daal, zaal, re, ze, zhe, siin, shiin, saad, zaad, taa, zaa, 'ain, ghain, fe, ghaaf, kaaf, gaaf, laam, miim, nuun, vaav, he havaz, ye.

I hope this helps you. CCLemon 05:51, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What I realy need is the way they're written in Persian. I put what I got into the following tables. For the letters ج,‎ چ and ش I see two option - the one you wrote, and the ones from ominglot. she sounds to me like an error, but djeh and cheh sound to me "more Persian", while djiim and chiim sound "more Arabic". The empty ones (ح,‎ ه and ي) are the ones I'm realy not sure what to do with. Could you fix any errors I have, and fill in the missing letters? conio.h • talk 21:49, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

tables[edit]

Persian letter	ا	ب	پ	ت	ث	ج		چ		ح	خ	د	ذ	ر	ز	ژ
Persian name	الف	به	په	ته	ثه	جه	جيم	چه	چيم		خه	دال	ذال	ره	زه	ژه
Romanized	alef	beh	peh	teh	seh	djeh	djiim	cheh	chiim	heh	kheh	daal	zaal	reh	zeh	zheh (jeh)

Persian letter	س	ش		ص	ض	ط	ظ	ع	غ	ف	ق	ك	گ	ل	م	ن	و	ه	ي
Persian name	سين	شين	شی	صاد	ضاد	طا	ظا	عين	غين	فه	قاف	كاف	گاف	لام	ميم	نون	واو
Romanized	siin	shiin	she	saad	zaad	taa	zaa	'ain	ghain	feh	qaaf	kaaf	gaaf	laam	miim	nuun	vav (veh)	heh	yeh

continued[edit]

I'm not being too picky on this, but the transliterations look fine to me. beh and be arent really that different as long as the correct "e" is pronounced (as in fret, met, or pet, but the e sound is slightly more stretched, like in peeeet). So it's OK as far as Im concerned.--Zereshk 01:04, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Also, I just noticed that I wrote the Arab letter ك, instead of the Persian ک. :) conio.h • talk 10:46, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good deed.--Zereshk 18:25, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Translation from Arabic[edit]

Could someone please help me by translating the Arabic portions of this song in English. It will be appreciated. Thanks! deeptrivia (talk) 23:32, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll do it tomorrow, and I'm leaving this notice now so that if someone else is working on it they can tell me and save me an hour. Otherwise I look forward to a fun little exercise. -LambaJan 04:10, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that will be great! Thanks :) deeptrivia (talk) 12:58, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You know... I went through my dictionary, which I'm generally quite capable of doing, and I wasn't able to find many of the words. Sorry, I guess I can't actually help you. -LambaJan 03:36, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is one big complain about the world and everything in it. It says that there is nothing good left, the hope is gone, sweetness, blessing too ... even from human's heart. What is left is all troubles, sorrows, envy, etc. The brave ones turned into cowards, "they're cutting into human's flesh, they're drinking of brother's blood, no life no fear" and the world turned into devil's property .... And so on and on ... //// Is this good enough or you need real translation? Take care.82.148.108.96 18:29, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you could do it line by line, that would be awesome! deeptrivia (talk) 02:53, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

totally unhelpful, but i love that effing song. haha.Dlayiga 06:11, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Russian Letters[edit]

In the article Russian Alphabet, for the letters Ъ and Ь, it has a - for the english example. In a chart I found searching google it has ' for Ь and " for Ъ. What do these letters sound like in the Roman Alphabet? schyler 23:44, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

one can't say how they "sound"...try to read yer patiently :P...--K.C. Tang 00:19, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They don't have a sound, they modify the sound of the previous consonant. From hard to soft, and vice versa. Eivind ^t ^@^c 01:04, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And if you get hungry, you'll always have a znak to eat. --BluePlatypus 13:35, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the Ъ has fallen into disuse in Russian. As for the Ь, it is used at the end of a word to alter its pronunciation. It is most common (but not exclusively) used to signify the infinitive form of a verb. For example "3HAT" would be pronounced "Znat". However, "3HATЬ" would be pronounced "Znaitz" and is the equivalent of the English infinitive "to know". Loomis51 20:12, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ъ is not entirely in disuse. There's simply few words that use that character, but it is still mandatory to use it in those words. As far as your attempt to explain how to pronounce "3HATЬ", I think it's more confusing than useful. Perhaps if you read "Znaitz" in Polish or something it might be close. If you read it like an English speaker would it sounds nothing like what it should. There's no easy way to explain how to pronounce it without using IPA. --Ornil 23:16, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

April 3[edit]

Why does "refractory" mean "unruly; hard to treat/cure"?[edit]

"Refractory" etymologically means "breaking up," which is seemingly unrelated to its current senses "(of a person) unruly; (of a disease) hard to treat/cure." Why so? Could somebody help? T. Y. --163.14.180.18 02:32, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To refract means to bend. If you bend certain objects, then they "break up." A person who evades the rules is bending them. In addition, a disease that refracts, then bends by finding a circuitous route to hurt us. Also, light refracts or bends when it travels from air to glass.

--Patchouli 03:29, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure to "refract" means to "bend"? I believe the word you had in mind should have been to "reflect." Sorry, but I still didn't get the answer. T. Y. --163.14.180.18 05:14, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Patchouli is correct. Isopropyl 05:20, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

see if this site helps,cheer.--K.C. Tang 07:05, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, indeed. To "refract" means, ostensibly, to "bend." The Latin root "fract/frag/fring" does mean to "break," whereas "flect/flex" means to "bend." Could these two roots be cognates? Please advise! T. Y. --163.14.180.18 09:53, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You've got the Latin "flectere", "to bend" and "frangere", "to break". The latter is a cognate with "break" (PIE "*bhr(e)g-"). The origin of "flectere" seems to be unknown, though. --BluePlatypus 16:31, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Catchy phrase too catchy[edit]

Hey, does anyone know how to rephrase "as a matter of fact"? I keep using it all the time when I write, and it's quite stuck in my head. --JDitto

Wikipedia:Words to avoid may help you root it out of your head.:)--K.C. Tang 04:36, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! --JDitto

to the contrary, on the contrary, in contrast, instead, rather (may require some rephrasing though), ultimately, in the final analysis... That's all I got off the top of my head. --Diderot 10:46, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about "Actually"? --Hughcharlesparker 12:59, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quite often nothing at all is a good substitution: "As a matter of fact, Sunderland are going down this season" can be shortened to "Sunderland are going down this season" without losing any meaning. Note to Sunderland supporters: I know this isn't actually a matter of fact yet. --Hughcharlesparker 13:00, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

/\_/\ Thanks guys! --JDitto

Help request on an article[edit]

I was working on List of fraternity and sorority mottos, and I think some guidance is in order. The page is baisically a list of mottos (duh) with some in a non-English language followed by its English translation (or, at least, the accepted translation).

First, regarding style: how does it look? Should foreign languages be italicised? I would like some way to differentiate between the mottos and other text. Is there some standard here such as "type the non-English and then the translation between brackets?" It seems like there are a bunch of linguists here who might have some suggestions.

Second, regarding translation: would anyone here be willing to offer a neutral and knowledgeable hand in translating mottos? While I know that no fraternity would like to be told that their motto is poorly translated, I do not think it would be good for an encyclopedia to list phrases as "translations" if they are misleading or a "stretch." Non-english language mottos would most likely be in (ancient?) Greek or Latin, but I'm pretty sure at least one is in Hebrew.

Third, regarding pronounciation: would anyone here be willing to add phonetic (IPA? maybe something a bit more understandable/useful for the lay-folk?) transliterations for the mottos?

Further, any help in creating a more understandable structure for all of the information would be helpful. I'm pretty new to Wikipedia, and I certainly don't know or understand all the useful tips and tricks yet.

Re your second point, I'm quite happy to check out the translations from Greek and Latin, which probably covers most of them. Just tell me exactly how you would like me to go about this. Re your third point, there is no accepted version of how to pronounce words in ancient Greek and Latin. I could certainly indicate how I personally pronounce the words, but others may have been taught differently. As for other languages (eg Hebrew) I can't help much. Maid Marion 11:22, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Manual of Style doesn't actually address the use of italics in this case. Looking at other lists: List of Greek phrases and Wiktionary:Transwiki:List of Spanish expressions in common English do italicize while List of Latin phrases, French phrases used by English speakers and List of German expressions in English do not. List of military mottos does not except for Military Unit Mottos: United Kingdom which does. Rmhermen 16:34, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Italian[edit]

What is the best translation of the Italian expression "avere buon gioco"? Thanks, David Sneek 06:46, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Have a good game". Proto||type 11:23, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Proto. I thought it meant something like that or "a good hand" in cards, but the thing is that it seems to be used in a more general way too. Having an opportunity, maybe. David Sneek 18:25, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Difference between decide by/for oneself[edit]

What is the difference, if any, between "decide by oneself" and "decide for oneself"?

In general, "decide by oneself" indicates that a person decides without the help or input of other people, while "decide for oneself" indicates making the decision based on one's own goals, priorities and best interests without anyone else's interests in mind. This general rule extends to most comparable usages of "by" and "for". The difference is subtle, and as with most general rules in English, it isn't upheld in every case. --Diderot 10:43, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not so sure that the "decide for oneself" has as venal a connotation as Diderot gives it. I would just say "decide for oneself" means making a decision after having listened to other people's opinions. As in, "Don't let other people sway you, decide for yourself!" User:Zoe|^(talk) 16:37, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For me (Western US dialect), "decide by onself" means to decide alone, while "decide for oneself" implies making your own decision, rather than letting others decide for you. It doesn't necessarily imply listening to others—all it implies is that the individual is the one making the decision. The Jade Knight 06:57, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Devil beating his wife[edit]

When I was younger, my mother used to say that "the Devil is beating his wife" when there was rain and sunshine at the same time. Outside of my family, however, I haven't ever been able to find someone who uses this phrase. Has anyone ever heard this and, if so, know the origin of this strange phrase? Thanks, Ryan

In french, "Le diable bat sa femme et marie sa fille" (and marries his daugter) : sale temps (bad weather)! (fr:WK) --DLL 19:14, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Check out this article from Michael Quinion. 151.199.192.106 18:02, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I read it in this livejournal post just yesterday, but there's no origin information there, just confirmation that people who aren't your mother say it, and some versions from other cultures - supposedly the Japanese say the foxes are having a wedding, and some Indian tribes say Coyote's having sex. Corvi 18:52, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Odd couples[edit]

Here's a question that's popped into and out of my head for a long time: The Spanish word for "right" is "derecha" and "left" is "izquierda". I understand the latter is from Basque and the former is from Latin. (like 'right' and 'recht', etc). So what I'm wondering is: How did it come about that two words of completely different origin became used for such a close-knit pair of words? Any theories on how someone started using one languages' word for "left", and the others' for "right"? Also, does anyone know any similar "odd couples"? --BluePlatypus 17:40, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know anything about the particular question that you have posed, but to clarify, right and recht are English and German respectively, neither of which is a Latin-based language. You're correct anyways that derecha is a derivative of the Latin rectus. I guess I'm just picking nits.

As for your question, I'm just going to throw this out there because I really don't have a clue. Assuming that left correlates to west, and right to east, is the Basque region of Spain in the western part? When I think "Latin", Italy comes to mind, and that country is certainly east (right) of Spain...just a guess.

Is there a word for compulsive wikification? I find myself absent-mindedly writing the double square brackets [[ ]] even when I'm taking notes in class. Scary! -Isopropyl 17:49, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

you're certainly not alone in suffering the compulsive wikification disorder...--K.C. Tang 00:22, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seems I expressed myself badly; I didn't mean to imply "right" or "recht" came from Latin, just that they are cognates of the Latin. (from PIE), unlike the Basque word. --BluePlatypus 18:20, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Basque region of Spain is actually in the northern part, on the border with France.Loomis51 20:18, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rectus is latin for straight. Dexter is latin for right. I can't be completely certain, but I'd be surprised to find that derecha derives from rectus since they mean different things. The Basque Country is in the north of Spain (as Loomis51 says), towards the east. Latin certainly did originate in Italy, but I'd guess that the modern spanish words for left and right arose before general public literacy did, and thus before left and right could have become associated with west and east. Also, I'm not aware of any language where the words for east and west are cognates with the words for right and left. Does anyone with more linguistic training or experience than me have any comment to add? --Hughcharlesparker 21:06, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If anything, directions are named based on the assumption that one is facing east. The Germanic word north apparently comes from a word meaning "left hand", and the Irish words aniar and anoir mean "from the west" and "from the east" respectively, but they also mean "from behind" and "from the front". And of course to find out where you're going you have to orient yourself. Angr (talk • contribs) 21:36, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This Spanish page says that Basques have a higher proportion of left-handed people than average.

So my guess would be that if left-handedness was seen by the Castilians as a Basque trait maybe thats why they came to adopt their word (perhaps firstly as a nickname and then more generally). Jameswilson 22:41, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

the explanation sounds great--K.C. Tang 00:22, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note that in Spanish "derecho" also means right, as in "civil rights", just as in English right has both meanings. User:Zoe|^(talk) 01:47, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's interesting. The Romans had a huge prejudice against left handed people, and the same was the case until recently in Britain, hence the use of the word sinister, Latin for left, in its current usage. It could be that the association of right with right and derecha with derecho have some association with this. Angr - your expertise again, please. :) --Hughcharlesparker 09:54, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not many answers to the actual questions, are there? --BluePlatypus 10:47, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No. In fact there probably is no answer to the question. Widespread superstition concerning lefthandedness has led lots of European languages to replace their word for "left" through taboo avoidance, but why Spanish replaced its word by borrowing a word from Basque instead of finding a euphemism is probably unknowable. Angr (talk • contribs) 11:13, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's right, they considered left-handedness to be downright sinister. :-) StuRat 04:32, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There can only be speculation, which is often the case in lexical history. (no one knows where the word boy comes from, or perro in Spanish. Perhaps, the word for left already had the connotation sinister. Just a guess. In any case, it is probably relevant that what we know today as Spanish began to be spoken in the area of just south of the Basque region and the original Castillians probably consisted of a great number of Basques. We know that from historical evidence and also the influence of Basque phonology on Spanish. Not too many words though. —This unsigned comment was added by Mnewmanqc (talk • contribs) 13:26, 4 April 2006 UTC.

There are two separate questions here: why is the word for 'left' not the Latin word, and why is it the Basque word. The first question has been answered by Angr- the word for left in many languages is marked, and so tends to be changeable. As for the second question, I'd suggest two points. Firstly, if the Spanish were looking around for other words to mean left, then the only two obvious candidates would be the Basque and the Arabic words (or conceivably Galician, but I suspect that's just too remote from the Spanish heartland to have much of a cultural impact). And if the change happened before the Moors arrived, then Basque is the only obvious option. Secondly, along with the linguistic markedness comes an association of leftness with otherness, and Basques have always been a potent representation of otherness for the Spanish. It's therefore quite natural to associate leftness with the Basques. Henry ^Flower 16:37, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article Markedness seems to define the concept differently from the way you're using it. Are you in a position to expand the article? --Hughcharlesparker 09:10, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid not- I'm no expert. However, our article does include the rather vague sentence The concept of markedness has been extended to other areas of grammar as well, such as morphology, syntax and semantics- this aspect of markedness is an example of the latter. Henry ^Flower 21:16, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To get back to the original question, Yiddish is a great candidate for odd couples, as it is basically a mixture of Old German and Hebrew (plus a dash of slavic, for good measure), two languages that are only very distantly related. I thought about it for a while, and found one of possibly a great many odd couples in Yiddish: The two words are Truth and Lie. The word for Truth in Yiddish is emmess taken directly from the Hebrew, whereas the word for Lie in Yiddish is ligen, taken directly from the German. Loomis51 01:16, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation of Ancient Egyptian Words[edit]

From what I understand, much of our knowledge of Ancient Egypt is derived from the interpretation of that civilization's hieroglyphics. However, I don't understand how, based solely on hieroglyphics, we came to understand the pronunciation of such terms as, for example, "Tut Ankh Amun". How did we figure out how to pronounce this word, based solely on "written" evidence? Loomis51 19:18, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it had something to do with personal names (assumed to be pronounced the same in multiple languages) on the Rosetta stone? --Lph 19:26, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The first thing that was done to decipher Ancient Egyptian was to compare the names in the cartouches on the Rosetta stone with the names in the Greek. That and other proper names gave us the pronounciation of many of the hieroglyphics. After that, a lot of work was done on comparative linguistics with Coptic and other related languages.--Prosfilaes 19:46, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the pronunciation of the vowels is rather uncertain in many cases, since the ancient Egyptian orthography was a strictly consonants-only orthography in almost all respects. (You can look at article Matres lectionis for the somwehat analogous Hebrew situation, remembering that written Egyptian was even more strictly consonantal than written Hebrew...).

One relatively common mid-20th century transcription convention was to semi-arbitrarily transcribe certain Egyptian consonantal orthography symbols which represented sounds with semi-vocalic affinities as "i" and "u", and then completely arbitrarily add in enough additional English vowel letters to ensure that words were made somewhat pronounceable-looking (these arbitrary vowels being "a" next to a guttural consonant and "e" elsewhere).

There are partial scientific linguistic reconstructions of Pharaonic Egyptian vowels based on late Coptic vowels, foreign transcriptions, and other available fragmentary evidence, but I don't know how much influence this linguistic work has on conventional transcriptions of ancient Egyptian proper names... AnonMoos 02:46, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at the article on transliteration of ancient Egyptian. That article shows the various different ways in which the phonetic complement of the Egyptian language is interpreted. We can safely say that it Egyptian pronunciation must have changed over time, and it developed through to Coptic. Through comparison of texts, both within the Egyptian corpus and with those in other languages (e.g. Greek names) we cometo understand the phonetic values of hierglyphs. For example, the name Tutankhamun is written

. The first three graphs (reed-gaming board-water) represent the divine name Amun written entirely phonetically — the reed is the consonant 'ỉ', the gaming board represents the two consonants 'm-n', and the water is the phonetic complement 'n' — all giving 'ỉ-m-n'. A lot of Egyptian names began with a written divine name, but it appears that this was pronounced last. The next three graphs represent a bread bun, a quail chick and another bread bun. Again these are all phonemic — the breat is 't' and the quail chick is 'w' — giving the word 't-w-t', meaning 'image'. The ansate cross is the final graph. It represents the words 'life', 'living', 'to live', but occassionally just represents the three consonants that make up the word — ˁ-n-ḫ. Putting it all together with the divine name at the end, we have t-w-t—ˁ-n-ḫ—ỉ-m-n, the living image of Amun. From this, Tutankhamun is simply a way of making this jumble of transliteration signs pronouncable, rather than a definite representation of its pronunciation. — Gareth Hughes 16:43, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. That's awesome. :D —OneofThem ^(talk)_(contribs) 17:39, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ideology[edit]

What does ideology in the abstract mean? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.199.130.16 (talk • contribs)

A search for the word in both wikipedia and wiktionary should shed some light. --Hughcharlesparker 09:57, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

word for comedic almost rhymes?[edit]

I'm wondering if there's a word for when a verse sets up an expectation for a rhyme only to replace the final word/syllable, for comedic effect. e.g.:

Roses are red

Violets are blue

no one is as pretty as... me

I've also seen it used in limericks, where the last word would be expected to be something vulgar due to the rhyme scheme, but is replaced with something benign that doesn't rhyme (can't think of any examples though). Is there a specific name for this? --Krsont 22:56, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When the last word is expected to be vulgar, I think I've heard it called implied rhyme. —Keenan Pepper 23:45, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This was used in Shrek, when he goes into Duloc and there's the little intro box, which sings a ditty including the following lines:

Please keep off of the grass

Shine your shoes, wipe your... face (as they turn around and bend over)

- СПУТНИК^{ССС Р} 02:24, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another one:

À cette explosion voisine

De mon génie universel,

Je vois le monde qui s'incline

Devant ce nom: Victor Hugo

- Raymond Roussel

David Sneek 06:40, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There was a non-vulgar one on the '80s TV show Kate & Allie; a boy had been pestering a girl to go to the dance with him, and she kept refusing. Finally he sent her a poem:

Let's just be friends

Why not take a chance?

All's well that ends

Let's go to Las Vegas

Angr (talk • contribs) 06:42, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since everyone's giving examples here's one from "La Camisa Negra" by Juanes:

Tengo la camisa negra

Ya tu amor no me interesa

Lo que ayer me supo a gloria

Hoy me sabe a pura

Miércoles por la tarde y tú que no llegas...

Here the humor's emphasized by the next word being miércoles. --RiseRover|^talk 16:13, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The song "Mr. Brightside" by The Killers does this ...

Now I'm falling asleep
And she's calling a cab
While he's having a smoke
And she's taking a drag
Now they're going to bed
And my stomach is sick
And it's all in my head
But she's touching his ... chest
Now, he takes off her dress
Now
User:Zoe|^(talk) 19:39, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Then, just to be obnoxious, my favorite non-limerick:

There was a young man of St Bees
Who was stung in the arm by a wasp
When asked, "Does it hurt?"
He replied, "No it doesn't
"I'm glad that it wasn't a hornet."
--jpgordon ∇∆∇∆ 00:03, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

April 4[edit]

French names[edit]

the final t/d in a French surname always baffles me: sometimes it's silent, sometimes it's not. any general rules?--K.C. Tang 11:51, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt it. French surnames don't follow rules. It's true of final s/z, too: consider the composers Camille Saint-Saëns and Hector Berlioz, both ending with the /s/ sound. Angr (talk • contribs) 11:56, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

so which is the safer bet: pronounce it or not pronounce it?--K.C. Tang 13:08, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say the safer bet is to try to find out either way for any particular name from some reliable source. Which name(s) did you have in mine? Angr (talk • contribs) 13:19, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

actually not looking for any particular name...sometimes i have to transliterate French names into Chinese, and i don't want to flip through my tome of Francais-Chinois every time to check the pronunciations...so u see i just want to be lazy...btw, any website that i can check the pronunciations? i can't find one :)--K.C. Tang 00:53, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd guess it's more often silent than not, as it is with French words ending in t/d. --BluePlatypus 13:37, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If the name is from Catalan or possibly Occitan, a final consonant would be more likely to be pronounced but not always. There's a wine called Banyuls, for example, which is from French Catalonia. The s is pronounced. mnewman

For final consonants 't' and 'd', the safer bet is definitely not to pronounce them, especially for "typically French" names. Phils 12:50, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

April 5[edit]

Yclept[edit]

How can this "living fossil" survive? i always feel that i'm looking at a platypus (i don't mean you, BluePlatypus :O) when i come across the word. any other words with that past-participle prefix "y-" survive in modern english (probably in dialects)?--K.C. Tang 02:32, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've never read "yclept" in modern English; only in Old English. However, a trip to the OED shows usage as recently as 1900 (though it was much more common long ago). However, all sorts of words carried over into the 19th century. I recommend reading the Oxford English Dictionary entry on "a, a-, particle"; often this form has survived as "a-", such as "a-left" (I am uncertain if it's related to terms like "a-sailing")… The Jade Knight 06:03, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quite a few odd words like this appeared in the novel Cold Comfort Farm, but some were made up by the writer Stella Gibbons. JackofOz 07:39, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some famous poets used it which helped keep it from entirely disappearing. Rmhermen 22:11, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Francisco=>Paco[edit]

Does anybody know how Paco originated or why Spanish speakers call people with the name Francis/Francisco as 'Paco'; like for example Bill for William?--Jondel 07:59, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

here you have several theories but the most plausible is, Paco is an hipocorístico from Francisco, that is, a deformed name derived of how little children try to pronounce the original. --RiseRover|^talk 15:18, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Muchas gracias!--Jondel 00:32, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rose Bonbon[edit]

What does the French idiom "en rose bonbons" mean? Is it the French equivalent of the English "through rose-tinted glasses"? --Bearbear 09:47, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think "rose bonbon" is just a description of a colour, "candy pink", but when used in "la vie en rose bonbon" it becomes an exaggeration of "voir la vie en rose" which means something like "through rose-tinted glasses". David Sneek 20:33, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That seems to make sense, thanks. I heard it in France Gall's "Poupée de Cire, Poupée de Son" and it's been bugging me ever since. I did some searching but it's not very commonly said (anymore?). --Bearbear 12:05, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question about foreigners writing in English[edit]

Why do so many people, whose first language is not English, and whose English grammar often leaves much to be desired, insist on using k3wl h4x0r d00d abbreviations such as "u", "ppl" and "thx"? I have seen it very often on Usenet, even in technical newsgroups (which prefer normal grammatical English over l33tspeak), and even though I'm not a native English speaker either, it annoys the heck out of me. JIP | Talk 19:32, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you think their first language is not English? The reason why people do that is because people they want to emulate (possibly their peer group or people they esteem) do so.--Prosfilaes 19:39, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Because on technical newsgroups, people most often use their real names, and judging by them they are from foreign countries with a first language native to that country. I understand your point, but I would very much prefer if they learned the language first, and the group vernacular second. Doing it the other way around can result in incomprehensible text. JIP | Talk 19:45, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Names aren't a terribly reliable tool for that. People learn the language from the people they communicate with. The answer here seems simple.--Prosfilaes 19:51, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of my students (I teach TEFL) cannot write a sentence in English, but can write msn remarkably fluently. I'd say that a form of communication in which accuracy is not valued has a particular attraction for people incapable of writing accurately. This would also explain the popularity of this idiom among moronic and ill-educated native speakers. Henry ^Flower 22:09, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That strikes me as an elitist statement making fun of people who are using language as it's designed to be used, to communicate. I doubt most of the users of this are stupid, or comparatively ill-educated. The fact that your students can communicate with English speakers is a good thing; most people would quit if they never bothered trying to communicate with English speakers until they coulf speak with pedantic correctness.--Prosfilaes 05:13, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bad luck, yes, no, yes, yes, yes, yes. In that order. Henry ^Flower 08:14, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And what's the fundamental difference between what you just wrote and these k3wl abbreviations? In fact, the abbreviations are generally understood among people who use them, but I have no reason to believe that your response would be intelligible to anyone but you.--Prosfilaes 14:04, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My favourite usenet abbreviation is the Spanish d, short for de. Jameswilson 23:17, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I like "c" for "c'est" in French (and I think they often use "k" to replace "qu", which also amuses me greatly). Adam Bishop 01:52, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As in "K'est-ce ke c"? Angr (talk • contribs) 06:06, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen stuff like "kkchose". You also see 2 for "du". The Jade Knight 22:11, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

chsai pa tro de tt ca, mai chpens k Prosfilaes a raison. David Sneek 13:25, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese Hamutaro (tv)[edit]

Hello. Do you know where I can watch the previews of the new Japanese Hamutaro season in Japan? like what site to go to?

Hello! I would suggest Hamutaro. But what I don't understand is why you're asking this question right here... --Sebesta 20:31, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you,but also..I've never posted here before so I didn't know where to put this..

Since it was about a TV program, Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities might have been more on-target. --Lph 21:45, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar of obscenities[edit]

Is the word "fucking" not a normal adverb, or is the sentence "It's really fucking cold outside" grammatically incorrect? I'm no grammaticist, but I can't think of any other adverbs that don't end with the suffix -ly. Just curious. Isopropyl 21:24, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's the same with real. See the Merriam-Webster entry below. Note the tag not often in formal use.

Main Entry: 3real Pronunciation Guide

Pronunciation: "

Function: adverb

: VERY <was real glad to see her> -- not often in formal use

--Sebesta 21:28, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was under the assumption that "real" as an adverb was a definitive sign of hickishness and completely unacceptable. Isopropyl 21:32, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

:) And "fucking" is acceptable in formal speech? :) See Adverb for some other non -ly adverbs, including well, hard, and some words ending in -wise or -ways. --Lph 21:40, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good point! Isopropyl 21:48, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But when it comes to -ing, I can think of a few other similar intensifiers, like "He was hopping mad", or "He was stinking drunk". Perhaps they are simply idiomatic phrases? "Hoppingly" and "stinkingly" seem unnatural. Perhaps this is because they are metaphorical? (it's not literally fucking cold outside). --Lph 21:52, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's always fun to conflate "proper grammar" and expletives, see, e.g., "I hit the tennis ball shittily". Joe 23:13, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adding -ly to an adjective makes an adverb meaning "in an X manner". You don't say "It's fuckingly cold outside" because you don't mean "It's cold in a fucking manner". You do say "I hit the tennis ball shittily" because you do mean "I hit the tennis ball in a shitty manner". Angr (talk • contribs) 06:05, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And adding "-ly" unnecessarily is often an example of hypercorrection, e.g. saying "firstly" & "secondly" instead of simply "first" & "second."

Yes, or "I feel badly about that" or "He's been acting strangely ever since the diamonds went missing". Angr (talk • contribs) 11:59, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure about those two, Angr.

"I feel bad about that" and "I feel badly about that" are subtly different, and both have their place (at least in antipodean idiom). To me, the first one is just a neutral "I feel bad". But if I wanted to convey "I feel bad that you feel bad", I'd use the "badly" version.
Strangely is the correct adverb, I believe, in most contexts. Scenario: An acting class. The director says , "Now, for this next exercise, Bill, I want you to act defiant, and you Cheryl to act drunk, and you, Jack, I want you to act strange". Jack says, "No worries, it comes naturally to me". That's acting strange. But in the general scenario, the sense you're conveying is not that of pretending or putting on an act, but the sense of behaving, and in particular behaving strangely. Hence, acting strangely. :--) JackofOz 12:38, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well perhaps different people use them differently. To me, if someone said "I feel badly" it could only mean something like they were attempting to feel with their elbows instead of their fingertips (or else that they were being hypercorrect in their use of adverbs). Likewise, one might argue that Keanu Reeves acts strangely, but someone who's nervous about being caught is acting strange. Because again X-ly means "in an X manner": "I feel in a bad manner" can only mean "I'm not very good at feeling", and "He's acting strangely" means "He's acting in a strange manner". Angr (talk • contribs) 14:10, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would have thought that "strangely" would apply to both Keanu Reeves and the person who's nervous about being caught. Both of them are acting "in a strange manner". "Strange" is an adjective, and would follow a verb only in unusual contexts. Would you say "He was walking strange", or "He was talking strange" or "He was sitting strange"? No? Then why say "He was acting strange"? :--) JackofOz 22:31, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Because, according to my grammar book, act is being used as a "verb of incomplete predication" (traditional term) or "copular verb" or "linking verb" (modern terms). Others that can be used in this way are be, become, seem, remain, go, grow, appear and taste. They are incomplete verbs until you plug in another bit called the complement, e.g. strange. I suppose that if it "remains fucking cold outside" then you've got two copular verbs in a row. :) --Heron 11:36, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Amen to that! JackofOz 14:49, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

French place names in English[edit]

Bonjour la classe,
Why do Marseille and Lyon sometimes have an 's' appended to their name in English? I think it's ironic that it only appears in English - silent final letters are common in French but rare in English. Is it a pointless attempt to make the places more French? Was an 's' ever used in the French version? Where did it come from? Why bother? Why!? -- Slumgum | yap | stalk | 21:43, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could be from Old French nominative case forms (though I'm not familiar with the detailed etymology of these particular words). AnonMoos 22:34, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds likely, foreign names of places are often older than the domestic versions. (see my recent question on Poland). --BluePlatypus 22:44, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, the French got rid of the -s but we didnt notice for a couple of centuries. Quite recent books still use the -s. As an aside, the -s in Marseille only got dropped when their football club started doing well and British sports journalists and football fans, probably unaware of the -s form, automatically used the modern French form without questionong it. This also happened with Corunna becoming La Coruńa due to the football club doing well in Europe. Likewise maybe Oporto to Porto. Some linguist could write a paper on that unusual process of language change in the age of popular culture. Jameswilson 22:52, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On the other hand, English doesn't generally try to slavishly emulate the exact spelling or pronunciation of foreign place names. And neither do other languages. If the French can call London Londres, why can't the English call Marseille Marseilles? We generally only comply when a city changes its name proper, eg. Salisbury > Harare, Benares > Varanasi, Leningrad > St Petersburg (and even that's not a true representation of "Sankt Peterburg"). JackofOz 03:43, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We dont have to no but what seems to happen is that if a city ceases to be very well-known amongst English-speakers, the English word gets forgotten by most people. If the city then becomes well-known again for some random reason, people adopt the native name without even realising there is an English alternative. 200 years ago most English people would have heard of Corunna. But the end of naval rivalry between Spain and England meant that the average English person forgot that La Coruňa even existed let alone that it had an English name Corunna. Jameswilson 22:44, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Similarly, although the spelling has never changed, Calais used to be pronounced to rhyme with Alice in English. Angr (talk • contribs) 22:53, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Calais, Maine still is pronounced that way. --Halcatalyst 01:20, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And then there's Leghorn, Italy. --jpgordon ∇∆∇∆ 03:13, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not to mention Rome, Milan, Naples and Turin. See Names of European cities in different languages. JackofOz 12:02, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a auditory section for each vocabulary word?[edit]

If you do where on your web page that defines the word would it be found. thank you Sus

Wiktionary? Gerard Foley 23:16, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

April 6[edit]

German paragraph[edit]

I hope it wouldn't be too much trouble for someone to translate the following German:

Es schwört bei den göttern, der mich schikt: Wenn eine Jungfrau dich nicht anlachelt und dir nicht etgegen fliegt, besanfige sie durch duftstrome! Ein guter nat mich gefüllt für einen, der gut und von guten manieren ist; nicht soll mich ein schlechter stehlen! KeeganB

We do have an article on the Duenos inscription. --BluePlatypus 03:22, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The wikipedia article leaves the second line untranslated. KeeganB

"und dir nicht entgegen fliegt, besänftige sie durch Duftströme"? means "and does not fly against thou, calms her through a 'flow of scent'". Not that that makes a lot of sense, but I guess the original doesn't either. --BluePlatypus 05:23, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, okay, I'm sorry! KeeganB

"... against thou" or ... "against thee"? User:Zoe|^(talk) 20:36, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thee, and "dir entgegenfliegt" means "fly towards thee", not "against thee". So the sentence basically says "If women don't come rushing to you, use some perfume" -- Ferkelparade π 20:43, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, I should probably add that this is what the German sentence says, not necessarily what the inscription says. Our English translation in the Duenos article differs quite a bit from the above German translation -- Ferkelparade π 20:57, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For completeness' sake, here's a translation of the entire German text:

He who sends me swears by the gods: If a virgin does not smile at you and does not come flying towards you, calm her with pleasant smells! A good (man) has filled me for one who is good and of good manners; I shall not be stolen by a bad one.

Ferkelparade π 17:48, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

anti child predator program[edit]

Recently a came across our Frank Figueroa article, and it had the line: "anti child predator program" which read to me like "anti-child predator-program". How do you write the line to make it sound more like a proper goverment program, and not a bunch of child hating killers. I tryed "anti child-predator program", is this correct? --Eivind ^t ^@^c 01:03, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's a triple modifier: anti-child-predator program. -- Mwalcoff 01:56, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See, this is why German is good; it'd simply be "Antikindesmißbraucherprogramm" or something :) --BluePlatypus 06:42, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of which, is there a good translation of "child predator" or "sexual predator" in German? Does "kindesräuber" work? (Haven't heard it. Guess I should be happy about that) --BluePlatypus 06:51, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Kinderschänder", literally "child desecrator", is often used by the media. It translates to "child abuser" or "child molester" according to dict.leo.org. I don't know if "child predator" is used in the same way.

Btw you could write "Anti-Kinderschänder-Programm", with dashes to make clear what belongs together. —da Pete (ノート) 07:56, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is why I had problems with the line, because in Norwegian like German we create a long word rather than link the words together: Antibarnemisbrukerprogram. Eivind ^t ^@^c 21:38, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, "child predator" isn't quite the same thing, since it refers to preying on children with the intent to molest, which doesn't necessarily mean that they've actually perpetrated an abuse or molestation. On the other hand, it implies more active (predatory) behaviour than "child molestor". So while it mostly means the same thing, it has slightly different connotations, IMHO. --BluePlatypus 05:06, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For style, anti-pedophile program(me) might work better. Anti-child-predator can equally mean 'against predators who are minors'. Peter Grey 06:57, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For style perhaps, but not for meaning. Not all pedophiles are child predators, nor are all child predators pedophiles. But you're right, the term "child predator" itself is structurally ambiguous. Normally context would disambiguate, but given the violent nature of children it doesn't in this case. Angr (talk • contribs) 07:34, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've never heard "child-predator" in Canada - my first impression was a young version of "adult preditor". Peter Grey 08:16, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lowrise[edit]

To go with such endearing terms as 'whale tail', 'camel toe', and 'landing strip', what's the word or phrase generally used to describe pubic hair that peaks out over the top of a hemline? Black Carrot 03:39, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know, but a merkin is a wig made from pubic hair (inter alia). JackofOz 04:58, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The closest term I can find is "fright wig", which refers to a woman's overgrown or unkempt pubic hair. But that isn't exactly what you're looking for. Bhumiya/Talk 22:07, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sign language as official language?[edit]

Are there any sign language recognised as an official language except NZSL? If not does that mean NZSL is the first official sign language?

WP 09:23, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There seem to be a whole lot of them listed here: Category: Sign languages. schyler 12:38, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's a lot of sign languages, but it doesn't say whether any of them are official languages in their respective countries. Angr (talk • contribs) 12:59, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Believe me, as a Canadian the notion of "Official Languages" is discussed ad nauseum. To be brief, Canada has two official languages (it's in our contstitution!) English and French. But to make matters more complicated, eight of our ten provinces have English as their only "official" language. New Brunswick is unique, as it is an "officially" bilingual province, and in Quebec, the "official" language is French and French only. In Quebec we even have laws restricting the use of English on commercial signs. I know it sounds ridiculous, which it is, but it's true. Loomis51 21:32, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But just as another example, Switzerland has four "official" languages. Loomis51 21:35, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My experience of Switzerland is it has four de jure official languages (German, French, Italian, and Romansh), and four de facto official languages (German, French, Italian, and English). Angr (talk • contribs) 08:16, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Embedding[edit]

Is this an example of embedding: "I am so helpless that I feel numbed"? I read in a book that embedding is the inclusion of a linguistic unit in another linguistic unit & it is often when the phrase/clause has been rankshifted so that it forms part of an element in the superordinate clause, but I can't tell if the sentence quoted above is an example of embedding or not. Can you help me? According to the Oxford Dictionary of English Grammar, the examples below show embedding:

'The news that Cassandra announced was not encouraging'
'That she was gloomy was characteristic'
'They did not believe that they were doomed'
'She was gloomier than she normally was'

But I can't tell the difference between these examples & the one I've quoted above. Is there a difference between parenthesis and embedding? Thanks. meinekurzebeine 12:44, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I would say this is a case of embedding. The "so...that" construction used in this particular example introduces a "clause of result" - I quote my Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary of Current English, from the entry for "that" as a conjunction. So, "I feel numbed" is a clause of result embedded in the larger predicate, that together with the subject "I" forms the higher level clause. Thus this is a case of embedding. Hope this makes it clear. --Dutchlinguist-- 18:40, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Spanish Slang?[edit]

I recently heard some people of Latin American descent speaking Spanish, and since I'm in my 3rd year of Spanish classes, I was evesdropping, trying to translate. I pretty much got the jist of their conversation, but I word I didn't know came up. I went home to look it up in dictionary to no avail. I tried free Internet translators. I even asked my teacher what it was. He refused to answer me saying, "That word is used as slang in the Spanish culture. It would do you good to forget that you ever heard it." The word: Benoño (I'm pretty sure). Can someone help me with this (more preferably a native speaker as they may know better how it would be used, not what proper Spanish language says). Thanks. schyler 12:35, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That word's not used in Spain (where I'm from) but it resembles one we certainly use, "coño" (meaning cunt). Or "ñoño" (dull and whiny). It also resembles "bisoño" which means some kind of newbie and inexpert (for example in the Linux realm, but also in general). The latter is not slang as such though.--RiseRover|^talk 16:48, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your teacher is misguided. Slang is one of the richest and most important parts of understanding a language. "Benoño" or "benono" seems to be fairly rare, but "benoña" or "benona" shows up more often. It still seems incredibly rare. It doesn't appear on this dictionary of regionalisms, nor in any other Spanish dictionary I can find. Are you sure it wasn't "venoño" or "penoño"? Bhumiya/Talk 22:54, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Decimal Points[edit]

When writing and using whole dollar amounts, i.e. $90, should there be a decimal point placed after the $90. or not? Which is correct?

In the United States, you never include a decimal point unless there are numbers after it. You would write $90 or $90.00. If you do include decimal places, people usually expect two unless there's some reason. Isopropyl 13:49, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. StuRat 21:08, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

German grammar help[edit]

How would you say in German "Because Reservoir Dogs is a gangster film, it is my favourite film"? (I know the phrase as a whole doesn't quite make sense, but bear with me here)

I can get "Weil Reservoir Dogs ein?en? Gangsterfilm ist, ist ?es? mein?en? Lieblingsfilm."

The part I'm having trouble with is the cases and the usage of "it". Should I use "der" in place of "es"? Are "Gangsterfilm" and "Lieblingsfilm" in the accusative?

Thanks in advance.--Doug (talk) 14:40, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Weil Reservoir Dogs ein Gangsterfilm ist, ist er mein Lieblingsfilm. You don't want einen, because that's accusative, and ein Film is a predicate nominative. You want er because Film is masculine. You don't want meinen in the second sentence for the same reason you don't want einen in the first. Angr (talk • contribs) 14:47, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gah, for some reason using "er" completely escaped my mind. Thank you very much! --Doug (talk) 14:54, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

While er is gramatically correct in this case, colloquial German would most probably use es in its place. In sentences like this, when talking about persons or animals, use the male or female form as appropriate, when talking about inanimate objects, use neutral regardless of the noun's gender - even though grammatically incorrect, that's what most native speakers do (unless the noun is an inanimate object that is personified to some degree, like "Sonne" (sun) which always has to be referred to as "sie") -- Ferkelparade π 20:53, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you're a native speaker and I'm not; nevertheless I don't think I've ever heard a German say es when a masculine antecedent is this close to it. And when my German roommate picked up a cucumber and asked me, "Ist die noch gut?", I don't think he was personifying it. Angr (talk • contribs) 21:10, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, that was not what I meant...the above does not hold true for any use of pronouns. But in the specific case of the relative clause above, I would instinctively use "es" even though it's grammatically incorrect. I was just trying to make some sense of colloquial usage which is not necessarily logical and consistent :) -- Ferkelparade π 21:17, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When I first read the question, I would have said es too, although I understand the reason why it should be er. --Sebesta 21:22, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This native speaker has es too. Probably because the masculine "Gangsterfilm" isn't really the grammatical antecedent at all, being just the predicate but not the subject of the preceding clause. The relevant antecedent for me is the subject, the genderless proper name "Reservoir Dogs", so neuter is natural and logical. Lukas ^(T.|@) 07:40, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... saying it over to myself again I can be convinced by Lukas's argument that the pronoun refers back not to Film but to Reservoir Dogs, so es is okay too. I guess I should downgrade my user page from de-4 to de-3 :-( Angr (talk • contribs) 08:09, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

After a bit more thinking about this, I think there's something else at play here...as a native speaker of German, I just use the language and have never learned much about its grammar, so I might be off quite a bit, but from observing my own and others' speech patterns, it seems that the neutral es is almost always used in simple indicative sentences of the form "It is something", regardless of the gender of the "something". It would be perfectly normal to say "Es ist ein toller Wagen" although Wagen is masculine, or to say "Was ist da so hell? Es ist die Sonne", contradicting my example above. It can even happen that the neutral es is used when referring to a person, compare "Weil Paul ein netter Kerl ist, ist er mein bester Freund" versus "Wenn jetzt jemand klopft, ist es wahrscheinlich Paul". It seems to work similarly in English: "Because Paul is a jolly good fellow, he is my best friend" vs. "If somebody is knocking at the door now, it is probably Paul". I guess there's some underlying logic to this (in the first example, I am explicitly referring to Paul as a person, while in the second example, i am referring to a neutral act of knocking that is probably executed by Paul), but as I said, I never really studied German grammar... Ferkelparade π 10:34, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chicano Convicts[edit]

I've been trying to find out the origin of the word "Pinto," which is slang for Chicano prisoners in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California. I know "pinto" means "painted" in Spanish, and I wonder if it has something to do with their prison uniforms.--70.231.161.175 17:02, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd put my (uninformed) money on pinto beans, personally.--Prosfilaes 00:54, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the name of the beans comes from the Spanish pinto as well, but that doesn't help you decide which pinto the slang expression came from. It's often impossible to tie down the origin of a slang expression with certainty. In case it helps, here are links to the etymology of pinto (horse colouring and bean) from Chambers, Merriam-Webster, and American Heritage ~ Veledan • Talk 19:23, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest that the term refers to the prison tattoos they often receive once incarcerated. StuRat 21:05, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

April 7[edit]

translation[edit]

Translate from English into Latin the saying Combat tests the warrior —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.137.116.6 (talk • contribs)

How about Certamen bellatorem probat? —Keenan Pepper 14:18, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Or, for a more poetic ring, bellum bellatorem probat. The Romans liked using different forms of the same root word together. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 16:02, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's called polyptoton. —Keenan Pepper 16:35, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spaces after period[edit]

Is there a standard for how many spaces should be after a period (following a sentence)? It seems with the advent of the computers that spacing changed to one space. We were taught in the "old school" on typewriters to use two spaces. There is great disagreement amoung our office staff ... anyone have an answer? I noticed I used two in typing - automatically.

I suppose it varies from style manual to style manual; things like that aren't set in stone. Usually it's discouraged when writing in a proportional font, which most people do nowadays. Here at Wikipedia the edit box uses a fixed-width font, but converts it to proportional once saved. Also, the wiki software automatically converts two spaces into one, so it doesn't matter which you use, it's going to wind up looking like one either way. If I were writing a letter, I'd put two spaces after a period if I were typing in a fixed-width font, one space with a proportional font. But that's just me. Angr (talk • contribs) 16:04, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re the two-spaces-converted-to-one, that's not the wiki software, that's the HTML standard itself. All whitespace in HTML source collapses to a single space (even a huge string of newlines, though the Wiki does detect those and turn them into paragraph breaks). The wiki in fact saves the original formatting, as you can see by editing this answer (I was taught French spacing at an early age and can't shake the habit). --Bth 17:35, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, whether two spaces are converted into one is browser dependent. The HTML Standard (http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/text.html) says that user agents should convert, not must as it would if that were a hard rule: "Note that a sequence of white spaces between words in the source document may result in an entirely different rendered inter-word spacing (except in the case of the PRE element). In particular, user agents should collapse input white space sequences when producing output inter-word space. This can and should be done even in the absence of language information (from the lang attribute, the HTTP "Content-Language" header field (see [RFC2616], section 14.12), user agent settings, etc.)." --A. Kohler 18:57, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Putting extra space between sentences is known as French spacing. It's rarely used by professional typesetters and designers, but it's not unknown. Open some printed books, especially ones you consider well-designed, and check for yourself. Gdr 16:27, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It suprises me that so many people despise the French spacing (double spacing) convention. It all comes down to a matter of readability. Sometimes double spacing is helpful, sometimes it is not. Quite a few publishers have always used a single space, not because it helped readability, but for mass publishing, those extra spaces add up to a substantial amount of paper that could be saved or space that could be dedicated to advertising. There have been a number of other conventions over the years, including a practice of putting a space before all punctuation marks (can't recall the term for that one). Ande B 02:08, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Putting a space before other punctuation marks (colons, question marks, exclamation marks...) is French spacing too. Or, at least it's commonly done in France. — QuantumEleven | (talk) 15:43, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was taught the two space rule in elementary school, but sometime between then and now it dropped away. Linguofreak 21:03, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was totally self-taught on the typewriter. I always put 2 spaces between sentences, probably mainly because that was the standard at the time, but also because it was more readable. I don't plan to change the habit, not even here where I know one space will be removed by the software. JackofOz 01:57, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I used to train people to take the RSA secretarial exams in the UK. The standard for that test was two spaces after a full stop and after colons. Semi-colons and commas required one space. This is a more 'classic' secretarial exam, however, in so far as there were guidelines for people doing the test on typewriters as well as computers, and that was only three years ago. I guess word processing programs weren't designed by secretaries.Phileas 06:40, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

what is the term for a phrase that contains 2 cliches mixed together?[edit]

what is the term for a phrase that contains 2 cliches mixed together? for example....My father always told me never to burn your bridges at both ends....which contains part of the cliche burning your bridges and burning the candle at both ends.

I heard the term at one time, and now cannot find any reference to what it is, or specifically what the illusive term means.

71.99.138.222 14:29, 7 April 2006 (UTC)Pat H[reply]

Do you mean a mixed metaphor? Maid Marion 16:32, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

While I would generally say that such a thing is a mixed metaphor, it seems way to silly to be described as such. I don't mean to be rude, but to say "never burn your bridges at both ends" is way beyond the category of mixed metaphor, and delves into the area of a Yogi-Berraism, and that's being polite. Loomis51 23:09, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Try: Anti-cliché. -LambaJan 17:49, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From our Metaphor article: "A mixed metaphor is one that leaps, in the course of a figure, to a second identification inconsistent with the first one. Example: "He stepped up to the plate and grabbed the bull by the horn," where two commonly used metaphors are confused to create a nonsensical image." --hydnjo talk 16:03, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Uh-oh, somebody let the smoking skeleton out of the closet !" :-) StuRat 20:58, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's an ill wind that gathers no moss. Angr (talk • contribs) 21:01, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For many great examples of the mixed metaphor in use, I recommend People Like Us Chapuisat 16:59, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Translation from German to English[edit]

How could I tranlate "Rosskastaniensamentrockenextrakt"?

Dried extract of horse chestnut seed, maybe? Angr (talk • contribs) 18:10, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I quite agree with Angr.

Otherwise, for English/German translation queries I can recommend the various forums at [1] as well as the dictionary itself ([2]). The LEO server is experiencing some reconstruction right now (it is being expanded), but normally it is a good place to ask. Sebesta 18:19, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are kastanien just horse chestnuts? Or chestnuts in general? (I seem to recall Rosskastanien and Edelkastanien, or something like that.) --jpgordon ∇∆∇∆ 22:53, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kastanien are chestnuts in general, Rosskastanien are horse chestnuts, and Edelkastanien are sweet chestnuts. Sebesta 22:55, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

historical firsts?[edit]

what was the first form of language to use cus words?

Gruntish. No, but seriously, I would expect explitives existed from the beginning—simply as things something says when one is upset, surprised, or bothered (which some people take offense at…the history of swearing is long and convoluted). See Profanity#History. The Jade Knight 22:21, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're onto something there, Jade Night. Especially when we consider that the brain has a special place where it stores profanity and other forbidden words. (It's in the so-called primitve brain.) This appears to provide an explanation as to why people who suffer damage to their language centers (by stroke or injury, for example), are still often able to scream out nasty curse words when they become frustrated with their limitations. It may also have a role in the outbursts of those suffering from Tourette's syndrome. Ande B 02:14, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm only guessing, but I imagine they pre-dated language, as very basic concepts that people would express one way or another. People were certainly expressing emotion before complex structured sentences came into being. It's a funny thing, but take any word at all, and say it the right way, and it could be a euphemism for some bodily function. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peter Grey (talk • contribs)

Noises that pre-date language can hardly be called "cuss words", though. To me a "cuss word" implies a taboo word (a word that should not be said in particular social settings), and that concept certainly postdates the evolution of language. Nevertheless, the first language to have taboo words is probably lost in the mists of time, and anyway the concept of having taboo words may well have evolved separately in different languages at more or less the same time. My vote for the answer to the original question is "No one knows and no one can know." Angr (talk • contribs) 07:46, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

that's right; all hominids are well capable of communicating anger and frustration. But in order to have taboo words, you need to develop a taboo first. I imagine that the first homo to have called his fellow an "asshole" sent ripples of hilarity and consternation through the entire population. People were probably laughing for weeks, it was, in fact, a major cultural stepping stone :) Yes Angr, we cannot know, it must have happened half a million years ago, and we cannot go back there and watch. But it is safe to say that the answer to your question is "in the Paleolithic" (no, that answers 'when?', not 'what was the form of language'; that, we really don't know at all). dab (ᛏ) 08:15, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The idea is that as soon as there were 'words' in the modern sense, some of them would have been singled out for special emotional impact. Peter Grey 13:39, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

April 8[edit]

German Phonology → Orthography?![edit]

I'm trying to find a chart that relates the IPA phonology of German to its orthography, like Wikipedia has for The Spanish Language. For wikipedia, all I see is a phonology chart that does not have corresponding orthography; and it's pointless trying to search for anything reasonable on google. Much help appreciated. --Xhin 06:23, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Such a chart would be fairly long – for example, [oː] is written as ‹o› (tot, Tod), ‹oh› (Kohl) and ‹oo› (Boot), while ‹o› is pronounced [oː], [ɔ] and [o] (Polizei). Wikipeditor 06:47, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AFAIK, there are two approaches to certain elements of the German language's phoneme inventory, thus further complicating the matter. Should I ever have too much spare time at some point in the future, I may try to make such a chart, but I guess others will have done it until then. If you have a question about a single phoneme, please ask. Wikipeditor 06:59, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is German orthography#Grapheme-to-phoneme correspondences what you're looking for? Angr (talk • contribs) 07:40, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Xhin seems to be looking for information given in the opposite direction. Wikipeditor 09:03, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Such a chart exists... we should be able to get one. Of course, German spelling is less regular than Spanish spelling, so the chart isn't that helpful because there are more exceptions. --Chl 10:26, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's the one, Angr. Thanks. --Xhin 23:37, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Final syllable of "revealed"[edit]

The article on Handel's Messiah contains this line:

This becomes obvious in such movements as And the glory of the Lord, where he sets the ultimate non-inflected declension of "revealèd" on its own note:

My question is regarding the naming of the suffix of "-ed" in bold. Is this correct? And, if not, what should it be? Thanks! MusicMaker5376 08:10, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not. It should be called the ending of the past participle. I'll go fix it. Angr (talk • contribs) 09:04, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I thanked you on the talk page there, but I'll thank you here, too. Thanks! MusicMaker5376 19:18, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spot the connections: "My mother thanks you. My father thanks you. My sister thanks you. And I thank you" - James Cagney in Yankee Doodle Dandy, 1942, playing George M Cohan who wrote Over There, which is where Handel spent much of his life. :--) JackofOz 11:11, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Siddhartha ?[edit]

How is the ( th ) in Siddhartha pronounced ? Is it like the ( th ) in : " think " .. or is each letter pronounced seperately t & h ? Hhnnrr 14:19, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's an aspirated t. It's not exactly the same as pronouncing each letter separately, but doing so will certainly bring you close to the correct pronunciation. The same is true of the ddh, incidentally. If you pronounce the name sidd-hart-ha, you'll be fairly close to the Sanskrit pronunciation. Angr (talk • contribs) 14:33, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you're an English speaker, you shouldn't even need to pronounce an h after the t (you still probably will after the d though), English t is aspirated normally. Of course you'll need to make sure you pronounce it as a distinct t and don't let it become a "d" as can happen in fast speech. Linguofreak 18:26, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, in that position in the word, t isn't aspirated in English. Think of the word artist: the t may be flapped if you use an accent that does that, but even in non-flapping accents it isn't aspirated. Angr (talk • contribs) 18:52, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, you're right... Or at least not aspirated as much. I think my accent may be a bit wierd though. I seem to aspirate my voiceless stops rather strongly (except for flapped & voiced t), although I don't know too well what the "standard" amount of aspiration is, and I'm pretty sure I've caught myself aspirating /b/ pretty strongly too. Linguofreak 21:00, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't think voiced consonants could be aspirated, only breathy voiced. —Keenan Pepper 21:10, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Technically, you're right. But breathy voiced consonants are often called "voiced aspirates" for convenience. Angr (talk • contribs) 21:32, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why can't fully voiced consonants be aspirated? I have no trouble voiceing a sound while holding back the air at the point of articulation to build up pressure. Linguofreak 02:44, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that's what aspiration is. Aspiration is when whatever's blocking the air is released before the voicing starts, so there's a little [h] sound in there. For a voiced consonant, the voicing is there even before the constriction is released, so to aspirate it you would have to stop the voicing and then start again. I can't do that without a vowel sneaking in. For example, when I try to say [dʰə] it always comes out [dəhə]. —Keenan Pepper 12:29, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You and I find it difficult, but Indians can do it! Jameswilson 22:58, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I asked a British Indian about this (not a linguist) and he said that all the consonants have aspirated and unaspirated versions. The aspirated version is written with a following -h in English transliterations (ie "dh" and "d". To his ear, English-speakers make a real mess of it, especially with p, b, k and g. He maintains he has never heard an English person pronounce Pakistan correctly; we automatically say something which is closer to "Phakistan" or even "Phakhisthan" than it is to "Pakistan". Likewise English-speakers akmost say "Dheli" when we mean "Delhi". In both cases, if you put the palm of your hand up to your mouth you should not feel any breath at all on your hand when you pronounce the unaspirated initial letter. I've been playing with this, and its not easy! Jameswilson 22:28, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

April 9[edit]

Oulala? Olala??[edit]

I'm looking for information about the expression "oulala," often stereotypically associated with the French in US culture. Is this phrase actually Frech? A teacher of French told my class that in France they say "olala," and that "oulala" is Cajun. However, I haven't been able to find any information verifying these claimes. Theshibboleth 01:07, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The French oh là là (literally 'oh there there' - 'oh my my' would probably be a good equivalent)is pronounced /olala/ in French. But most English seem to say /ulala/. (They're probably not trying to duplicate correct French when they say it.) Peter Grey 02:50, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You could try bothering User:Firespeaker. Cajun and Acadien are areas he is particularly interested in. The Jade Knight 04:26, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not much help but I have normally seen it written (in English) as "ooh la la." --Fuhghettaboutit 15:32, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Phoneme how to pronounce[edit]

I noticed that I couldn't pronounce the word Phoneme although there was a great amount of information here. Would it be possible to include pronunciation in the future? Thanks in advance. --69.152.115.145 02:44, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

phoneme /'founi:m/ Peter Grey 02:52, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How to speak "Rennaisance Faire" English?[edit]

What websites can I go to, to learn how to use the The's, thou's, would'st. Common names for items and professions?

thanks

I'm not sure about a website, and I haven't gone looking, but I'd like to suggest reading something like Sir Richard Burton's translation of the 1001 nights, or anything else by Sir Richard Burton, or something classy of a similar vintage. The late 19th century certainly wasn't the rennaisance, but those archaic terms were still in use, at least by this author, but much of the rest of the language is similar enough to our current english to be easily picked up by the uninitiated. -LambaJan 01:59, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why not just read some Shakespeare? (BTW, pet peeve: The "ye" in "ye olde whatever" is pronounced "the". The "y" is a thorn character, not a "y". So it's not "ye" as in "you" but just a typographical variant of "the"). --BluePlatypus 04:23, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is "ye" pronounced "thee" or "thuh"? -- Slumgum | yap | stalk | 20:43, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is a difference here between "Renaissance Faire English" and the actual English spoken at the time. Essentially, you want to only use words people understand, so many of the obsolete words must not be used, as nobody would have a clue as to what you were saying. So, speaking straight Shakespeare is not a good idea. I'd go with the first suggestion, instead. StuRat 20:53, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The style of English you generally seem to be after is Early Modern English. The Jade Knight 04:23, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

trout in the milk[edit]

I know it's a quote-but context please.What trout and what milk?(hotclaws**== 07:40, 9 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

The full quote is: "Some circumstantial evidence is very strong, as when you find a trout in the milk." (Thoreau). The meaning is that though circumstantial evidence is not deductive, it can be of a immediate and obvious flag raising nature. Finding a trout in milk would be very bizarre and disconcerting, yes? So finding a trout in milk is something that should immediately raise flags of something not being right, even if you can't pinpoint the exact manner that situation arose. Or to answer your question literally--an everyday trout in everyday milk. --Fuhghettaboutit 15:28, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's more specific than that. The statement about finding a trout in the milk relates to the specific allegation that a merchant has been "watering down" the milk: diluting it with water and yet selling it as whole milk, as a means to defraud their customers. Thus the "trout" is circumstantial yet strong evidence that someone's been adding (river) water to the milk (the trout having been added unwittingly and apparently unnoticed along with the water.) - Nunh-huh 21:52, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

devanagari[edit]

could some one give me the following words in devanagari : dukkha - anicca - anatta Hhnnrr 16:42, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

दुक्ख - अनिच्च - अनत्त is my guess, unless you left some diacritics out of the transliterations above. Angr (talk • contribs) 18:02, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You've correctly transliterated from what was given, but the words in latin script above aren't as carefully transliterated as you have done, so what you've given aren't words unfortunately. - Taxman ^Talk 15:08, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

दुःख - अनिच्छा - Can't guess the third word! Can you please give the context in which it occurs? Vineet Chaitanya

Those seem the most plausable to me, and my guess for Hindi for the third one is अनत an adv. meaning Somewhere else, elsewhere, or अनट a noun meaning injustice, grievous oppression, etc. Also possibly अनाथ adj. Without lord, protector, husband, master or owner; husbandless, protectorless, fatherless; poor, helpless, forlorn;. A friendless or a destitute person; widow; orphan. Definitions are from Platts which is old, but gives you the idea. There are some Sanskrit possiblities, but none that give a doubled t either. Perhaps the double t is used for the retroflex t, which is the second one I gave. - Taxman ^Talk 15:08, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all for your help .. the transliterations I've written are all from wikipedia . I am unaware of the correct transliterations since I dont speak the original language . I will repeat them here with the context they came in to make things more clear . ( I've added quite a few also :-) ) All the words are related somehow to Buddhism . Please help if you can : The eightfold path : Samma Dithi - Samma Sankappa - Samma Vaca - Samma Kammanta - Samma Ajiva - Samma Vayama - Samma Samudhi - samma samadhi Three marks of existence : Dukkha - Anicca - Anatta Mahayana concepts : Tathata - Sunita Theravada canon ( three baskets ) : Sutra Patika - Vinaya - Abhidhamma Non-canonical texts : Visuddhimagga - Awakening of Mahayana Faith - Platform sutra - terma Places in India : Rajagaha - Vesali - Pataliputta Buddhist school : Mahasanghika Indian king : Asuka Hhnnrr 20:41, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  Oh! So these are not Hindi or Sanskrit words but are Pali words!
  dukkh=दुक्ख [दुःख], anicca=अनिच्च [अनित्य], anatta=अनत्त [अनात्म]
  I have put the Sanskrit equivalents in the square brackets.
  Vineet Chaitanya

Thank you, I guess they are . But I was told before that there is no such thing as a sanskrit script , there was only devanagari . So whenever I needed "sanakrit" I would ask for "devanagari" . Thats why I didnt say Bali, a did'nt know you could give me the sanskrit equivelant . Thanks for clearing things up , but could you - or anyone else - finish up the good work ! Thanks again , may you be guided . Hhnnrr 09:04, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're quite right; Sanskrit and Pali are languages, while Devanagari is a writing system, so you were right to ask for the Devanagari. The confusion arose because people thought you were giving badly transliterated Sanskrit instead of correctly transliterated Pali! Angr (talk • contribs) 07:34, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Really ? So then what does it mean when "Vineet Chaitanya" says : " I have put the Sanskrit equivalents in the square brackets " ? If both are Divanagari . Are Hindi and Pali Devababgari different ? + I would really appreciate it if someone would help me out with the rest of the words , I'll paste them here again to make it easier :

The eightfold path : Samma Dithi - Samma Sankappa - Samma Vaca - Samma Kammanta - Samma Ajiva - Samma Vayama - Samma Samudhi - samma samadhi
Three marks of existence : Dukkha - Anicca - Anatta
Mahayana concepts : Tathata - Sunita
Theravada canon ( three baskets ) : Sutra Patika - Vinaya - Abhidhamma
Non-canonical texts : Visuddhimagga - Awakening of Mahayana Faith - Platform sutra - terma
Places in India : Rajagaha - Vesali - Pataliputta
Buddhist school : Mahasanghika
Indian king : Asuka ---Hhnnrr 09:13, 12 April 2006 (UTC) Thanks[reply]

The Sanskrit and Pali spellings are different because Sanskrit and Pali are different languages and pronounce the words differently. A parallel case would be the Latin and Italian words for "dog"; the Latin word is spelled CANIS and the Italian word spelled CANE, but the alphabet is the same. Vineet Chaitanya gave you both the Pali spellings (what you were actually asking for) and the Sanskrit spellings (as a matter of interest). Angr (talk • contribs) 09:24, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I wasnt asking for Pali but rather for sanskrit, as it says in many wikipedia articles after citing the english transliteration of a Buddhist term : sanskrit : - and then the word written in an unknown language ( to me ) . Would that mean they are using sanskrit spelling for Pali words ? If so , I'd have to revise a whole section of my thesis where I gave sanskrit equivelants to Pali translierations . I hope thats not case !! Hhnnrr 09:47, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The difficulty from my point of view is that you are giving Roman transliteration of the Pali word and asking the Devanagari rendering of its equivalent Sanskrit word. Whereas Wikipedia articles seem to give Roman transliteration of both Pali as well as Sanskrit words, for example, in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism#The_Noble_Eightfold_Path

  1. Right Understanding - (samyag-dRSTi, sammaa-diTTi)
  2. Right Thought - 〈samyak-saMkalpa, sammaa-saGkalpa〉
  3. Right Speech - (samyag-vaac, sammaa-vaacaa)
  4. Right Conduct - (samyak-kalmaanta, sammaa-kammanta)
  5. Right Livelihood - (samyag-aajiiva, sammaa-aajiiva)
  6. Right Effort - (samyag-vyaayaama, sammaa-vaayaama)
  7. Right Mindfulness - (samyak-smrTi, sammaa-sati)
  8. Right Concentration - (samyak-samaadhi, sammaa-samaadhi)"

Please note in the above first the Sanskrit word and then Pali word are given for each entry. Vineet Chaitanya

I have just added the Devanagari spelling in both Sanskrit and Pali to the articles Dukkha, Impermanence, and Anatta. Angr (talk • contribs) 10:12, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possible languages for the name "Creidieki"[edit]

I'm considering legally changing my first name to "Creidieki", and people seem to have a lot of trouble understanding that someone might have a *new* name. I'm starting to think that it might be easier if there were a country or geographic region that I could claim it was from. It's pronounced something vaguely like "Crih-dee-key". I don't need a perfect match, I'm just looking for some origin that would sound vaguely plausible. -- Creidieki 17:30, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly vaguely Polish. Like a corruption of kraj and dięki or something. Not that I think any Poles would be convinced. I don't think it sounds terribly plausible in any language though. --BluePlatypus 18:25, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Or Gaelic? [3] a' creidsinn (creidich)

- to believe. There are quite a few other languages on that link with cre- words meaning "believe", Saint|swithin 18:40, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Creideki" was the name of a dolphin character in Startide Rising. AnonMoos 03:29, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Credu" is Welsh for "to believe". "Creduci" (pronounced something like your name) would mean something like "to believe a dog". The Jade Knight 04:21, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, that would be more like "the belief of a dog", though grammatically that would e "crêd-gi". This is getting a bit metaphysical! -- Arwel (talk) 21:16, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

April 10[edit]

Why Spanish?[edit]

My mom is planning on home schooling my brother starting next year (don't ask me why, I don't know) and she wanted me to teach him some basic Spanish. My brother is totally opposed (possibly racist too) and refuses to ever learn Spanish, anything associated, etc. I live in the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex (my mom her family in Denton) in Texas. This seems to be reason enough to need to learn some Spanish. He wants to learn German. I tell him there really aren't a whole lot of Germans living in Texas (who don't speak English already) but there are plenty of Mexicans in Texas who don't know a lick of English. I'm not planning on teaching him all the Spanish I know, I just want to teach him how to un-conjugate verbs from some of the main tenses and some basic expressions. I have tolled him this and he still refuses. What are some other reasons y'all can think of why he should learn Spanish? (As I sit here proof-reading my question, I see how Texan I actually am. The stereotypes are certaintly true with me).

Not counting practical considerations, from the perspective of English speakers: Spanish has logical spelling rules. Spanish has some interesting grammar rules (relative to English) that force you to think more clearly about what your saying (more work but an advantage), and the grammar is much more regular than the equivalent in Italian or Portuguese (less work). Excellent stepping stone for learning Latin, Italian, Portuguese. But why not learn both? Peter Grey 02:17, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, everybody in Germany learns English. You're a lot more likely to need Spanish if you happen to be in Nicaragua than you are to need German if you are in Germany, Austria or Switzerland. -- Mwalcoff 02:45, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd let him learn German, and make sure he gets a teacher that knows how to teach language (otherwise you get my situation with Spanish, I could ace all the tests and worksheets but never actually learned to speak). One of three things will happen: 1) He will be so enamoured with German that he'll want to learn other languages too. 2) He'll apply himself and learn German moderately well, but then disregard language in general for most of the rest of his life. 3) When he finds out that learning German actually requires work, he'll lose interest, flop the class, and not do anything with language for the rest of his life. I was the kind of person that fell under case 1. I didn't really have much interest in learning any language but German, but after learning German, I quickly took to Japanese, Spanish, Latin, and French. My dad turned out as case 2, he learned the language, but it doesn't really interest him, and he let it fall by the wayside. If your brother does this with a language he wanted to take, that's very close to his own (English is after all a Germanic language), he won't do any better with Spanish, which he did not want to take. And then there's case 3, which many of the kids in my various language classes fell into. If he's a case 3 with German, he certainly ain't gonna learn Spanish.

I myself lived in Colorado for 15 and a half years, in the DFW area (Duncanville) for 3, and in the Tyler area for the past 8 months. In all that time I only recall meeting one person that I had to talk to that understood only Spanish and no English. And even that situation was resolved by recruiting one of the myriad bilinguals that can be found in Texas as an interpreter. So he probably doesn't really need Spanish. And if he is racist, you want to cure that before you start teaching him. Firstoff, you're not likely to teach him anything unless his attitude changes. Secondly, if he does learn Spanish and still is racist, mightn't he not just use it to berate Spanish speakers? If you teach him anything of grammar, he'll probably be able to get whatever cuss-words, racial epithets, etc. he wants out of a Spanish-English dictionary.

The best arguement for learning a language (other than fun) is because it's courteous to at least attempt to speak to someone in their language even if they know yours. But this applies to German as well as Spanish. He's more likely to be courteous to speakers of a language he wanted to learn than to those of a language he didn't want. But whatever language you teach him, I'm not sure homeschool is the best way to learn a language. Depending on how well you know Spanish, it may be out of the question for you to teach. Can you carry on a prolonged conversation in any (or at least most) subjects? If not, you can do worksheets and wordlists, but it's likely to bore him to tears and teach him little. If you are fluent, you need to make sure that at least 75% of instruction is carried out through speaking in Spanish, demonstrating what you're trying to say with gestures, drawings, etc. (not translations into English). He won't learn it well unless you make him think in it. You yourself will need to be willing to put a lot of work in. If you are willing, the next step is to convince him. If you're not, don't even try. Linguofreak 04:00, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, learning any foreign language is good. But for pros of Spanish over German, there are a number. As said, it's easier (for a native English speaker) than German is (spelling, grammar and to a lesser extent, vocabulary). Second, far more people in the world speak Spanish, and in particular in your part of the world. The role of German as an international language has been diminished a lot, mostly by English. Spanish and French haven't lost as much ground in comparison. But at the end of the day, the answer really has to come from why you want to learn to speak a second language in the first place. --BluePlatypus 04:17, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would disagree that Spanish is easier than German for an English speaker. Grammar and morphology are quite similar between English and German (of course not identical), and the core vocabulary is a much better match than between English and Spanish. About the only place where Spanish is easier for an English speaker is phonology: There are no phonemes in North American Spanish that do not exist in English or at least cannot be approximated unambiguously. German is also far more widespread than you think (actually more native speakers than French). See the Wikipedia Article on German, which mentions for instance, that German is the second most common language on the internet, and is more popular than French as a foreign language in Europe. Linguofreak 06:26, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unless he just said German to annoy you, one good reason why he should learn German is motivation, which you need to have at least a little of if you want to learn a language at all. Believe me, I used to be a language teacher.

Other reasons for him to learn German are:

Plenty of US Americans can speak Spanish but not so many can speak German: being able to speak a slightly more unusual language could give him a big advantage later in life. (E.g. if he works as a translator, travel agent, pilot, CIA officer, tourist guide, historian, salesperson at Disneyland, etc etc.)
In Texas there are a some high-tech companies with factories producing microchips, etc in Germany, e.g. AMD with its fab [4] in Dresden. Infineon has fabs in Dresden and Texas, too. They often send their workers to Germany, and it is a big advantage if you can speak even only a little German. If he stays in Texas, it would still be good to have German on his resumé if he applies for a company like that.
German has a reputation for being hard, so looks good on a resumé. Actually, I've learnt French, Spanish and German (I'm English) and they are all hard in some ways and easier in others. German is actually very easy to spell, too, BTW.
The German Wikipedia is the second largest wikipedia!
Why shouldn't he learn German, if that's what he fancies?

Saint|swithin 09:33, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, if you want to learn a language for the sole reason of learning a language, all practical considerations aside, clearly the one to learn is classical Greek. It is the most pure and least mangaled of all languages that I've learnt, so it's a fantastic base for learning future European languages. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 10:04, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I really, really, hope you're kidding about that, Sam, and that you don't actually believe there are such things as "pure" and "mangled" languages. Angr (talk • contribs) 10:07, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was slightly serious. But only slightly. That said, classical Greek is fantasticly poetic. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 10:08, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The main reason my mom wanted me to teach him some basics was b/c we all see him headed in a direction different from me. I'm more slighted towards the corporate world, while he will turn out doing some kind of landscaping work. I forgot to mention this earlier. Thank you very much though for all your wonderful sugestions. schyler 12:48, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As a language teacher, I can assure that attitude is probably more important than anything. Want him to learn Spanish? Take him somewhere that would blow away his stereotypes of "greasy, uncultured Mexicans" (which I assume are what's powering his racism), like any of the Mexican colonial cities, Guanajuato or San Luis Potosí for instance. I never wanted to really learn a language until I was in an attractive foreign country. Also, it's a good for you guys in other ways.

We can only hope his racism is that shallowly rooted. If the reason he wants to learn German is to read Mein Kampf in the original or to communicate with German Neo-Nazi groups, it will be much harder to turn him to the light side. Angr (talk • contribs) 16:05, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe he'll read Marx and Engels instead? On the main point, dont try and force him to learn Spanish. He obviously doesnt have the motivation to do it so it would just be a waste of your time. He might as well learn German. Jameswilson 00:30, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why not compare the two languages on a variety of points?

GRAMMAR: On the one hand, English owes more than half of its words to Latin (ultimately), which enables an educated English-speaker to understand a complicated Spanish discussion much more easily than the equivalent German discussion. On the other hand, English shares quite a few common terms with German. On the other hand, German is far more inflected and agglutinative than Spanish, and German conjugation is not really all that similar to modern English verbs (which almost totally lack conjugation). On the other hand, Spanish verbs are difficult as well, and their conjugation is more complicated. However, Spanish has fewer irregular verbs.
ORTHOGRAPHY: Spanish and German spelling conventions are equally easy and intuitive, with a few easily-remembered exceptions. Both are far more regular than our weird-ass English orthography. Both Spanish and German use diacritics, of course, which can be obnoxious when typing.
DEMOGRAPHY: Spanish-speakers vastly outnumber German-speakers, and are more widely-dispersed across the globe. Moreover, Spanish-speaking countries have a much higher birth rate than German-speaking ones. At this rate, German could be a dead language soon (not really). But demographic changes could quite easily have an effect on the future relevance of the language.
UTILITY: Living in the Americas, it's far more useful to speak Spanish. I can't think of an "on the other hand" for this one. This is clear-cut. If you intend to remain in the U.S. and not become a translator or interpreter, there really isn't a pressing need to learn German. It would be more useful to learn French or Portuguese. If you want to move to Germany, that's a different story.
LITERATURE: German has a larger, richer corpus of literature than Spanish (a huge percentage of philosophers and scientists were/are German). However, Spanish has accrued a lot of interesting literature of its own over the past few centuries (including my personal favorite, Borges). If you want to study something like economics or philosophy, German will suit you better, though I doubt it's really much of an advantage these days.
COLLEGE/JOB: For resume purposes, German is undoubtedly more likely to impress. I took a few years of German and it never ceases to amaze people. "They offer that??" In many U.S. schools, Spanish is the "default" foreign language, so it is widely (albeit unfairly) associated with slackers and C-students.
SCENERY: If you're looking for trivial reasons, consider that German-speaking countries are (in the opinion of many) colder and less picturesque than Spanish-speaking ones.

In conclusion... Spanish strikes me as the more logical choice, especially if you aren't enthusiastic about either option. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed German, and I enjoy being able to read it today. But I don't feel like I really got anything out of the class. For me, it just didn't serve a purpose.

On the other hand... why not learn them both? Neither is particularly difficult if you really put effort into it. Or... why not learn neither? Learn Chinese or Hindi instead! Both have more speakers than Spanish. Bhumiya (said/done) 04:29, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Colder, yeah, which means snow, and some of the greatest skiing in the world. But less picturesque? Germanic countries have epic fantasy castles and mountains. I think it really depends on what you're looking for. For chemistry, a couple of years of German is still required at the graduate level. There's some mathematics still being published in German, but it seems like French is major non-English publishing language for mathematics. If you want to read stuff printed between ~1750-1950 in math or physics, German is likely to be necessarry. --Prosfilaes 04:43, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I was really just kidding about that one. There are some very pleasant sights in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. But I don't think you'd call the region "balmy". Bhumiya (said/done) 05:34, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I read that there were so many German immigrants in the USA early in its history, that at one time German was looking like becoming the lingua franca, displacing English. True? Interesting that it has become so much less significant in the USA. If you want a language you can get your heart into, Russian does very nicely. JackofOz 10:24, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's correct. German was very influential in certain American colonies, though the legend about it almost gaining official status is untrue. Bhumiya (said/done) 23:59, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Bhumiya. Now I feel completely demythologised. JackofOz 00:44, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are both advantages and disadvantages to learning either language, but it all depends on his learning style. I'm convinced the reason a lot of people stop learning a foreign language is because it is not taught to their method of using language. I was learning French, and I had all but dropped it, and then I accidently came across conlangs like Esperanto and Interlingua, which changed the whole way I looked at language. Whereas the French class had me memorize sentences and phrases with little explanation of conjugation or grammar, these conlang sites started at syntax, and word arrangement. They started with the foundation of forming a phrase and then added in vocab like variables. After that, I could pick up the gist of a whole lot more languages. My point is this: if your mom sees that your brother is having difficulty with retaining spanish/german (or whatever he decides to do) try teaching him with a different method. Because he is being home-schooled, he has the advantage of being able to be taught in a way that fits him. She should take into account what kind of learner he is.--The i kiroid (talk parler hablar paroli 说話し parlar) 18:55, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

German music is way better than Spanish. Serious point, actually, music was the main reason I kept up and improved my knowledge of the language. However, I do agree that if you're going for utility, Spanish is probably the better language to learn for the reasons above. But then, if you're going purely for utility, you should learn Chinese.

In the end, the average Westerner probably won't ever meet someone who doesn't speak English (though if you go to France or Wales they might pretend not to). So learning a language to enjoy something cultural is as good a reason as any. Though everyone likes to hear someone address them in their own language, even if it's just a quick "Guten Tag" or "Buenos dias" or "Ni hao" before falling back into the lingua franca. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 00:36, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I find that it highly unlikely that "the average Westerner probably won't ever meet someone who doesn't speak English". In the heart of the US, I quite frequently run into customers who can't communicate in English. Since these are the Mexicans who chose to come to the US, I assume that if I went to Mexico, I'd find many people who can't speak English. I understand that Japanese tourists who have gone on guided tours of the US have went home with the impression that Americans all speak Japanese, but if you look around, I suspect you'll find more non-English speakers then you think.--Prosfilaes 05:12, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

words with multiple meanings[edit]

Hi

 Could you please help me with a few words(except verbs)that has more than four or five meanings.

Thanking You abha

moved to its own question --WhiteDragon 19:47, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

oh, and set has lots of meanings, some verb and some noun. --WhiteDragon 19:49, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wiktionary's Translation of the "Week"[edit]

When we say Translations of the Week, it's never weekly, but still, we need your help for translating some of these terms, if you would be so kind. Thank you very much. -- --Wonderfool t (c) 11:57, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1	I don't know

2	love triangle

3

plus

Translate into what language? Loomis51 23:13, 10 April 2006 (UTC) If you're looking for the German translation, "I don't know" is "Ich weiss es nicht"; "plus" can be "plus (+ dat)" or "und" or "ausserdem" unless you're talking about the plus-sign, in which case it'd be "das Pluszeichen" and "love triangle" is "das Liebesdreieck" (I think). User: meinekurzebeine 10:53, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think I can tell you the Spanish and Japanese translations:

SPANISH: "I don't know" is "No sé" or "Yo no sé" for emphasis; "plus", depending on the usage, could be either "más" (one plus one), "signo de más" (plus sign), or "además" (Jack plus Jill); "love triangle" seems to be "triángulo de amor".

JAPANESE: "I don't know" might be translated as "知らない" shiranai, which means literally "unknown"; "plus", in the sense of "plus sign", is "正号" seigou, and in place of a verb, they just use the particle "と", which means "with" or "and"; "love triangle" is "三角関係" sankakukankei, which literally means "triangle relationship". Bhumiya (said/done) 04:44, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shiranai is a verb form and "unknown" is an adjective. However it can be used in phrases like shiranai hito, i.e. "unknown person". In general, "don't know" would be a more accurate translation. It is a little informal; the polite form, "Shirimasen" is probably preferable here. --Dforest 01:52, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There were supposed to add translations to these wiktionary entries in wiktionary.

I still don't know what language you want this translated into. In any case:

FRENCH: "I don't know" "Je ne sais pas", "Love Triangle" literally would be "Triangle D'Amour" though, knowing the French they probably have a much sexier phrase for it. And "plus" is simply "plus".

In fact, "love triangle" translates to «triangle amoureux» in French, which isn't much sexier.Superk 18:13, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"I don't know" in Hebrew is: "ani lo yode'ah", in Yiddish it's: "ich vaist nisht" in Russian it's: "ya nye znayu" in Pig-Latin it's: "I-ay ont-day ow-nay", and in Common Teenager English it's: "beats me" (with a shrug of the shoulders).Loomis51 00:32, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In Latin, "I don't know" is "nescio." On the wiktionary page, it is erroneously translated *"non scio." "Love triangle" literally is "triangulus amoris." I am not sure of how to translate the matematical term "plus" to Latin (it could very well be "plus," the same word), but when it is a synonym of "and," the Latin equivalent is "et."--El aprendelenguas 01:08, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DUTCH: "I don't know" translates as: "Ik weet het niet" "Love Triangle" becomes: "Driehoeksverhouding", literally the translation would be: "Liefdes driehoek" "Plus" could be "plus" or when you use it as a synonym for "and" it's "en" Zorayas 12:35, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know:

Welsh: Dydw i ddim yn gwybod, 'dwi ddim yn gwybod, or (my personal favorite) 'sa i'n gwybod.
Jèrriais (Jersey Norman): Jé n'sai pon

The Jade Knight 04:17, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In Norwegian "Jeg vet ikke" (Bokmål)/"Eg veit ikkje" (Nynorsk), "Kjærlighets triangel" (b)/"Kjærleiks triangel" (n) and "Pluss". --Eivind ^t ^@^c 19:13, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help in parsing needed[edit]

Would be grateful for identification of parts of speech of words in following sentence:

"The design of wings is complicated."

Thanks!!!

 --J. Stumped

Please do your own homework. Angr (talk • contribs) 19:52, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re-spelling of a word[edit]

If you can, please provide me with the re-spelling of the word, or a break-down of the pronounciation of the french word used to describe the area between the neck and breasts of a woman. I believe the word is spelled deco'lletege. I'm sure that the accent mark and one or two letters are incorrect in the word. I hope that I've given you enough information about my question to answer it . Any help would be greatly appreciated. - Crystal

I'm not even sure what to call it in English. Loomis51 23:15, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Décolletage originally referred to cutting a plunging neckline, and only by extension to the area revealed by wearing one. It's used in French and English. English décolletage <= French décoleté. As for pronunciation, "day-coal-e-taj" should get you by. - Nunh-huh 23:24, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

April 11[edit]

Spanish[edit]

Could some one treanslate this for me? ~~goodguy~~

Se me esta acabando lo buena que soy y me esta llegando lo malo por dentro yo no se matar pero voy a aprender para disipar todo el mal que me has hecho y si llego a ser asesina por ti matarás por eso derecho al infierno.

Ya me estoy volviendo también como tu como tu lo hacías en la iglesia del pueblo de rodillas besabas la cruz y llorando con golpes de pecho yo creí que rezabas por mi quién iba a pensar que me estabas mintiendo

Si por estas cosas que acabas de hacer se molesta Dios y te manda el castigo yo voy a rezar un rosario por ti pa¹ que te perdone lo malo que has sido y si ya te tiene del fuego el Señor yo sería capaz de quemarme contigo

Ya me estoy volviendo también como tu como tu lo hacías en la iglesia del pueblo de rodillas besabas la cruz y llorando con golpes de pecho yo crei que rezabas por mi quién iba a pensar que me estabas mintiendo

Try running it through this. -Snpoj 02:20, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to see the results! Lengthy sentences like these are really not suitable for machine translation. Bhumiya (said/done) 04:47, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Witness, for example, the machine translation for the first sentence: "This finishing the good thing to me that I am and me this arriving bad on the inside not to kill itself but I am going to learn to dissipate badly all that you have done to me and if I get to be killer by you you right kill for that reason hell". Joe 05:12, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, really looks horrible ;) I'm gonna attempt a somewhat free translation, using puctuation:

My patience is coming to an end and I'm filling with evil thoughts. I don't know how to kill but I'm going to learn, to dissipate all the evil you've done to me. And if I become a killer for you you'll kill for that, you'll go straight to hell.

I'm becoming just like you, like you used to do in the church of the village. You kissed the cross kneeling down and crying hitting your chest. I thought you were praying for me, who would have thought you were lying.

If for these things you've just done God becomes annoyed and punishes you, I'm going to say a rosary for you, so that he forgives how bad you've been. And if you're already in God's fire I'd be ready to burn with you.

I'm becoming just like you, like you used to do in the church of the village. You kissed the cross kneeling down and crying hitting your chest. I thought you were praying for me, who would have thought you were lying.

Hope that was useful. --RiseRover|^talk 08:54, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hauling someone over the coals[edit]

What does it mean to haul someone over the coals? (or in German, "jemandem die Leviten lesen")? Thanks User: meinekurzebeine 10:55, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To haul or drag someone over the coals is to take them to task; to admonish them for a perceived wrong. --Fuhghettaboutit 03:06, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've always heard it as "rake them over the coals". I imagine this refers to an imaginary torture imposed on them (making them burn themselves on hot rocks). StuRat 03:12, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You got me interested. "The phrase drag (or rake) over the coals was a reference to the treatment meted out to heretics by Christians" [5]. Which in turn appears to refer to heaping "coals of fire on someone's head"[6]. --Fuhghettaboutit 03:40, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Illocutionary speech acts[edit]

Can an imperative also be an illocutionary speech act or does it have to be something like "I declare," "I proclaim," "I pronounce you..."? Can something like "Sit down" be an illocutionary speech act? Thanks User: meinekurzebeine 10:57, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I think a command like "Sit down" is closer to being perlocutionary. Bhumiya (said/done) 04:52, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'again' in German[edit]

What is the difference between 'wieder' and 'nochmals' in German? When my little boy wants to go on the slide one more time, he shouts "Again!" I think the correct translation would be 'nochmals' (or 'noch einmal') in this case, but could he say 'wieder' instead? If not, when is 'wieder' appropriate? Thanks very much. Richardrj 05:32, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"nochmals" or "noch einmal" can usually be translated with "once more," "wieder" with "again."

Some typical examples: Sag es nochmals. (Say it once more.) / Komm mal wieder. (Come again.)

When your little boy shouts "again" in that case, he literally means "one more time," hence in German he should say "nochmals" or "noch einmal," not "wieder."

To explain the difference generally, I would say "nochmals" expresses one repetition (noch einmal, while "wieder" can express several repetitions (ein weiteres Mal, not specified). Daniel Šebesta (talk • contribs) 06:36, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks very much. Richardrj 07:23, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

“Nochmals!” would sound very artificial for a child to say in that situation, I'd say. “Nochmal!” sounds better where I live. Wikipeditor 17:07, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'may' and 'might'[edit]

What do people think about the use of 'may' or 'might' in a sentence such as: "Going outside with insufficient clothing in cold weather may/might lead to catching a chill"? A well-read acquaintance of mine argues that 'may' refers to permission, and 'might' to possibility, and therefore only 'might' would be correct in this context. I disagree - I think that both 'may' and 'might' can refer to possibility, with 'may' indicating greater likelihood than 'might'. Any thoughts? Richardrj 09:04, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you. "may" refers not only to permission.

The Advanced Gramar in Use (Cambridge University press) says, "...we use may or might to say there is a possibility of something happening or being true. There is often little difference in meaning, but might can suggest that there is less possibility." Daniel Šebesta (talk • contribs) 09:08, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about advanced English syntax that much, but I do know a fair bit about Latin syntax, and I believe it is applicable here. "May" goes with primary sequence; "might" goes with secondary (aka historic) sequence. The primary sequence includes (not exclusively) these tenses: present, future, perfect (to use the names used in Latin). The historic sequence includes (not exclusively) the aorist (I'll elaborate on the distinction between the perfect and the aorist in a minute). It is impossible to make the other secondary tenses work with "might".

So, "I may be clever at the moment" and "I may go there tomorrow" are both primary sequence and both properly use "may".

Now, the difference between the aorist and the perfect. This is easy when you haven't got a "may" or a "might" confusing things. Perfect is "I have done so-and-so". Aorist is "I did so-and-so" or "I did do so-and-so". Perfect uses "may", so "I may have done so-and-so", whereas aorist uses "might", so "I might have done so-and-so".

The differences are subtle, but I think this is the way the sequence of tense rule works in English. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 09:30, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very interesting from the grammarian's perspective. The differences are indeed subtle, a lot less obvious than the difference between "may" and "can", for example. But I think grammarians are the only people who give a damn one way or the other (bless them). From the reader's perspective, all that matters is the meaning. I can detect virtually no difference in meaning between "may" and "might" in this particular sentence. All rules default to "Either is equally acceptable". And I really wonder if there are any good professional writers who agonise about such apparently insignificant technicalities (no offence to the questioner. In fact, thank you for a most enlightening discussion).

(Lol). How's that for sitting on the fence (I think Monty Python has a job for me - see Episode 2, Sketch 3). JackofOz 10:14, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, thank you for an interesting post. But I see from your talk page that you are a grammarian yourself ("adhering to correct grammar"), so you must agree that there is something at stake here :) Richardrj 10:36, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The grammarian in me agrees 100 per cent and thinks this is terribly important. The other two guys in here are more interested in chilling out and writing and reading good literature. :--) JackofOz 13:48, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From a linguist's perspective, it is an error to take the rules of one language and use them to determine meaning in another, particularly when the languages are as different as English and Latin. Doing so has led to some of the more disfunctional prescriptions in English (e.g., "Do not end a sentence with a preposition.) May and might as described in the Cambridge grammar reflect usage. Beyond the internal grammar reflected in that usage, there is no "correctness" or "incorrectness" in grammar. mnewmanqc

That's certainly true, but it isn't always applicable. Sometimes Latin rules can be used to understand English forms more fully. I'm not saying that the guidelines I mentioned above are prescriptive. I was merely giving what I understand to be the way that these words are technically used, and I am not claiming to know the rules perfectly. However, "might" is without a single doubt the past tense (aorist, if you will) of "may". Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 13:51, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is undoubtedly true technically. But most readers would understand both words to refer to a possible future event, rather than having anything to do with the past. "Might have" or "may have" would be necessary to convey a sense of past action. JackofOz 14:03, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Might historically comes from the past tense of may, which is clear from the t. However, it is debatable whether it is a past tense in any meaningful sense now, and I stand by the irrelevance of Latin in this case. Cross linguistic comparisons, under the rubric of comparative syntax are useful in developing an understanding of structures at a more abstract level, say, universal grammar than this. Also, the statement "It is impossible to make the other secondary tenses work with might" is by definition prescriptive, when, in fact, might is used.

I really don't see how you can put "I was going" or "I had gone" into a construction using "may" or "might", which was the point I was making. I disagree that Latin is irrelevant. I wasn't making the statement prescriptively, just how I personally understand it having studied Latin and Greek. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 15:42, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So is there a consensus here that may and might are interchangeable when referring to a possible future event? Richardrj 15:48, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sam, we're getting into a mutual "yes it is" "no it isn't" thing here, but I'm not sure what you mean with the "was going" or "had gone" construction, but if you are fine with it, let's just leave it. Anyway, the sentence that provoked this debate is fine with either modal. mnewmanqc

Taking ownership of the null[edit]

What does it mean to "take ownership of the null"? I know it's something to do with claiming power (e.g. in the play, Oleanna) but I'm just wondering if anyone has a specific definition for this? Thanks. User: meinekurzebeine 9:33, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

This article discusses it in some depth. A proper understanding depends on the concept of the null hypothesis, but one could paraphrase it as 'setting the terms of the debate'. The person who 'owns the null' is the person who sets up the initial presumption in a discussion; anyone with a different view therefore has a hard task in disproving that presumption. Henry ^Flower 16:04, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"War" in other languages[edit]

I'd like to know some one word translations for the word 'war' in languages other than english. Thanks if you can help.

In Czech we say válka, in German Krieg. Daniel Šebesta (talk • contribs) 17:34, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

युद्ध (yud'dha) in Hindi, guerre in French. deeptrivia (talk) 17:47, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Three more from me: guerra in both Spanish and Italian, война in Russian. Daniel Šebesta (talk • contribs) 17:56, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rat in Serbian/Croatian/Bosnian. Duja 17:57, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/War Henry ^Flower 17:57, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, some words not included there: Danish: "krig" (same as Norwegian/Swedish.. big surprize), Icelandic "Stríð"/"Styrjöld". Hungarian: "Háború". --BluePlatypus 18:39, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

軍 or 戦 (both pronounced ikusa) in Japanese, but this can also mean "battle" or "fight". Bhumiya (said/done) 18:55, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In Hebrew, the most common word is מלחמה, (milchamah), but you could also use קרב, (krav) which would refer to a battle or fight. In Latin, war is bellum (you'd think it would have something to do with belle in French, but it doesn't to the best of my knowledge). СПУТНИК^{ССС Р} 21:01, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Belle comes from the adjective bellus/a/um, which means "beautiful" just like in French. Bellum the noun is war, which comes from an old Latin form "duellum" which survived in a different sense to become our word "duel". (D shifting to B in Latin is a frequent occurrence for some reason.) Adam Bishop 03:56, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Silly me, I didn't check the Wiktionary link, which of course has the Hebrew and Latin words. Oh well... СПУТНИК^{ССС Р} 21:11, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Guerre" in French. "Rhyfel" in Welsh. The Jade Knight 04:08, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Traditional Chinese: 戰爭 Simplified Chinese: 战争 --Kahang 15:09, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do not go to Wikt, WP has it : Search (search button, on your left) war - go - edit this page - go to the bottom : 40 words, e.g. [ [hr:Rat]][ [id:Perang]][ [is:Stríð]][ [it:Guerra]][ [he:מלחמה]][ [ka:ომი]]. Now language codes like "hr" are listed under country codes (?) here. --DLL 20:18, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In Tagalog it's gera or gyera, from Spanish guerra. A less comonly used word, a native one, is digmaan. --Chris S. 02:18, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The word for "war" is "Milito" in esperanto, "Wig" in old english, and "krijg" or "oorlog" in dutch.--The i kiroid (talk parler hablar paroli 说話し parlar) 18:09, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

April 12[edit]

toward vs towards[edit]

what's the difference in saying "I ran toward the house" and "I ran towards the house"? are they both correct? Deep evil 00:51, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The two are interchangeable. Toward is more common in American English; towards is the more common usage in British English[7].--Fuhghettaboutit 00:54, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some grammar books recommend the s-less variants of words like toward(s), afterward(s), and backward(s) for "correct" speech and writing. Despite this, you should use whichever is more natural to you.--El aprendelenguas 01:46, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have adopted my own rule. I say towards to always mean "in the direction of." For example, "I am moving towards the right direction."
I say toward to mean "imminent." For instance, "I feel that a war with Iran is toward."
Patchouli 10:00, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The people you usually speak with may understand that, but I doubt most English speakers would. If you said to me "I feel that a war with Iran is toward", I would ask "Toward what?". :--) JackofOz 11:05, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The two are interchangeable when used as prepositions or adverbs, but only toward may be used as an adjective:

Toward \To"ward\, Towards \To"wards\ adv.

    Near; at hand; in state of preparation.

Toward \To"ward\, Towards \To"wards\, prep.

    1. In the direction of; to.
    2. With direction to, in a moral sense; with respect or
       reference to; regarding; concerning.
    3. Tending to; in the direction of; in behalf of.
    4. Near; about; approaching to.

Toward \To"ward\, a. [AS. ?. See Toward, prep.]

    1. Approaching; coming near.
    2. Ready to do or learn; compliant with duty; not froward;
       apt; docile; tractable; as, a toward youth.
   3. Ready to act; forward; bold; valiant.

See Webster's 1913 dictionary for further examples. (available at dict.org) --Akohler ^Talk ^@ 21:28, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

k, thanks for the details =D Deep evil 03:23, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bookreports...[edit]

i've got a bookreport to submit after the easter holiday, and i want it to be good. but how can i write a good report? what are the criterias, and what should i include? many thanks. --203.218.93.206 01:06, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some suggestions:

Always capitalize the first letter of a sentence.

Write "book report" as two words, not one, unless you're German.

Always capitalize the word Easter.

Always capitalize the word "I".

"Criteria" is plural. The singular form is "criterion".

StuRat 02:03, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anytime you describe a trend ("theme") in the book, give examples (quotes with page numbers). And use correct punctuation and capitalization, as StuRat suggests. The Jade Knight 04:10, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

German translation[edit]

What does this mean: (quote from Duerrenmatt) "In der Zwielichtzone seiner Grenze siedelt sich alles Paradoxe an." I know what each individual word means, but as a whole - what is he trying to say? Can anyone help? Thanks. meinekurzebeine, 3:57, 12 April 2006

It literally means "In the twilight zone of its border, all that is paradoxical settles" (ie, all the paradoxical/weird stuff can be found in its border zone, whatever "its" refers to in context) -- Ferkelparade π 08:10, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

english-novels[edit]

in english there is a novel called Chocolat, would you be so kind to tell me what is the metaphoric function of chocolate?

This sounds like a homework question to me, but feel free to read our articles Chocolate, Chocolat, and Chocolat (film). Angr (talk • contribs) 10:16, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The chocolate is a metaphor for Lurpak, which Joanne Harris couldn't use for copyright/trademark reasons. Fortunately, she was later contracted as a copywriter for them and was able to see her original vision through to completion. --Bth 11:07, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Created a new word, a new definition.... now what?[edit]

Would like to know how to go about authoring a new word w/definition I thought of -- it's catchy and unique, but not copyrightable or trademarkable (according to the gov't offices in DC that handle those things) -- and what are the best ways to get it into circulation?

Start using it. If it really is catchy it'll catch on. Obviously, the more high profile you are the more likely you are to get it into general circulation (eg see Dan Savage's alternative meaning of santorum, or Stephen Colbert and truthiness). The important thing in determining whether it'll catch on is whether it expresses something that it would be useful to have a succint word for but one doesn't exist already.

So, come on, tell us: what's the new word? --Bth 12:03, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Frindle? schyler 12:24, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What's the meaning of "gets in over his/her head"?[edit]

I'm not sure what this phrase means.

It means to become involved with something you don't fully understand, and usually suggests the person who is "in over his head" has some degree of responsibility that he is unable or unwilling to relinquish despite being incompetent in the area. Angr (talk • contribs) 15:47, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What Angr said. The usual explanation is that it's related to getting into deep water. Unless you can swim well enough, you'll drown. But I don't know if that is a mere folk explanation or if it is traceable. Ande B 04:02, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What is it called when you swap the first letters of words?[edit]

This has been driving me crazy for days ~ what is the name for swapping letters of words, i.e. mood gorning instead of good morning? thanks, Denise~~

That's called a Spoonerism. "It is kisstomary to cuss the bride." --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 20:08, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Your example, however, is not a canonical spoonerism, as it switches the vowels rather than the initial consonants. Examples alleged to be from Spooner himself are "the queer old Dean" for "the dear old Queen" and "you have tasted two worms" for "you have wasted two terms". I like using spoonerisms as a form of euphemism, as in "It is cucking fold in here!" Angr (talk • contribs) 21:14, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - After British TV presenter Keith Chegwin (nickname: Cheggers) admitted to being an alcoholic, I came up with the rather wonderful (I thought) spoonerism: Cheggers can't be boozers. It seems that I was the only one who thought this was something to be proud of. Ah well. Phileas 02:18, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - I like it. Congratulations.
    - interesting that this literary form is named after one of its perpetrators rather than some Latin/Greek root referring to the interchange of letters. Do other languages have an equivalent for "spoonerism"? JackofOz 02:53, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - yes, all I know is in German, there's something similar called a "Schuettelreim" but I'm not too sure. There's more on it here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spoonerism - hope it helps. User: meinekurzebeine 4:48, 13 April 2006
- On the German wikipedia Schüttelreim links to spoonerism, but so does Buchstabendreher. Which one is correct? David Sneek 08:47, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Well, both, sort of. Buchstabendreher can be spoonerisms, but not necessarily, as they include letter-switching in written language. A Schüttelreim is a spoonerism as a poetic technique rather than as an intentional or unintentional slip of the tongue. Angr (talk • contribs) 08:56, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There doesn't appear to be a single name in Russian. My English-Russian dictionary resorts to: Непроизвольная перестановка звуков. JackofOz 14:24, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One I came up with accidentally, before I'd had my morning coffee, was "I think I need a cough of cuppy." StuRat 21:18, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Evil Sir Jasper[edit]

What is the meaning of the term "evil Sir Jasper"? I assume it means something like "bogeyman", but I don't know for sure. Bhumiya (said/done) 22:42, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

how to correctly credit wikipedia in an english paper MLA format[edit]

Can you please show me how to correctly cite wikipedia for an english paper I am writing? Thanks

See Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia -- AJR | Talk 01:06, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

April 13[edit]

Is this correct spanish grammar?[edit]

Sorry to bother you about this, but I need you to proofread this. I modified my español babelbox so that it says the following: Este usuario puede apenas contribuir con un nivel básico de español, pero lo dude que puede te entender. Tiene que hacer de uso del diccionario cuando escriba. Is this correct grammar? I'm unsure about my use of the subjunctive, since it doesn't exist in english, and my placement of "apenas" may be wrong. If you could help me with this, that would be wonderful.--The i kiroid (talk parler hablar paroli 说話し parlar) 20:51, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1)'puede te entender'. If you use 'te' then it should be 'puedes (tu ) entender' or 'puedas entender . I feel it should be se pueda entendar (pueda -subjunctive with dude) 2)'dude' -someone doubts? Maybe ' dudo' I doubt? Don't use the subjunctive of dudar. 3)Tiene que hacer de uso del diccionario cuando escriba. -Who is communicating here? If yourself then I would say, Tengo que usar el diccionario cuando escribe.

I hope you don't mind if I post this at the [[Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language|help discussion]]. Please go there. There are gazillions of native speakers and experts better qualified.--Jondel 00:35, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've copied the above from my discussion page , please feel free to correct/respond. I'm not a native Spanish speaker .--Jondel 00:41, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the complete correction: Este usuario puede apenas contribuir con un nivel básico de español, y es dudoso que pueda entenderle. Tiene que usar un diccionario cuando escriba. "Entenderle" mean something like "understand you, sir or ma'am," and is more appropriate in this situation than "entenderte." The other changes were slight, more or less.--El aprendelenguas 01:31, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry it's so ambiguous. The "puede" "dude" are supposed to be for Ello/a, not Usted, so I probably should have written that in. It's supposed to say "This user can barely contribute on a basic level of spanish, but they doubt that they can understand you. They have to use a dictionary when they write."--The i kiroid (talk parler hablar paroli 说話し parlar) 18:27, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say, Este usuario apenas puede contribuir con un nivel básico de español, pero duda de que pueda entenderte. Tiene que hacer de uso del diccionario cuando escribe. In fact, I wouldn't say "pero", but "por lo tanto": they can barely contribute on a basic level - therefore, they can't understand you. So, Este usuario apenas puede contribuir con un nivel básico de español, por lo que duda de que pueda entenderte. Tiene que hacer de uso del diccionario cuando escribe sounds more appropriate to me.--RiseRover|^talk 22:00, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

subjunctive [...] doesn't exist in english. Of course the subjunctive exists in English. -lethe ^{talk +} 23:48, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It isn't differentiated between the non-subjunctive though with prefixes or suffixes. And its usage differs from spanish.--The i kiroid (talk parler hablar paroli 说話し parlar) 02:24, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese (Mandarin) Possesive pronouns[edit]

I need a pronunciation of the sentence: I want to see your shoes.

I've forgotten nearly all my vocabulary, but in regards to to possesive pronouns, they're formed by adding the particle de to the pronouns. That is, I - Wo, My - Wo.de; You - Ni, Your - Ni.de; she/he/it - Ta, hers/his/its -Ta.de. This translation is probably wrong: "Wo yao kan kan ni.de (shoes)." I think "yao" means "want" and "kan" definitely means "to see." I feel like "kan kan" would be a bit more informal: "Hey, can I see your shoes." Hopefully, someone who actually knows mandarin will post :-) --Vijay 02:52, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

我想看看您的鞋子。(pinyin (without tonal marks): wo xiang kankan ninde xiezi). Vijay is right, the repetitive "kan kan" is of a lighter tone, something like "take a casual look".--K.C. Tang 03:31, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe he could add yixia (一下) to be polite?--The i kiroid (talk parler hablar paroli 说話し parlar) 18:35, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

of course, in this case.--K.C. Tang 00:09, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'我想看下你的鞋子。'will be more casual.this means 'i want to have a look of your shoes for a while.“请问我可以看一下你的鞋子吗？”will even be more polite, means 'may i have a look of your shoes for a while?'--Carbonferum 16:46, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quoting British English in American English work[edit]

I'm writing a thesis in American English, but I quote British works often. Are there manual of style guidelines dictating whether I should change the spellings in the British quotations or keep them as is? Do I need to indicate a spelling change?--Bkwillwm 06:49, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Most guidelines I've seen discourage changes of any sort to quotes. Especially with something as minor as this, I wouldn't think twice about leaving the spellings alone.--Prosfilaes 07:07, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Prosfilaes, though if you want to be obnoxious about it you could put "[sic]" after every British spelling. Angr (talk • contribs) 07:13, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From other countries' perspectives, we are all foreigners and we all speak with an accent. An accent is not just the different way in which the same word can be pronounced, it also includes the choice of words and idioms and, in the written form of the language, the conventions about spelling and punctuation. These variants are expected from known foreigners (sounds a bit like "known felons"). It's all part of the deal with being a foreigner. Changing the spelling would be like asking Tom Cruise to speak like an Englishman. (well, sort of.) JackofOz 11:01, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Or asking Nicole Kidman to speak like an American (shudder). Angr (talk • contribs) 11:03, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very droll. I really loved Tom Cruise in "Eyes Wide Shut", and I'm sure he will get his Oscar ... one day. You'll hear no word against his alleged acting ability from me. :--)

I should have said: Changing the spelling would be like asking an American actor to speak like an Englishman while playing the part of an American. Incongruous and crazy. JackofOz 11:42, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I believe British english and American English switch definitions of "should" and "would" sometimes.--The i kiroid (talk parler hablar paroli 说話し parlar) 18:37, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also note that in some cases, you will need to give an American English interpretation of a British English sentence. There probably aren't too many Americans who would know what a "dual carriageway" is, for example (a divided highway). StuRat 20:54, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That would be a separate exercise. The actual words used by the speaker should be sacrosanct if quotation marks are being used. JackofOz 00:24, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Western US Pronunciation of Want[edit]

I have immigrated to California from another country nine years ago. I would like to know whether the native Californian pronounces want as \'wänt\ (like father or mar) or as \'wənt\ (like humdrum). I myself think the answer is \'wənt\ because this is how I pronounce what (\'wət\) and wanna (\'wənə\).
Basically, is the California pronunciation of want with a long vowel or a short vowel? Or is it both like the a in and.
Note: I have used the phonetic alphabet of Merriam-Webster.
Patchouli 09:45, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

While there are accents of English where want is pronounced to rhyme with punt (thus IPA /wʌnt/, M-W \wənt\), to the best of my knowledge California English isn't one of them. I believe in California, as in the majority of accents of English, it is pronounced to rhyme with font (thus IPA /wɑnt/, M-W \wänt\). I don't think describing one vowel as long and the other as short is helpful in this case, though. Angr (talk • contribs) 09:57, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Angr, though there may be some variation on this. Vowels before nasals do tend to migrate, and there are different accents in California. The best place to look is the new Labov, Ash, and Boberg, Atlas of North American English, which may be at a local university library. mnewmanqc

Or right here at my elbow. They have very little discussion of phonemic occurrence in individual words, and don't discuss want specifically at all as far as I can tell. Angr (talk • contribs) 14:56, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lucky you! They deal in word classes. There is no reason why want would vary from other words in the (ah) or maybe (a) group which will be merged with the (o) class in CA. So, if want is pronounced with a slightly raised vowel, so will other words like font Tom calm. mnewmanqc

Well, there is a reason, namely that in some accents, want is phonemically /wʌnt/, i.e. it rhymes with that accent's pronunciation of punt but not with that accent's pronunciation of font. In terms of word classes, all they deal with that's relevant to want is the cot-caught merger: if I'm right that want rhymes with font in California, both words also rhyme with haunt and taunt in California (except for San Francisco). Angr (talk • contribs) 16:16, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In California, the vowels in law and god, and father are the \ä\ of M-W phonetic alphabet. So you don't form an egg with your mouth for law. Patchouli 17:16, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The whole notion of "long" vs. "short" vowels is problematic for many English dialects, but "want" is pronounced with an unrounded and often somewhat fronted vowel which is nevertheless rather distinct from the [æ] of "cat". AnonMoos 20:17, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"El Quico"[edit]

Hi everyone. I'm in the process cleaning up our article on Spanish anarchist/resistance fighter Francisco Sabaté Llopart, but I can't find any of the many online biographies giving an English translation for his nickname "El Quico". Babelfish oh-so-helpfully supplies "The Quico". Can anyone suggest a suitable translation? Thanks! --Bth 12:16, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Quickie? The Quiche? Angr (talk • contribs) 12:37, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to my Cambridge-Klett Spanish dictionary, a "toasted corn sack."--Bkwillwm 12:44, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Two facts solve your puzzle. First, a nickname for Francisco is Quico, like Bill for William. Second, in Catalan and by extension, the type of Spanish spoken in Catalonia, it is normal to use an article before a given name. I'm known to friends in Barcelona as "El Michael." mnewmanqc

Ah-hah! That sounds much more plausible than the foodstuff-based ones. As such I'll just leave it untranslated. Thank you very much. --Bth 16:15, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unhealthy Obsessive Dependent Love[edit]

There is a word in the English language for a man who is obsessively and unhealthily dependent upon his wife and his relationship with her. Or the word I'm seeking may refer to the unhealthy obsessional dependence itself. Can anybody help me remember this word? Thanks Tony Smithies 13:00, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Codependent? Or Dependent personality disorder? Angr (talk • contribs) 13:15, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To the extent that the dependency is pecuniary, the phrase you're searching for is Kevin Federline. Joe 16:11, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fidelity? --Sam Blanning^(talk) 00:39, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible that you're referring to the phrase "a kept man"? Loomis51 11:18, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Radionica[edit]

Serbian word. Definition?

Workshop. --BluePlatypus 22:34, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What about...[edit]

...a giant multilanguage searchable wiktionary? Is there one? If not, what would it take to make it. I know there's an EN one and probably some others, but I don't think there's a way to search from one language to another. -LambaJan 21:01, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the end, I think each language edition of the Wiktionary is supposed to cover all languages. You can already look up Chinese characters and kana on the English Wikitionary. For practical purposes, I doubt you will find much information on any other Wiktionary that is not also in the English Wiktionary. If there is, use an internet search engine and restrict your results to site:wiktionary.org. Wikipeditor 23:37, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the point is to be able to get from a word in English to the translation in German, eg. For great justice. 21:25, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You mean, not only a link from English wiktionary:eat to French wiktionary:manger and an interlanguage link from there to wiktionary:fr:manger, but directly from wiktionary:en:eat to wiktionary:fr:manger? Wikipeditor 00:25, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

April 14[edit]

Classical Arabic[edit]

On the Classical Arabic article, I tried to add arabic spellings for baḥr and ǧisr as ﺑﺂﺣﺮ and ﺟﻴﺴﺮ. Is this correct? I don't know any arabic, and I have only a basic understanding of the arabic abjad. Also, I added a consonant and vowel table a while back which was never validated, so I need that checked too.--The i kiroid (talk parler hablar paroli 说話し parlar) 02:39, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's displaying in reverse order, for me. AnonMoos 03:30, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If baHr is supposed to mean "sea, river" (as in the singular of Bahrein), then it should be بحر -- AnonMoos 03:35, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is supposed to be that.--The i kiroid (talk parler hablar paroli 说話し parlar) 13:44, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not really sure how much validity the "silent postconsonantal final r" rule really has across different pronunciations of classical Arabic, anyway... AnonMoos 03:39, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that whole section was added by an anon w/o sources, edited by more anons, and then fixed by some users for the sake of formatting and spelling. So, a lot of the article is unreferenced and could be total BS, so I need some help fixing it. I've been trying to add on to this article for a long time, since before I was a user, so I don't want to see it go down the drain. But I only know about the history and phonemes, I don't know anything about pronounciation. With these words, I was just trying to wikify the article.--The i kiroid (talk parler hablar paroli 说話し parlar) 13:44, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The opposite of 'original research'[edit]

What do you call research of the type that is done to compile a Wikipedia article? The type that does not include making new observations, but may involve much searching for and synthesis of information from published sources? ike9898 09:48, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A review of the literature? Henry ^Flower 10:57, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Or text based on references. Daniel Šebesta (talk • contribs) 13:53, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think a review of the literature is the correct term. "Text based on references" isn't really accurate, because even original research has to have references and cited sources. Angr (talk • contribs) 14:02, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Or more specifically, "research that consists of collecting and organizing information from existing primary and/or secondary sources". Dforest 16:15, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to find a specific word when the definition is known[edit]

Awhile ago I looked through a dictionary and found a word with a definition that I really liked. The problem is, I forgot what the word was! The definition is something like "a person who believes they should have been born in different time period than the one they live in." I think it may have started with an 'S' but I really can't remember. If anyone could help me figure out what they word was, I would truly appreciate it. Thanks a lot!

-Keith

I wonder if you might be thinking of SCAdian, a term used to describe a member of the Society for Creative Anachronism? (see also The Urban Dictionary ). --LarryMac 18:39, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

April 15[edit]

R[edit]

What is the rolling of r's called, like you would do in the spanish word "perro?" schyler 01:54, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

see trill consonant--K.C. Tang 01:55, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Or, as I think they say in Spanish, "Hacer vibrar las erres" -Wiccan Quagga 03:19, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Learning Irish[edit]

can recommend any good book for learning Irish? i can't find one even in a university library... and you know how tempting Irish is to any language geek... a pity that the "Routledge Grammars" series seems to have no desire to produce one...:( --K.C. Tang 02:03, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the most successful one I know of is Learning Irish by Micheál Ó Siadhail (ISBN 0300042248) , but it has the strong drawback that he teaches his local dialect rather than standard written Irish. It's the only textbook I know of that has any discussion of pronunciation at all, but the pronunciation is also that of his local dialect, and may be rather different from what you hear elsewhere, not to mention rather far removed from the spelling at times (the prepositions do "to" and de "from" are both pronounced [gə]). If you're just interested in reading and don't care about pronunciation, and don't mind a rather dry presentation, Progress in Irish by Máiréad Ní Ghráda (ISBN 0861671597) is good. Then there's Teach Yourself Irish by Diarmuid Ó Sé and Joseph Sheils (ISBN 034056492X), which includes a tape but no systematic presentation of pronunciation. Like all the other books in the modern generation of the Teach Yourself series, the focus is on listening and speaking, not on grammar. What the best book for you is depends a lot on whether you want a more "easily accessible" book that presents phrases and sentences for use in conversation, or more "scientific" book that presents paradigms and grammatical explanations for the linguistically minded. Angr (talk • contribs) 06:30, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

um... what i want is something like those in the "Routledge Grammars" series, with basic pronunciation guide and comprehensive grammar - but in the case of Irish, i guess detailed orthography is necessary ...not for real life usuage, just for geeky purpose, you know:)--K.C. Tang 08:48, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, you want a reference grammar rather than a textbook. There isn't one, I'm afraid. I keep telling myself I'll write one someday. In the meantime, maybe you can track down a copy of the Christian Brothers' grammar, which has grammar information but no pronunciation guide. Or the Wikipedia articles in Category:Irish language! Angr (talk • contribs) 09:53, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thanks:), btw, is there any Irish-English dictionary with IPA?--K.C. Tang 12:02, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the Foclóir Poca (ISBN 1857910478) gives pronunciations in a system close to IPA. Problem is, the pronunciations are artificial, intended to be easy for learners to learn, but not really reflective of the way native speakers actually pronounce the words. Angr (talk • contribs) 12:37, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As a fellow learner, I can recommend Gramadach na Gaeilge, which is, I believe, an English translation from German. It can be freely accessed here. There is also 1895 Simple Lessons in Irish by Rev. Eugene O'Growney here, which is outdated but nevertheless useful on some occasions, as well as The Irish People-Learn Irish online course[8], which is inconsistent and typo-ridden, but discusses both pronunciation and grammar--very useful as a supplement to whatever other textbook you can dig up. There is a pronunciation key of marginal usability at daltai.com, and, of course, Angr was too modest to mention his excellent Wikipedia articles on Irish orthography, Irish phonology, Irish morphology, Irish syntax, Irish initial mutations and on the Irish language in general.--Ag Foghlaim 15:30, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ahem, well, modest or no, I really can't take credit for most of the main Irish language article, where I've mostly done minor housekeeping. But yes, the subarticles Ag Foghlaim mentions are predominantly my work. Angr (talk • contribs) 15:57, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Translate[edit]

Russian[edit]

С конца 1960х годов в СССР велись разработки, направленные на создание эффективного оружия для боевых пловцов Военно-Морского Флота. Работы велись в ЦНИИ Точного Машиностроения (ЦНИИТОЧМАШ) О. П. Кравченко и П. Ф. Сазоновым. К началу 1970х были теоретически и практически отработаны специальные боеприпасы для подводного огнестрельного оружия, использовавшие удлиненные невращающиеся пули с гидродинамической стабилизацией при помощи кавитационной полости, генерируемой при движении пули в воде. Пули имели вид удлиненных игл длиной порядка 20 калибров, с головной частью в виде усеченного конуса. Плоская площадка в головной части пули как раз и отвечала за создание кавитационной полости, стабилизирующей пулю при движении в воде. Первоначально были разработаны и приняты на вооружение ВМФ СССР 4.5мм патрон СПС и 4х-ствольный несамозарядный пистолет СПП-1 под эти патроны. Примерно в 1975 году на вооружение ВМФ СССР принимается комплекс оружия, состоявший из Автомата Подводного Специального АПС, разработанного конструктором В. В.

Автомат АПС построен на основе автоматики с газоотводным двигателем и запиранием поворотом затвора. В конструкции газоотводного тракта предусмотрен автоматический газовый регулятор, обеспечивающий работу автоматики в таких разных средах как вода и воздух. Работа газового регулятора использует различия в плотности сред (вода или воздух) для автоматического сброса части пороховых газов при стрельбе на воздухе.

From the end of 1960-ties in the USSR were conducted developments, directed towards the creation of effective weapon to combat the swimmers of Naval Fleet. The works were conducted in TSNII - CENTRAL SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH INSTITUTE, Precise Machine Building, (TSNIITOCHMASH) O. P. Kravchenko and P. F. Sazonovym. At the beginning of 1970-ties, there was theoretically and in practice worked out special ammunition for underwater firearms, using elongated nonrotating bullets with hydrodynamic stabilization with the aid of cavitation, generated during the motion of bullet in the water. Bullets took the form of elongated needles with a length of 20 calibers, with the head part in the form of truncated cone. Flat area in head part of the bullet was responsible for creating the cavitation recess, which stabilizes bullet during the motion in the water. Initially they were developed and accepted to the armament VMF of the USSR 4.shchmm cartridge SPS and 4x- barrel "non-self-loading" pistol SPP-Y under these cartridges. Approximately in 1975 to the armament of VMF The USSR starts the complex of weapon, which consisted of the automaton Underwater Special APS, developed by the designer V. V.
Automaton APS is built on the basis of automation with the gas-bleeding engine and the cutoff by the turning lock. In the construction of gas-bleeding circuit there is provided the automatic gas regulator, which ensures work of automation in such different media as water and air. The work of gas regulator uses differences in the density of media (water or air) for the automatic discharge of the part of solid-reactant gases with the shooting in air.

/// I hope this helps. Take care. Cheers, Sam 82.148.120.140 19:53, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence "Работы велись в ЦНИИ Точного Машиностроения (ЦНИИТОЧМАШ) О. П. Кравченко и П. Ф. Сазоновым." translates as:

"The works were conducted in TSNII - Central Scientific Research Institute, Precise Machine Building (TSNIITOCHMASH) by O. P. Kravchenko and P. F. Sazonov" (Note: the surname is Sazonov, not Sazonovym, which is the instrumental case to denote a passive construction. English has no corresponding case ending). :--) JackofOz 01:49, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

German[edit]

Aufklärungs- und Warnsysteme

Mobile und stationäre Aufklärungs- und Überwachungsmittel

I am writing a report about supercavitating weapons technology, and I would like somebody that can read Russian to translate this into English for me. *big smile* Thank you. -- Mac Davis] ⌇☢ ญƛ. 05:49, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Clearing-up and warning systems
Mobile and stationary clearing-up and monitoring means

///Cheers, Sam 82.148.120.140 20:01, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's seems a bit literal to me. I'd translate that as "Reconnaissance and warning systems/mobile and stationary reconnaissance and surveillance systems/methods". ("mittel" does mean "means" but that word wouldn't be used in this context. "systems" or "methods" would be better). --BluePlatypus 00:25, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More/-er[edit]

Why are some adjectives made comparative by adding -er (cleverer for example), while other are "more ..." (more intellegent). Why are phrases such as "more clever" or "intellegenter" not used? smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 09:04, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Long words are made comparative with 'more'; short words with 'er'. Two syllable words can go either way: I sometimes have discussions with people over whether I'm stupider than them or more stupid. (Personally I think either of these is acceptable, as is 'more clever'). Henry ^Flower 10:20, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Originally, the ones with '-er' were Germanic (as still today in other Germanic languages), and the ones with 'more' were French or Latin (as a translation of French 'plus'). It just so happens that English words of French orgin have generally more syllables than Germanic ones, and so the present rule developed. The reason for this is of course that during the French rule, complicated English words went extinct and were replaced by their French counterparts, while simple, everyday English words stayed in use. --Chl 11:13, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

very true:)--K.C. Tang 22:56, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! You've made everything clearer (or should that be more clear?)!

Both is OK! But I like clearer more good. freshgavin ΓΛĿЌ 06:56, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shit[edit]

A question has puzzled me for long: in Chinese the character 矢 (pinyi:shi) can mean both "arrow" and "shit" (though the more commonly used character for "shit" is 屎, also pronounced "shi"); in English we have "shit" vs. "shoot", and in German Schiss vs. schiessen... is the similarity only a lovely coincidence? or the concept of excrement and flinging arrow somehow resemble each other? could you guys give some examples in other languages to illustrate the problem?--K.C. Tang 12:00, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt it. The English and German words have the same origins, so there are only really two languages to have developed similar similarities- not a startling coincidence. Henry ^Flower 12:05, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You'd have to look up the "Old Chinese" Karlgren-type forms to make any conclusion about the Chinese words -- two syllables pronounced the same in modern Mandarin today can have very different pronunciations in the Chinese of 1500-2000 years ago. Meanwhile English shit and shoot come from different roots... AnonMoos 15:41, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, more than just two. All germanic lanugages have the word "shit" in some form. As for shoot, it comes from the PIE root "*skeud-", "shoot" (says etymonline), whereas "shit" is from PIE "*skheid-" (seperate). So it seems the resemblence of these two words goes pretty far back, but they're not related as far as anyone knows. "shit" is related to the verb "shed" though, and apparently through PIE to "science", which is fun :) As for the Chinese, I think it's just an interesting set of false cognates; "shit" and "shoot" being false cognates with eachother and the Chinese. Although I don't know if the Chinese words you mention are true cognates or not. --BluePlatypus 17:30, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

so you can't think of any similar pair in other languages?--K.C. Tang 22:55, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In Japanese, though borrowing much from Chinese (including the character for arrow, 矢) there is no relation between the word for shit and arrow (ya). freshgavin ΓΛĿЌ 06:54, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The first question is whether there's actually any meaningful or valid relationship within each "pair", and for Germanic, we've established that the answer is no. AnonMoos 20:28, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Idioms[edit]

Hi Sir How are you? I am new one and this web is very great i got alot of information and I am thankful to you

I need Idioms good idioms plz tell me I am waiting for you reply? thankyou —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.247.152.67 (talk • contribs) .

First of all, there are many people who answer questions at the reference desk, many of whom are female. I personally am doing fine. Have you read our articles Idiom and List of idioms in the English language? —Keenan Pepper 17:36, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you are asking (a miss is as good as a mile). There are thousands of idiomatic expressions in English (a good many) and though this is only a ballpark figure, the area certainly has an embarrassment of riches. So this might fall short of what you are looking for but getting down to brass tacks, you might find this list of idioms helpful.--Fuhghettaboutit 17:38, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The questioner could have used gentlehumans as a salutation.Patchouli 18:46, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- How dare you assume that only humans answer questions here? I much prefer "gentlebeings". User:Zoe|^(talk) 21:12, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What if we are not all gentle? Seriously, though, using Dear Sir as a professional greeting is not necessarily making a socio-cultural presumption that everyone here is male. Oftentimes, non-native English speakers have learned the language from older resources (just as many of us (online anyway) learn foreign languages from similarly old resources). If you look at any pre-feminist era book detailing how to write a professional communication, it will tell you to use Dear Sir as a general professional salutation. -- Akohler ^Talk ^@ 21:58, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know that non-humans were capable of contributing to Wikipedia.
Here gentle does not specify soft. In this case,

gentle = good-mannered, polite, respectful, and not rude.Patchouli 06:35, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On Wikipedia, nobody knows that you're a dog. :) User:Zoe|^(talk) 21:18, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And I know many rude, ill-mannered top-hat wearing gentlebeings. freshgavin ΓΛĿЌ 06:46, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pronouncing footballers' names[edit]

I watch lots of Arsenal football, and I've noticed different announcers pronounce some of the names differently. I'm kind of curious - which is "correct"?

"Cesc Fabregas" is Catalan; is the bolded C pronounced like sentence or chest?

"Alexander Hleb" is Belarussian; is Hleb actually pronounced like Gleb? – ugen64 23:29, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, "Cesc" is short for "Francesc"; it's a soft 'c', which in South American Spanish is as the 's' in 'sentence'. In Castille Spanish it'd be as 'th' in 'thin'. I think (someone will no doubt correct me if I'm wrong here) that the Catalonians pronounce it the former way. I doubt it's 'ch' as in 'chest' as that would be the Italian (or Romanian) pronunciation. (Perhaps the announcers have been following the Serie A too much :)). "Hleb" is a tricky one too. The Russian letter 'х' which is usually transcribed as 'h' is gutteral, approximately the 'ch' in Scottish 'loch'. However, the Belarusian 'Г' is also transcribed as 'h' and pronounced that way, as opposed to the Russian 'Г' which is transcribed and pronounced as 'g' in 'good'. (E.g. from what I understand, Homel is pronounced "Homel" in Belarusian, but "Gomel" in Russian, but spelt the same way in both) So it could be either if you only had the transliteration to go by. But the Aliaksandr Hleb article gives the Belarusian spelling as "Глеб". So you get to chose between 'Hleb' with an 'h' as in 'horse' (Belarusian style) or with a 'g' as in 'good' (Russian style). --BluePlatypus 00:55, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

btw, how to pronounce the name of the NBA player Nenad Krstic?--K.C. Tang 02:14, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

With a /ʨ/ at the end and a schwa between the "K" and "r". So "Kerstitch" approximately. --BluePlatypus 02:38, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cesc Fabregas is definitely pronounced "Sesk". I seem to remember one commentator saying Hleb means "bread". Jameswilson 04:04, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, but that's the "хлеб" spelling. --BluePlatypus 04:48, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As in "Мой друг Глеб ел хлеб" meaning "My friend Gleb ate bread". JackofOz 07:32, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've noticed the British announcers (the ones who know what they are talking about) pronounce the names correctly, while most American announcers get everything wrong. I also read somewhere that Hleb's name should actually be "Gleb", but they got it wrong on his passport or something - does this sound plausible, or is it just a transliteration issue (i.e. it could be either, he might prefer it one way, the government did it the other way)? – ugen64 22:32, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds quite plausible. The simplest explanation would be that they assumed the Belarusian transliteration (Г -> 'h' instead of Г -> 'g') would be correct since he's from Belarus. But given that Belarus has a quite large number of native Russian speakers (it's also an official language there) that's not a safe assumption to make. --BluePlatypus 07:34, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have never heard an announcer pronounce the name Xavi correctly, British, American or Scandinavian. --E ivind ^t ^@^c 23:11, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It bugs me how North American sports announcers always botch the names of Czech and Slovak hockey players. Miroslav Satan's last name is pronounced "SHAHT-tahn," not "Sha-TAN." -- Mwalcoff 23:10, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Its not Hleb its Gleb. 'Глеб' translates roughly into Glyeb or Gleb for simplicity. I've confirmed this with other Belarusian friends and back home in Belarus thats what he's called - Gleb. And yes there was a mistake. In his registration for Stuttgart they made a mistake changing Gleb to Hleb. Possibly because of the keyboard having G and H next to each other. He even wanted Gleb printed on his arsenal jersey. I've tried editing the article here but ignorant people that 'think' they are correct keep changing it back. UEFA.com has it as Gleb too in the pre-Stuttgart articles. His brother is also Vyacheslav Gleb. Sadly no one at wikipedia wants to take me seriously with this -- vNistelrooy9 06:24, 06 December 2007

Conviction[edit]

I need a quick ID on a quote: "A man convinced against his will is of his own opinion still." I believe it's from Alexander Pope. Black Carrot 23:46, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

the words sounds much more like a proverb than an iambic pentameter from Pope. Internal rhyme is common in English or German proverbs.--K.C. Tang 02:10, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not really internal rhyme; it's two lines of iambic tetrameter:

.  x   .  x     . x      .   x
A man convinced against his will
.  x   .  x   . x  .    x
is of his own opinion still

Which is the same meter as "It puts the lotion on its skin / Or else it gets the hose again". But back to the original question, I don't know the source of it, I'm afraid. Angr (talk • contribs) 06:44, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

my bad...:p, in any case Pope usually wrote in heroic couplet, so the lines are unlikely penned by him.--K.C. Tang 08:06, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is probably an altered version of

He that complies against his will,

Is of his own opinion still;

from Hudibras part 3, canto 3, 547. Previously a very popular work suppling many quotes omnyrpatd but now little known. MeltBanana 14:41, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BTW before you ask I don't know what "omnyrpatd" means apart form the fact that I need new batteries in my wireless keyboard. MeltBanana 14:43, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I never cease to be amazed at the esoteric stuff people come up with at the RD. Good job, everyone. —WAvegetarian•_{_{CONTRIBUTIONS}}^{^TALK}• ^{^EMAIL}• 14:47, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

April 16[edit]

Comander in chief[edit]

Can anyone tell me how the title "Comander in Chief" came about. I know what the Comander in chief is but I want to know the origin of the title. Looks to me like "Comander and Chief" would be more descriptive. Thanks wsc

George Washington was titled "General and Commander in Chief" during the Revolutionary War. See Commander in Chief for more. Erik the Rude 01:01, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another context where a similar construction appears is at law--us lawyers write the "case in chief," which means the case being discussed itself, to distinguish from the cases that are being discussed as precedent to make some point. So if the phrase follows the same form (speculating here) it could mean the "commander of all", "the COMMANDER HIMSELF", as opposed to the other, lesser commanders. --Fuhghettaboutit 01:28, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

idioms wanted[edit]

In English we call an easy job "a piece of cake", and the Japanese call it some "tea-time snack" (御茶の子, ocha'noko), are there similar idioms in other languages?--K.C. Tang 09:23, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In Czech we call it "a toy" (hračka), because even a child would be able to do such a job. Daniel Šebesta (talk • contribs) 09:31, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

but any food-related ones?--K.C. Tang

No, not in Czech... In German, "children's game" (ein Kinderspiel) is used, but I can't think of any suitable idiom related to food in German either. Daniel Šebesta (talk • contribs) 09:50, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

btw, the Chinese call an "easy job" or something "no big deal" pediatrics(小兒科).--K.C. Tang 10:02, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In German you could say "This job is easier than stealing the lollipop of a baby." Attention: It is used to describe something illicit in a cocky way.

The Spanish equivalent is pan comido or "eaten bread." The Dictionary of the Royal Spanish Academy, the official reference for the Spanish language, limits the definition of this idiom to "to be very easy to obtain." I am not sure whether it can apply to something very easy to do, as well, like the English "piece of cake."--El aprendelenguas 12:52, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

does "eaten bread" mean bread that has been consumed by one? how is it associated to "something very easy to obtain"... ?_?--K.C. Tang 14:06, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if somebody has already eaten the bread, I suppose it is easy to obtain because it is in the person's stomach. :) Nevertheless, it does not do much good to debate the logic behind an idiom. Consider the previously mentioned "a piece of cake." What is it about a piece of cake that is related to an easy job? Actually, this English idiom comes from mid-19th century African-American dance contests, according to Scholastic's Dictionary of Idioms. However, very few people who use this idiom really know how it came to mean what it means now. Similarly, there could be a reason why "eaten bread" is so easy to obtain, but any present sense of such a reason no longer exists.--El aprendelenguas 14:51, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd guess it's similar to "It's a done deal" -- you haven't actually done it yet, but you know for a fact that it will be, and it's so certain you can consider it done. So, you haven't eaten the bread yet, but it's so certain that you will that you can consider it eaten. --Zeborah 03:45, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In somewhat slang dutch, something easy can be called "Appeltje-Eitje" (Apple and Egg) which i would think comes from the proverb "Voor een appel en een ei" ("For an appel and an egg", which refers to buying something cheap) SanderJK 18:53, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Lätt som en plätt" in Swedish (or Norwegian if you switch the 'ä's for 'e's). "Easy as a plätt". Plättar (plural) being scandinavian mini-pancakes (see Pancake). A funny one is the Russian "Проще пареной репы" - easy as a stewed turnip. --BluePlatypus 07:51, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Finnish calls it "helppo nakki", literally "an easy Vienna sausage". So there you have a food-related idiom. JIP | Talk 09:33, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In Serbian, it's "prosto k'o pasulj" ("simple as beans"). Duja 16:16, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The other food-related idiom in English besides "It's a piece of cake" is "It's easy as pie" (although anyone who's ever made a piecrust from scratch will tell you it isn't easy at all!). Angr (talk • contribs) 16:46, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Syriac Script[edit]

Hi,

Have recently discovered the origin of my name as Syriac. Is it possible to get a spelling of it in Syriac script. I have looked at the scripts but have been unable to put it together. My name is Cephas.

How is that pronounced? -LambaJan 17:36, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The name Cephas is a Greek (Κηφας Kēphas) rendition (via Latin) of the Aramaic name Kêfā, which means rock. Old Aramaic and Jewish Aramaic are written using the Hebrew alphabet (or Aramaic alphabet) — כיפא. Syriac is a dialect (or dialect group) of Aramaic. In the Syriac alphabet, the name is written ܟܐܦܐ. Of course, the name is that of Saint Peter — Πετρος Petros also means 'rock'. — Gareth Hughes 19:19, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

a kind of vehicle[edit]

Hi,I have two questions:

1.I used to see a kind of vehicle that is driven on the swampland with a big fan(or wheel?) and the driver sits on a higher seat.
2.I turn on the computer and get on the web, can I say this way? If someone likes to be on web,how do I put it?

Thank you for your help.Bye.------- Sabrina, April 16 2006

1. Are you thinking of an Air boat?

2. Netophile??? --E ivind ^t ^@^c 14:34, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to me that 'internet' is becoming more common, in my region anyway (original research), but if you put it that way ('web') it will definately be understood. -LambaJan 17:35, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

N...(Hungarian)[edit]

Hi, can anyone tell me what does Nevesek mean? I don't know in what language though,:| and also 'Nevesis', what do those things mean, if anything at all? and also, it can be 'Erno Nevesek'. thanx. :D --Cosmic girl 14:43, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you could provide some context, it might be easier to guess. By googling, I have found the word on numerous Hungarian sites but have no idea what it means. Daniel Šebesta (talk • contribs) 15:18, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hu/WP sez "A Wikipédiában még nincs pontosan ilyen című szócikk. Készíts Nevesek című szócikket!" (sth like 'not found - create article ?'. It is really hungarian, but even hu/WK ignores it. Try en/WP hungarian people : [ [Category:User_hu]], they are 155. --DLL 19:29, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Nevesek" is Hungarian, an inflection of the word "neves", meaning "reknowned" or "noted". I don't think "nevesis" is a correct word though. Typo? --BluePlatypus 07:17, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BluePlatypus is correct on both counts. However, the original question was almost certainly about "Erno Nemecsek" (or "Ernő Nemecsek", if you can handle Hungarian accents correctly). Erno Nemecsek is the protagonist of a very famous Hungarian novel, A Pál utcai fiúk (The Paul Street Boys). The word "Nemecsek" does not mean anything, however. --Ashenai 23:03, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Desprite what Ashenai has written, could it be that "Nemecsek" does mean something? I don't know too much about Hungarian pronunciation, but still it sounds to me like the Czech word "Němeček," a diminutive of the word "Němec" (German (man)). Could the name be some kind of a loanword? Daniel Šebesta (talk • contribs) 23:15, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. The word "nemecsek" does not mean anything in Hungarian. It could certainly mean something in Czech, I have no idea. And of course it's quite possible that Ferenc Molnár, the author of The Paul Street Boys, chose the name Nemecsek because of its Czech meaning. I wouldn't know. --Ashenai 23:23, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for the answer! Daniel Šebesta (talk • contribs) 23:31, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds likely to me, the pronunciation would be pretty close. (Hungarian "cs" is pronounced like the Czech "č", IPA:/ʧ/). BTW, the Hungarian word for "German" is "német", which is borrowed from the Slavic. "Német"/"Németh"/"Németi" are Hungarian surnames. --BluePlatypus 04:45, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanx for your answers guys... hey, is Neves a Hungarian lastname by any chance? and also, is Hungarian a germanic language? or a slavic one?. --Cosmic girl 01:12, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neither. It belongs to the Finno-Ugric family of languages. JackofOz 02:44, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some UFO people think that aliens speak a "higher form of Hungarian". Which just confirms what their central European neighbors have suspected for centuries: Magyars are from outer space. ;) --BluePlatypus 05:29, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't think it is used as a name. Wouldn't be a common one anyway. BTW, the Hungarian "s" is pronounced like "sh" in "sheep", whereas "sz" is pronounced like "s" in "sleep". (And just to make things more confusing, Polish does it the other way around). Odd fact: Hungarians are the only ones in the western world to put family name first; e.g. "Szabó István" would be called "István Szabó" in English, Szabó being the family name. --BluePlatypus 05:09, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

interesting... so...'Nevesh' (lol) is a lastname...well, not Nevesh,but Neves since I believe it's supposed to be in spanish... does anyone know the origin of this lastname and what language is it in? :| now I'm confused... since, this lastname, belongs to a person which looks of latin american ancestry to me, but not so much, more like a mix of caucasian and latin american races, but anyway, the point is that, this guy likes to call himself as a nickname 'erno neveseck'...so I supose he must be of hungarian ancestry if he knows about the language and the novel... but also, the lastname could be spanish or even mexican, who knows...the world is full of weird lastnames, lol.--Cosmic girl 18:49, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Offhand I'd say it seems more likely Hispanic* than Hungarian, since it seems more common among the former. From that, I'd guess it could perhaps be related to the name "Nieves". (*'Hispania' is rather similar to 'ispán', a Hung. word for military leader. From this, the medieval chronicler Simon of Keza made up a fantastic story of how the Hungarians conquered the Iberian peninsula. - False etymologies can be quite misleading! :)) --BluePlatypus 15:13, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LOL! awesome... sorry 4 the nonsense but I like this guy...:P, and I found out that he uses the nickname Ernõ Neveseck because of 'a movie' according to him, and Nevesis is because of a monster in the Resident Evil videogame. :P.--Cosmic girl 20:00, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yah[edit]

Over the last few months, people on the net have started writing 'yah' rather than yes. Do they do this when speaking, or is is just a written form? And why (in the name of all that is good and holy) would anyone say or write such a thing? Henry ^Flower 14:59, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to be a variant of "yeah," which is indeed used in speech. English speakers sometimes get lazy when they speak, and the /s/ phoneme of the word yes seems to take too much work to articulate. In its place they use a weak /h/. A similar exchange occurs in some dialects of Spanish, where certain s's that close a syllable—especially those that close an entire word—are replaced with an h-like aspiration. Another pronunciation I have heard of the 'yah' mentioned in the question is /ja:/, which seems to be a more affirmative-sounding version of "yeah." Note that many people consider the reply "yeah" or any variant of "yeah" disrespect in formal conversation or as a reply to someone who ought to be addressed as "sir" or "ma'am."--El aprendelenguas 15:40, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I often say [jʌː] (which I spell yuh in written converstion) — but usually not to professors or at job interviews. —Keenan Pepper 17:06, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't this also a Minnesota/Michigan kind of thing? Apparently! "Use of German/Scandinavian "ja", pronounced as either /jaː/ or /jæː/, as an affirmative filler or emphatic; Standard U.S. English "yes" is used in formal settings to answer questions and to start an explanation." --Rueckk 18:10, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It could also be derived from the German "ja" pronounced like "ya" would be to an English speaker. -LittleBrother (to lazy to log in or put times)

Webster's dictionary says that "yeah" was originally a cross between "yes" and "ja", and that "yes" originally came from "yea".--The i kiroid (talk parler hablar paroli 说話し parlar) 02:16, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My personal experience, which is actually somewhat extensive, is that most people who use "yah" are (or at least were, when the term began to promulgate the 'net) unaware of the more correct spelling "yeah", and were attempting to write the commonly spoken "yeah". It is not a recent phenomenon, though it may be gaining popularity as an internet-specific spelling, similar, perhaps, to "teh". The Jade Knight 07:22, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

April 17[edit]

name-verb[edit]

just my geeky fancy again... i can only think of pasteurize, burke and boycott... any thoughts, guys?--K.C. Tang 02:17, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of eponyms contains all the nouns and verbs. Tintin (talk) 02:36, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

woo... but most of them are nouns... it contains bowdlerize, which i forgot, but it has no boycott nor burke...--K.C. Tang 02:53, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It does have Boycott, between Bougainville and Boyle. Tintin (talk) 03:04, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

my bad...must've skipped th line:P --K.C. Tang 03:39, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You forgot hoover, and this probably doesn't count but at MOP everyone used cauchy as a verb meaning "apply the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality". —Keenan Pepper 04:01, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let's see: To Democritize, to Gerrymander...Loomis51 06:10, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To Mirandize, to Jones, to Martinize, to Guillotine, to Mesmerize. Loomis51 16:27, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lynch---(82.138.214.1 17:06, 17 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

To macadamize. --ByeByeBaby 23:37, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Alito must avoid being 'Borked'" says the San Francisco Chronicle. -- Mwalcoff 00:19, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also see Fisking, which means "To refute erroneous comments, such as those frequently made by Robert Fisk." -- Mwalcoff 00:20, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also "to Sandwich", as in the sentence "A hamburger is sandwiched between two halves of a bun" or much more broadly, "I was sitting on a plane, sandwiched between two crying babies". Also, and I hesitate to introduce this one, but I have heard it used..."to Lewinsky". I won't bother to define that one! ;) Loomis51 00:34, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Standard American English[edit]

Will you loan me your car?
Will you lend me your car?

Which verb is correct? Also, is the correct one the more common one?Patchouli 14:47, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They are apparently interchangeable for this usage; however I believe that most people, if they make a distinction, use loan more often for money and lend for other goods, so would more often use lend in the cited example. Loan, however, is improper in figurative usage. As stated here:

Usage Note: The verb loan is well established in American usage and cannot be considered incorrect. The frequent objections to the form by American grammarians may have originated from a provincial deference to British critics, who long ago labeled the usage a typical Americanism. Loan is, however, used to describe only physical transactions, as of money or goods; for figurative transactions, lend is correct: Distance lends enchantment. The allusions lend the work a classical tone.

--Fuhghettaboutit 15:05, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, and so does Merriam-Webster's Concise Dictionary of English Usage. More traditional books discourage the use of loan as a verb, but in all physical senses, it now works as a synonym for lend.--El aprendelenguas 18:36, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To me, "lend" also sounds like it should be used with money. I would say, "Will you let me borrow your car?" or simply "May I borrow your car?" -- Mwalcoff 00:15, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with Mwalcoff. "Lend" is better than "loan", but "borrow", or even "use", is best. I'd say "Can I [please] borrow your car?" Perhaps not the best usage, but the most natural. a The Jade Knight 07:18, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I live in Ireland and to me while lend would not be wrong loan sounds far better, I'd say "will you loan me your car"

opporunity/community[edit]

I recently watched an episode of the Colber' Repor' and a part of it put me in mind of how many Americans pronounce "opportunity" and, say, "community." Is there any truth to the notion of "opportunity" pronounced as "ah-puh-turnDee", where the 'rnDi:' part is articulated with one's tongue in retroflex position (as in 'morning' or 'party'), plus being a nasalized flap. As to the "community" word, I think it's pronounced as "cuh-myoo-uhrnDy". The sound here is the same: retroflexed nasalized flap. Is it true? Help, help. --Dennis Valeev 17:25, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you mean. Is it [αpɚtynɪDi]? and [kəmjɝɹnɪDi]? (the y is because of (u) fronting, which is ubiquituous after coronals. Are you referring to some kind of /r/ insertion? If so I have never heard it there.

[ɒpətu:ɪɳi:] and [kəmjuɪɳi:], it can also be interpreted as [ɒpɚtu:ɪɽi:], where the "ɽ" sound is nasalized (as in the winter/winner case). I mean, it's casual speech, and quite ubiquitous. If you know how the vast majority of Americans pronounce it, I would love to see the transcription. --Dennis Valeev 22:05, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm no linguist, but to me, "ah-puh-turn-dee" sounds like someone speaking with a very exaggerated rural drawl, or someone trying to make fun of country folk. It's certainly not how most Americans would say it. They would say it "ah-pur-TOO-ni-tee," possibly with schwas in the second and fourth syllables. I've never heard anything like "cuh-myoo-uhrnDy." Everyone I know would say "cuh-MYOO-ni-tee." -- Mwalcoff 04:16, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not talking about carefully articulated pronunciation here, what with the large variety of accents, it'd be indeed better for one to speak clearly and consistently, I'm talking about casual and fast speech. Consider, for example, the word "wanted", in well-articulated speech you would pronounce it as [wɒntɪd], but when it comes to casual speech you may say it as follows: [wɒɾ̃ɪd] (the "ɾ̃" part is just as in the wi(nt)er/wi(nn)er case). I mean, I'm interested in pronouncing the rest of those words: the "-nity" part. How am I to do that? It sounds like [nɪɾ̃i:] to me. Do I make sense here at all? Thank you. --Dennis Valeev 07:52, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please, answer me. One of those words is Christianity. The '-ity' part is clearly related to the '-ty' part in "party". I mean, it's quite an interesting phonological phenomenon, isn't it? Even though there's no "r" in the "anity" part, "t" allophone is realized as a retroflex flap. How come? :) --Dennis Valeev 09:00, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you asking about flapping? Angr (talk • contribs) 09:13, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yeah, but there are two types of the flapping process: the first one being realized with your tongue simply striking the roof of your mouth (alveolar ridge), and the second one with your tongue _retracted_ behind the alveolar ridge and only then being moved forward so that it hits the alveolar ridge. Let's call the first one "tap" (you tap the alveolar ridge with the tip of your tongue) and the second one "flap" (which involves a retraction and hitting). But! There's that "but" moment, you know. Whenever you articulate the "flap" ("party", "forty", but not butter, for example) you involuntarily articulate the "retroflex approximant", that is "arr". So, my question is this: how is this possible that in such words as christianity and opportunity, where there's no r's in the "-nity" part, the t allophone is realized as a flap. I also assume that the "n" here is the nasalized tap, so that you get your tongue in retroflexed position to then articulate the "flappy" part. I dunno if that makes a lotta sense to you, but it does to me. I'm flabbergasted and want to clarify the matter. What about "maternity" or "paternity"? How these words are pronounced keeping in mind my previous rants? --Dennis Valeev 09:57, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I come from SW England and, unlike most British people, I never pronounce t or d as dentals. I pronounce them in the same place as k and g - ie alveolar. But I never pronounce the r before a consonant. Jameswilson 23:01, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am from Colorado and pronounce it /Qp@`tunI4i/ in casual speech, and never rhymes with "paternity" which would be /p@t@`nI4i/. Also, in response to the other guy's comment, k and g are velars, not alveolars, and are never at the same point of articulation as t or d, but your point still stands, t and d are not dentals in English. Linguofreak 21:23, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wild thought, I don't think it very likely: /u/ in American dialects is often fronted to [}] or [y]. This could then lower to [2], which is often heard by Americans as /@`/. But I've never heard of American fronted /u/ being lowered. Linguofreak 21:28, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can & Could[edit]

Hi how are u? Please tell me what's the different between them with examples? Thankyou

I'm very well. "Can" is the present tense, "could" is the past: Today I can play tennis; Yesterday I could play tennis. They can also be used in conditionals: first conditional- I can kiss you if you kiss me; second conditional- I could kiss you if you kissed me. (Use of the first conditional implies that I think you are likely to kiss me; use of the second implies that I think you are less likely to kiss me). Henry ^Flower 20:07, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note also that could is often paired with the auxiliary verb have to form a more emphatic past tense: "I could have gone to the party, but you didn't invite me." In addition, can cannot be coupled with an auxiliary verb.--El aprendelenguas 20:14, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My bad; this seems to be more like a conditional tense than like a past tense. Nevertheless, notice that could often goes with the auxiliary have.--El aprendelenguas 20:20, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's both- it's a past conditional. Henry ^Flower 20:43, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the past tense I always say "could have," whether conditional or not (most often contracted to "coulda") Thus, "I coulda played tennis yesterday," which can mean either "I was able to play tennis yesterday," (but didn't), or with a following if clause "I would have been able to play tennsis yesterday if...". I wouldn't use "I could have" with something I had actually done. In otherwords "I could have..." means I was able to do something but didn't, whereas "I was able to..." means I was able to do something and did. Bare "could" is almost always a present conditional, e.g. "I could do that if..." or a request "could you get that off the shelf for me?" Can is more a indicator of absolute present possibility, "I can do that," "Can you see it?" The future is almost always "will be able," e.g. "I'll be able to do that tommorow," but "can" may also work in some circumstances "I can do that tommorow." (I just tend to prefer "will be able"). Linguofreak 21:00, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

0n0matopeia[edit]

Are "rumbles and grumbles" examples of onomatopeia?

The sentence reads---"My stomach rumbles, grumbles and turns"

Thank you for your assistance

Hmmm hard to say. Example of onomatopeias would be kerplunk, meow, ruff (a dog's bark), clang, hiss, meow, moo, quack, etc.—words that sound like the thing they describe. I'm not sure that grumble and rumble sound like grumbing and rumbling. Err, on second thought, grumble (but not rumble) is listed on Wikipedia's article on onomatopeias. Still they don't seem to fit. --Fuhghettaboutit 23:30, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They sound like onomatopoeia to me. According to my Chambers etymology dictionary, rumble is "of uncertain origin", but it's probably from the same root as rumor and therefore not a strict onomatopoeia. Grumble, on the other hand, could indeed be onomatopoetic in origin. —Keenan Pepper 03:27, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Random tidbit: grumble is Cockney rhyming slang for cunt (via grumble and grunt). —Keenan Pepper 03:41, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe these are referred to as 'mimetics', which are indeed distinct from onomatopoeia. The general idea is that through learning (they are not as natural as the direct borrowing of sounds like with onomatopoeia) native speakers will come to associate certain sounds or sound clusters with a particular 'feeling' or state. An example in English: words that start with sl/sm "smoosh", "slog", "sludge", etc. If somewhere were to make up the new word 'sloog' and it was in the right context you'd have a good chance of guessing that it had to do with squishy noises. As far as I know, Korean has the most mimetics of any language, and vowel patterning in Korean as well as the 3-way contrasts in consonants let you capture alot of very intricate differences. An example: hohoho makes us think of a hearty Santa Claus laugh, hahaha is a normal laugh, and heeheehee is a higher pitched feminine laugh. It's like that in Korean except they have a mimetic word for EVERYTHING ('tears continually coming down the face', 'something spinning fast in a wide circle',). I don't know if wikipedia has an article for this or not, but here is the Japanese one (the Japanese language is probably second in usage of mimetics after Korean): Japanese sound symbolism --Zippyt 14:55, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

American English[edit]

Is it okay to say "I'm going shopping" instead of "I'm going to shop?"Patchouli 23:51, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They may mean two different things. The first is present progressive, which generally refers to something happening right now. It can be used to talk about the future if you mention a specific time ("I'm going shopping tomorrow."). The second uses "going to" plus verb, which always refers to the future.

If you say "I'm going shopping" with no specific time mentioned, you mean you are on your way now. If you say, "I'm going to shop," it means you plan to do so in the future. We'd probably say "I'm going to go shopping."

I don't think this is specific to American English. -- Mwalcoff 00:12, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it may be rather specific to American English inasmuch as ‘I’m going to shop’ sounds quite foreign to this Briton. Specifically, ”I’m going to shop tomorrow afternoon’, would suggest that I planned to report that time of that day to the police. (Although ‘I plan to report tomorrow afternoon to the police’ would be different again.) —Ian Spackman 11:54, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It sound quite foreign to this American, as well. I can think of very specific instances when one might say "I'm going to shop," -- e.g. "Why are you going to IKEA?"; "I am going to shop." The implication perhaps being that I am not planning on buying anything, I am simply going to look around. I think that the average American would say "I'm going shopping." --LarryMac 14:48, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it depends on when you plan on going shopping. If you say, "I'm going shopping for a high-def TV," you're probably doing so in the very near future. But if you say. "OK, I've decided. I'm going to shop for a high-def TV," that means you probably aren't going right away. Of course, you're far more likely to say, "I'm going to buy a high-def TV." -- Mwalcoff 23:56, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As a Coloradan, I would never say "I'm going to shop." To refer to the future I'd say "I'm going to go shopping." Linguofreak 20:55, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

April 18[edit]

To kill a Mockingbird[edit]

How many copies of to kill a mockingbird have been sold?

Found this on amazon.com: From the Publisher. Featuring a new introduction by the author, this specially packaged, popularly priced hardcover edition of an American classic (with more than 30 million copies sold) celebrates the 35th anniversary of its original publication. If you need a more exact number, I'd suggest weeding through these google results. --Andrew c 22:05, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The French for a tip?[edit]

What is the french for a tip? ( a waste disposal/ land fill site)

Our Landfill article, on the bottom left - just hover a mouse pointer over the word french, the link shows in the status bar - says "Décharge" ; and I approve that statement. --DLL 17:17, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Polyglots[edit]

What is the record for the most languages that a person has ever learnt (to fluency or other), and how/why did they get that way? What languages did the person know? Thanks. Daniel (☎) 10:15, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

there is List of noted polyglots - but learning languages is no stamp-collecting...--K.C. Tang 10:36, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I did find that after asking. I should have checked first. It's amazing how quick this thing works! Daniel (☎) 11:24, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, we all work 24/7 round here. Cheers. JackofOz 11:52, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Which language should I choose?[edit]

I want to pick up a new language to make myself more competitive, but I don't know just which one I should choose. (P.S. All I know now is English and Chinese.) Many thanks. --218.102.181.194 10:30, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Competitive in what field? Angr (talk • contribs) 10:59, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

one thing is certain: you are not a language geek. A language geek never learns a language because he wants to be more "competitive". Why, a local career consultant in your district can help you.--K.C. Tang 11:10, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Next to English, French is an official language in more countries than any othe language. However, its overall global speakership is not among the highest, and it is no longer considered a commerce language, though it is still one of the official languages of the UN, as well as the International Olympic Committee. Knowing the language of whatever country or state you are in or visit most would also be considered highly advantageous. In most of the United States, Spanish is considered a particularly important second language. The Jade Knight 06:58, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it might help if you told us where you live and what field you are working in. – b_jonas 12:47, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

French Military words in English[edit]

I'm wondering if anyone can tell me why so many relatively recent borrowings (the past century or two...not going back to the Norman Conquest) of French terms into the English language are so disproportionately related to military and/or international relations matters.

I'm thinking of words like: camouflage, sabotage, rendez-vous, attaché, envoy, espionage, coup, reconnaisance, surveillance etc...

If any of you could come up with more that would be great too (sounds like a job for KC!). Still, I'm also wondering why this is the case. Loomis51 11:13, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, I don't think that it is really so disproportionate, it's just that these happen to sound more French. The less military words were probably used more amongst the population as a whole (rather than military words being used mainly by Norman soldiers) which contributed to their anglicisation.

Also, most of the Normans going into England at that time would have been soldiers, so that also contributes to the imbalance (if there is one).

I don't know if the above (my answer, not your question) makes much sense (I just made up something that sounds plausible to myself), but it does make sense.

The reason that they were borrowed in the last century or two is because many of those concepts were not put into wide, sophisticated use until the last century or two. And French was the Lingua Franca of much of the world until the 1850's or so, when German displaced it, so it's logical that the name of such concepts would come from French. And here's two more words to add: coup d'êtat & avant garde.--The i kiroid (talk parler hablar paroli 说話し parlar) 11:48, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

German never became a lingua franca for much of the world. I'd say French was the international language par excellence until about World War I, when it started to be replaced by English. Angr (talk • contribs) 12:04, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

for some time German was the lingua franca among the scientists... right?--K.C. Tang 13:21, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in some sciences probably yes, but I don't think it was ever a lingua franca of commerce and diplomacy the way French used to be and English is now. Angr (talk • contribs) 13:47, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about caisson? --LarryMac 14:42, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Many of our older military words came from Norman (a close relative of French), as well. Examples:

War & Warrior
Cavalry (compare this to modern Jersey Norman C'valyi, for knight)
Castle
Battle
Siege
Conquer
Soldier
Lance

…and the list goes on. English is just not a very innovative language when it comes to war. The Jade Knight 07:08, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Information you have on how two words are combined to create another meaning[edit]

Dear Sir / Madam,

Allow me to congratulate you on a very well executed website, well done.

The quest that led me to your site is to find out how two words can be combined to create an interpretaion that falls in the middle of the other word meanings. For example on the page that translates French to English derivates, I looked up the word "optimism", which then had a Wikipedia prompt box which offered more information page.

On investigation it gave the example of exactly what I was looking for eg. Pessimism + Optimism = Hope. Unfortunately, this was the only example of such a word construction and this is exactly what I require.

I have viewed your site extensively but feel through my in experience of examining words finding the correct area is a little out of my reach.

Oh yeah sorry for sending previous email I thought it would only save the letter and not send it.

Thank you very much

What are you actually looking for? Can you clarify the text above? I'm afraid that I had a hard time following it. What do you mean by 'a page which translates French to English derivates'?

By the way, these pages are not answered by a single person, so your salutation sounds rather strange.

Daniel (☎) 15:25, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Check out portmanteau words.Patchouli 15:21, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

With a little thought I can come up with a few basic examples:

funny = strange + interesting
bravado = bravery + confidence + possibly stupidity
leap = combined jump and run

Though these could be argued, and the meaning isn't really as simple as that. You could as easily argue that "hope" doesn't really mean pessimism + optimism, but that doesn't really help you. freshgavin ΓΛĿЌ 06:09, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Freshgavin for your feed back, thats the sort of thing that I am trying to find out.

You gave an example of the possiblity that bravery+confidence+stupidity (arguably) = bravery. Is there somewhere on your site a section that shows just that, eg. 1 word+2nd word=3rd word. Im not sure if you would call this the construction of one word from two or more words.

Thanks again and I lookforward to hearing from you soon

Fetch = go, get and bring back. I dont know if there is a world to describe that type of word though. Jameswilson 23:05, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

April 19[edit]

Spanish phrase[edit]

Does anyone know the etymology of the Spanish phrase dar la lata? (meaning to annoy, or literally, to give the can) Thanks Mattwow 00:54, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Turkish[edit]

hey guys, what's the literal meaning of işte bunu seviyorum? (for the i'm lovin' it article)--K.C. Tang 06:05, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

the verb 'to change' in German[edit]

I know that there are at least two words for 'to change' in German, ändern and wechseln. But what is the difference between them? Can you give examples of when each would be used? Many thanks. Richardrj 09:14, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a native speaker, but my impression has always been ändern means to change the property of something in the sense of "alter", while wechseln is change in the sense of "exchange" or "replace". To change tires on your car is die Reifen wechseln, but to change your mind is die Meinung ändern. Angr (talk • contribs) 09:20, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am a native speaker, and I agree. Another meaning of to change I can think of is the transitive form of umziehen, meaning to change clothes.

Thinking of it, is there a special word for this kind of verb? It's only used like ich ziehe mich um, i.e. it takes an object, but subject and object are always identical. Although it's grammatically transitive, it's effectively intransitive. —da Pete (ノート) 17:13, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You mean Reflexive? --BluePlatypus 17:31, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The separable preverb um is used with several verbs when some sort of change is implied, not just sich umziehen. There's also umsteigen "to change trains/buses/planes, etc.", intransitive umziehen "to move house (i.e. change residences)", umbuchen "to change one's reservations", umpflanzen "to transplant", umschalten "to change channels etc.", umstellen "to rearrange", umtauschen "to exchange", etc. Angr (talk • contribs) 18:41, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Ändern" means changing by developping. You change your opinion, because you enlarge your knowledge. You change your outfit because you get older. - There is a progress which changes conditions. "Wechseln" means changing by putting something at the place of something else. You change your shoes because the old ones are wet. There is no development, but the new situatuon needs a new solution. - There are always two or more things which are exchanged.

austauschen - wechseln umgestalten, weiterentwickeln - ändern

first name - last name?[edit]

Hi there,

Imagine I, clearly a western person, need to write a letter to 'Ahmed Ali Ahmed': "Dear Mr...?? Could somebody tell me which part of this name would be the first name, and which part the surname?

Thank you in advance, Jeannine.

see Arabic name--K.C. Tang 15:30, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question about Russian[edit]

Why does Russian have two words for the number one? One is "odin" and one is "raz". What is their difference? JIP | Talk 09:30, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I can't help you very much exactly about Russian, but explaining a similar thing in Czech (also a Slavic language) could help you. In Czech, we have two words for the number 1, too—"jedna" and "raz." If you want to say e.g. 1 + 2, you would always use "jedna," while if you just want to say a sequence of numbers like 1, 2, 3, 4, etc., you can start with either "jedna" or "raz." Anyway, "raz" sounds a bit obsolete to me and is not used very widely by younger people. In Russian the difference between the two words might or might not be similar. Daniel Šebesta (talk • contribs) 16:37, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As a matter of fact, in conversational speech raz is just a short way of saying odin raz, meaning "one time, once". In this sense raz is a noun, while odin is a numeral. You can use the word "raz" for counting (raz, dva, tri→"one, two, three"), but you can also use odin: odin, dva, tri—both ways are correct, although the latter sounds a bit more formal. When you need an actual numeral, however, you can only use the word "odin"; e.g., when saying "1+2=3", you can only use odin. Hope this helps.—Ëzhiki (ërinacëus amurënsis) • (yo?); 17:05, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note that English also has multiple words for low numbers:

"One apple", "once", "an apple", "a single apple", "a solitary apple", "a unitary apple", "unary", "first/1st", "primary/main", "methyl"

"Two times", "twofold", "twice", "double", "duo", "dual", "second/2nd", "secondary", "pair", "couple", "couplet", "binary", "stereo", "ethyl"

"Three times", "triple", "threefold", "thrice", "third/3rd", "tertiary", "trio", "propyl"

"Four times", "fourfold", "fourth/4th", "quadruple", "quad", "quartet", "butyl"

Some are variations on the same root word, but not all.

StuRat 19:23, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For non-slavs, Russian has some seemingly weird and counter-intuitive rules about numbers.

"One" comes in three gender forms - masculine (один), feminine (одна), and neuter (одно). "Two" comes in two forms - masculine/neuter (два) and feminine (две). "Three" and upwards come in only one form for all genders.
Then there's the case endings of things that have numbers. In "one table" (один стол), table (стол) is in the nominative case. Genitive singular is used for "two tables" (два стола), "three tables" (три стола) or "four tables" (четыре стола). Genitive plural is used for "five tables" (пять столов) or more. So, it's like "four of a table" but "five of tables". JackofOz 22:42, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"raz" basically means "time" as in "one time". To say "one more time" you say "yeshcho raz". I'm surprised Oz didn't mention the totally screwed up rules regarding the word "year". One year is "adin god", two years is "dva goda", but for some numbers, I forget which ones, the word for years changes completely to "lyet". Don't ask me why. Loomis51 01:02, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that happens with people's ages. Russians don't say "I am xxx years old", but use an indirect construction and a form of the word "lyeto" meaning "summer". They typically say "Mnye xxx lyet", meaning "To me xxx summers". They have to remember to decline lyeto appropriately, depending on whether the age ends with the digit 1 (lyeto), or 2 through 4 (lyeta), or 5 through 0 (lyet). Maybe that's why colloquially they often leave the summers/lyet out and say just "To me xxx" (just as we say "I am 21" rather than "I am 21 years of age" or "I am 21 years old"). JackofOz 01:53, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not only do they have to keep in mind how to inflect the "lyeto" word, but also remember that if a person is 1 through 4 years old then you have to use an entirely different word to name her age, to wit, год(а) (god(a)): "mne 1 (21, 31, 41) god", "emu 2 (3,4; 22,23,24; 31,...) goda", as opposed to English version of forming plurals: "the baby is one year old", and then "the baby is two years old" and "the guy is twenty-one years old" (whereas in Russian you say "parnyu 21 god", that is "the guy is twenty-(one year) old"; well, it's possible to omit plurality in English, but that's a whole nother story). --Dennis Valeev 10:00, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That is: odin god, dva goda, tri goda, chetire goda, pyat' let, shest' let, sem' let, vosem' let, devyat' let, desyat' let, odinnadtsat' let, dvenadtsat' let, trinadsat' let, chetirnadsat' let, ..., dvadtsat' let, dvadtsat' odin god, dvadtsat' dva goda, dvadtsat' tri goda, dvadtsat' chetire goda, dvadtsat' pyat' let, ... and so on ad infinitum

In case all this is putting anybody off learning Russian, don't let it. It is a complex language, but (a) name any language that isn't, (b) it isn't all like this, and (c) the results are worth it. JackofOz 11:03, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think you guys overcomplicated the explanation. There is basically one, not too complex rule, regarding congruence numbers and nouns (see Talk:Dual (grammatical number)), and it's more or less shared across Slavic languages. Now, simply, "год" is one of very few words with irregular plural "лети", "лет" being Gen.Pl (the only other I can recall being человек ("man")), thus it follows the rule. Duja 16:41, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's also ребёнок "child", plural дети "children" following the pattern of человек, and perhaps there are others. (Though with that one there's potential confusion with ребята "children", which follows the pattern of words like котёнок "kitten" -> котята "kittens".) I agree that the explanation above was overcomplicated, perhaps intentionally. There are two phenomena interacting here, a completely regular pattern across the entire language governing numbers, and an isolated irregularity involving one word. I should note that годы is a perfectly good word for "years" and follows the normal pattern for plural nouns, and has the normal genitive plural годов "of years", as in 1960-х годов "of the 1960s". Also, the fact that лет meaning "years" after numbers comes from the genitive plural of лето "summer" doesn't mean that Russians are saying "summers". In the same way, when I ask my friend for a hundred bucks I'm not requesting any male deer, and it would be disingenuous to claim that when Americans want to talk about money, they have to talk about deer! There's no reason to scare people away from any language. Tesseran 20:48, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

True, except that "summer" is a lot more closely related to "year" than "buck" is to "dollar". Many cultures traditionally count in summers rather than in years (or so Hollywood would have us believe). JackofOz 22:51, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Pardon my French, but..."[edit]

Where did the phrase "pardon my French" before saying a foul world come from? Are the main "English" curse words actually French swears? Or derived from French obscenities? Or are they just French sounding words? What's the deal with this phrase? Any help on finding out the origin of this phrase would be appreciated. Thanks. – WaldoWatcher 22:29, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not having any sources to back me up, I'll just have to give the explanation as I have always assumed it to be. By saying "Pardon my French" you're (jokingly) hoping to fool the other person into believing what they just heard you say wasn't a swear word at all, but rather a word in French. Angr (talk • contribs) 22:47, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the British mind, anything filthy, such as sex, is French. Henry ^Flower 23:02, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What fowl words were you thinking of - bird? hen? drumstick? (joke) JackofOz 00:15, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was of the opinion that it's simply because French is the most common second language taught in British schools. I don't know if any other English-speaking countries use the phrase. But I'd presume it's a euphemism with no etymological background.
Slumgum | yap | stalk | 00:25, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. I get Fowl World delivered weekly - it's a great magazine!

as Angr said, one who uses the phrase is supposed to use it jokingly--K.C. Tang 00:34, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd just like to say that the expression is very commonly used in North America, not just Britain.Loomis51 01:08, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The French are associated with risque (pretend there's a proper accent there) and, to some degree, vulgar things. Swear words fall under that umbrella and so "Pardon my French" implies that what you've said is risque/vulgar. Google agrees with me, so it must be true ;D —Seqsea (talk) 02:21, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An interesting spin to this is that it is actually opposite the true derivation of the words. As English was developing, combining both Romance and Germanic language families, the upper educated class tended to use Latinate words more than the lower uneducated class. Thus, even though they mean the same thing, shit and fuck are vulgar but defecate and copulate are not. —WAvegetarian•_{_{CONTRIBUTIONS}}^{^TALK}• ^{^EMAIL}• 02:55, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to add - in a slightly anecdotal manner - that in my family, should anyone use the word 'shit', we would add "pardon my French" afterwards, after we gained much hilarity from discovering a French lemonade called 'Psschit' (possibly spelt wrongly), named onomatopaeically for the sound the bottle makes when you open it. Phileas 03:07, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're talking Pschitt, Phileas. -- Slumgum | yap | stalk | 23:26, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

April 20[edit]

same word spelled fromnt and back[edit]

What is the name of a word spelled the same frontwards and backwards?

Thanks _Shanw\\wn

palindrome. JackofOz 02:12, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Jack

You're welcome ("emoclew reuoy" doesn't work). JackofOz 02:22, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, the longest palindrome that I know of in the English Language is "Madam I'm Adam" Loomis51 04:34, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LOl. That's a palindromic sentence, strictly speaking. I know a longer one "A man, a plan, a canal - Panama" - but there are far longer ones than that. :--) JackofOz 04:51, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A man, a plan, a canoe, pasta, heros, rajahs, a coloratura, maps, snipe, percale, macaroni, a gag, a banana bag, a tan, a tag, a banana bag again (or a camel), a crepe, pins, Spam, a rut, a Rolo, cash, a jar, sore hats, a peon, a canal – Panama! --ByeByeBabyybaBeyBeyB 04:59, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.cs.usm.maine.edu/~welty/fun/palindromes.html talks of a 65,000 word book by one Edward Benbow which is palindromic. Tintin (talk) 05:03, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You know, the author could be just claiming it to be palindromic, and I bet not many people would really care enough to test his word. freshgavin ΓΛĿЌ 06:45, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I hereby coin the word "palindromoskepsis" to refer to your state of disbelief. See, good things can come from negative circumstances. :--) JackofOz 12:38, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's also the word semordnilap to describe a word that spells a different word backwards. Daniel (☎) 18:53, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My DOG, there's a word for everything, isn't there ? StuRat 19:32, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, I'm being very brave reading this page, as I suffer from aibohphobia. Phileas 03:03, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My favourite palindrome ever: "Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas!" You may want to take note of the fact that the supposed inventor of the palindrome, Sotades of Maronea, was encased in lead and drowned. He is said to have insulted Ptolemy II, so be careful when palindroming around. --Dr. Zarkov 06:52, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Prose Writing[edit]

can we use the words such as we or they while writing in a prose style.

Sure, especially if they fit with your choice of Grammatical person. --ByeByeBaby 05:03, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Surname Hitler[edit]

I'm wondering how common the German surname "Hitler" was prior to WWII, compared to after.

I don't live in a particularly German area of the world, and I can't find one Hitler in the phone book. I don't have access to a German phone book, so I don't know how common the name is there.

Was "Hitler" a common surname before WWII? If so, have those German families who have unfortunately been cursed with such a name since changed it to something else? Loomis51 04:31, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hitler was never a particularily common name. Some of the speculations about Hitler's origins are based on the fact that he had a rather unusual family name. I think it's safe to say just about zero people in Germany which still have that name. Anyone showing that degree of insensitivity would've been completely ostracized in postwar Germany. There are still some similar names around though, like Heitler and Hüttler. (Another example of mass name-changing was caused by Marc Dutroux, the article mentions it.) --BluePlatypus 04:55, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to Adolf Hitler#Childhood and heritage it was a clerk's error for Hiedler, which was the name of his father's stepfather (and of his mother's mother). I don't know how common Hiedler is in Germany, but anyone named Hitler would have to be descended from Adolf's father, I think. Angr (talk • contribs) 07:23, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to Wikipedia's articles about Hitler and his family, there are currently three descendants of Alois Hitler alive in the entire world. I think it's fair to assume that, excluding people like Adolf Lu Hitler Marak, they are the only living people named Hitler in the world. JIP | Talk 08:19, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The current German phonebook [9] finds one person named Hitler. The Austrian phonebook finds none [10]. There are 2 entries for Hiedler in Germany and 13 in Austria. I believe there never was any mass-changing of names because the name was very rare to begin with. Chl 17:24, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I read several years ago about a woman in Albania, of all places, whose last name was Hitler, and she was trying to get it changed. User:Zoe|^(talk) 02:23, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It occurs to me that if Turkish were to borrow the English word hit, perhaps in the meaning of "hit song", the plural of that would be hitler (How many hitler has Madonna had in her career?) Angr (talk • contribs) 08:01, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, but see the first sentence of our article Adolf. – b_jonas 12:41, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

William Patrick Hitler and his family changed their name after WWII. His three surviving sons live in obscurity on Long Island (their new name is not public, but they're been contacted several times by reporters who have respected their privacy). Incidentally, there's a new play out about William Patrick Hitler that got a very positive review in the New York Times.--Pharos 06:40, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Christianity[edit]

Can someone transcribe this word for me? Sticking to the general trends of American English. Also, here's a link to two small audio files (crops from a show, actually): http://gametangium.t35.com/audio/ It seems like there's the retroflex flap in the end of the word, at least this is how I hear it in fast speech. On the other hand, I described this phenomenon at length on April 17th, but nobody noticed it (opportunity/community subject).

I don't have audio on my computer at the moment, but a narrow transcription of my General American pronunciation is [ˌkɹ̥ɪstʃiˈæ̃nəɾi] with an alveolar flap (not a retroflex flap) in the last syllable. Angr (talk • contribs) 12:40, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can't open those mp3s.mnewmanqc

Try to save them from the page, not start; or try to read the text files, and only then try to download the audio files, because I also had an unexpected error page after clicking on one of the audio files. http://gametangium.t35.com/audio/christianity.mp3 and http://gametangium.t35.com/audio/christianity2.mp3

Okay, I listened to them. The second one (christianity2.mp3) sounds like a normal alveolar flap to me, but the first one (christianity.mp3) does sound slightly retracted, though not enough to call it a retroflex. Angr (talk • contribs) 19:18, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Revolution starts at closing time"[edit]

I would like to find out what exactly does the expression "Revolution starts/begins at closing time" mean. I would also appreciate any information about its origins and use in popular culture. --Braggite As I understand it,it means people get fired up after drinking a lot.In Britain we have set closing times for pubs which is when people are at their rowdiest.I have a vague idea it was George Orwell but I may be wrong.Hotclaws**==(82.138.214.1 09:01, 22 April 2006 (UTC))[reply]

 Thanks, Hotclaws. I'll probably have to read Orwell's every book once more, just to be sure...
  --Braggite

April 21[edit]

What is the best way to learn German?[edit]

can i learn it conviniently from the internet?--Carbonferum 12:53, 21 April 2006 (UTC+0800)

Conveniently, certainly, but not as well as with a human teacher. You could teach yourself with our German grammar article and an online dictionary; the BBC has a free basic course here; and you could find yourself one or two German to talk to via msn, aol, skype etc. Henry ^Flower 18:41, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Henry Flower. --Carbonferum 05:05, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From my experience the internet isnt very good at teaching languges, (my attempt to learn Spanish failed misrably). I learnt German from a teacher and its definitly the best way to do it.

To each their own of course. Some people respond better to different learning methods. To me, classes are a waste of time because I can tailor my learning better myself, at least for something like languages with so much volume of material available for learning. Others respond better to a structured system like a class. And Carbonferum, the above section where someone asked how to learn Chinese might be helpful too. - Taxman ^Talk 13:49, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Take a few German language classes, using the Internet as a reference when you need to (for instance, on grammar and spelling). Then go to a German-speaking country for six months. Nothing helps you learn a language faster than being forced to speak it! :) — QuantumEleven 14:18, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately there aren't many places in German-speaking countries where you're forced to speak German. Almost anywhere you go people are eager to practise their English. Angr (talk • contribs) 15:46, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the suggestion to take a class, preferably an intensive one taught entirely in German. If you can't do that, get some language tapes (maybe some are downloadable), find a German "Stammtisch" (group of people who get together to speak German), etc. Don't worry if you can't understand much at first--the idea is to just listen a lot and let the patterns of sound soak into your mind. It will sound like garble at first but will automatically resolve into words and phrases after a few weeks. Preferably, quit speaking English completely for a while, and speak and think in German. That's the best way to learn any language--it's like reformatting your brain; in the early stages, your mind becomes completely blank since you know enough of the new language to put English aside for a while, but you don't know enough to think complicated thoughts. There's something Zen-like about it. Anyway, the main point is to concentrate on the spoken language at first and the written one later. The internet is not so good for that. Phr 15:27, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Goethe-Institut is the state-run organization to deal with matters of teaching the German language to foreigners. They run schools in many cities, both in Germany and abroad. If there is a Goethe-Institut in your city, you could give it a try. -lethe ^{talk +} 17:30, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Latin Translations[edit]

Does anyone know the latin translation of 'witch' or 'Impervious'. I am researching Latin for a book I am writing and can't find a free decnt translator. I was hoping someone here could help. Please!

P.S If you leave your name you will be mentioned in the Acknowlegdements. Thank You. Please Help!

This may help you for witch. --Andrew c 18:47, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For witch: 'venefica', 'saga', lamia', 'praecantrix', 'incantatrix', 'phitonissa'. For impervious: 'clausus', 'clusus', 'impiatus'. I used the program WORDS by William Whittaker, which is freely downloadable, and brilliant. They all have different connotations, but the program will tell you those. If you're making a habit of this, go buy a Latin dictionary. Daniel (☎) 18:51, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is "strix" another word for witch? JackofOz 22:32, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kinda. It appears to be the source of "strega". See strix (mythology). --jpgordon ∇∆∇∆ 22:54, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is also, of course, "malefica", as in Malleus Maleficarum. Adam Bishop 01:57, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And don't forget fascinatrix! Wow, there are a lot of Latin words for witch. —Keenan Pepper 15:02, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Which is quite normal, as when they did speak good latin they didn't burn them. --DLL 16:38, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you guys sure those aren't just Asterix characters? ;) --BluePlatypus 17:04, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone know what a roliscanhardly is??[edit]

Roliscanhardly is an item worth a number of points on a scavenger hunt list, when searching the internet the only place it popped up was on another scavenger hunt list that was on-line. Just wondering if anyone knew anything about this, I was thinking it might be a made up thing to keep greedy people from getting the rest of the items on the list?? Thanks for your help.

redhed

rolLscanhardly ? MeltBanana 20:17, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, "Rolls Canardly", which is a humorous, fictitious model of Rolls Royce motor car. The joke is that, when it rolls down a hill, it "can hardly" get back up again. It's a very old joke - search for it on the web and you'll find lots of citations. --Heron 20:22, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signing off on[edit]

Of recent years, people are often said to have "signed off on" something, eg. "The government has now finalised its consideration of the tax reforms. Last night the Treasurer signed off on the changes to be introduced to parliament next month"

I can think of few more absurd constructions. Why use three words when one would do ("agree", "approve" etc)? And why juxtapose "off" and "on" like this? How come the world was able to get by without this crazy-speak for so long? What is really going on here? JackofOz 23:15, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably just one of those wird sounding phrases in english. First one that comes to mind is "for four" (I was in the plane for four hours). schyler 00:37, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not as weird as the Swedish phrase: Far, får får får? Nej, får får inte får, får får lamm. :) ("får" sounds like "four", BTW) --BluePlatypus 06:28, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I tend to pronounce "for" just like "fur", avoiding the " 4 - 4 " issue. (Born/raised Yonkers; H.S. in Bronx; college at NYU; in Brooklyn 4.5 years & counting) --Nelson Ricardo 05:56, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'Sign off on' is a three-word phrasal verb, similar to 'drop out of', 'get along with', 'get rid of', and 'think back on'. Hope this helps.--Andrew c 01:19, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

i guess we all know it's a phrasal verb... i think Jack's point is that why ppl choose to use an awkward phrasal verb ("on" and "off" coming together is jarring, i agree) instead of a simple non-phrasal verb...in most cases a phrasal verb is more "vigorous", but probably not in this case...--K.C. Tang 02:08, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can just about live with "signing off" something, but "signing off on" seems not only unnecessary but meaningless and ungrammatical. If it must exist, I suppose it has to be categorised as a phrasal verb, but I still dispute its right to exist to begin with. Why didn't it just die the death it so richly deserves, rather than being copied ad nauseam by every journalist in the world? JackofOz 04:10, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

it's certainly grammatical... it's just a problem of taste... maybe it wil die soon, who knows? :)--K.C. Tang 04:24, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing 'off' and 'on' together is a little odd, but it's a simple consequence of word formation, (sign off) is a compound verb, and ((sign off) on) follows. Peter Grey 04:57, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See, that's where I differ from both of you. To sign something off means to approve it. You don't "approve on" something, you just "approve" it. So you don't "sign it off on", you just "sign it off". What purpose does the extra word "on" serve? All I can think of is that, despite being one word longer, "sign off on the changes" is actually easier to say than "sign off the changes". But just because it flows more easily orally doesn't make it correct. Another example is "If only I had have (or had've) known ...". We all know the correct version is "If only I had known", but "had have" sort of sounds right because it's redolent of "could have", "should have" etc. JackofOz 08:30, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that this is one of those phrases that only sound weird when you think about them. I know that if someone were to say "signed off on" (in context) to me, I probably wouldn't even note that there was off and on right next to each other.

Yes, it takes weirdos like me to notice these things. Well, someone's got to be the gatekeeper. A lot of new phrases just enter the language surreptitiously and before you know it, everyone's saying them as if they've been around forever. (Well, everyone in Journalese-speak Land, that is. I don't mind admitting my xenophobia in this case.) JackofOz 03:38, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to Seqsea's consultation of the OED, 1930 N.Y. Times 29 Nov. 15/3 Princeton has signed off on graduate coaching for baseball. Is 1930 leet enough? It doesn't strike me as an outrageously new phrase that slipped in while I wasn't looking. Heck, I wasn't alive. --Keitei (talk) 03:28, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't mean "agree" or "approve." It means to put a literal signature on a piece of paper. It's a formal thing. Strange that it has such an informal amalgamated phrase... --Keitei (talk) 17:56, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure it isn't confined to literally signing a piece of paper. I've heard it used in much broader contexts. JackofOz 03:38, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, what you do when someone uses it to mean something other than signing a paper (or perhaps even outside of a legal/formal decision) is take them out back and shoot them. Insults to grammar should not be ignored! --Keitei (talk) 03:28, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Right. Now that the ref desk has (*) signed off on (*) the death warrant, I will be the willing executioner. And I won't discriminate between those who use it to mean signing a formal document, and others. They're all fair game as far as I'm concerned. Thanks all for your thoughts. JackofOz 15:13, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Newspeak[edit]

Maybe it was last week or so, but I saw a question about Nineteen Eighty-Four and someone answered in newspeak. I was wondering if newspeak has actual grammar rules and other (lack of another word) stuff. I certaintly looked at our article on newspeak but, as you may know, some articles on Wikipedia don't have all the information you would like them to have (e.g. Red Scarf Girl). Is Newspeak as advanced as Klingon as a fictional language? Or is it just kind of there? Thanks. schyler 00:46, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My understanding is that Newspeak is in fact merely English with certain changes representing the mindset intended in the book. I'd hardly consider myself an expert, however. The Jade Knight 01:43, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can read Orwell's appendix on Newspeak here. David Sneek 10:57, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm Lovin' It[edit]

Sorry for posting two questions in a row, but on the I'm Lovin' It article, it says the spanish phrase is Me Encanta and "litterally means" I Love It. Wouldn't it "litterally mean" It Enchants Myself? schyler 01:03, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not really. That's a pretty standard usage of encantar, in fact the first entry in my English-Spanish dictionary is love. Also, reflexive verbs should not be translated with English words like myself. It's just a grammatical feature of the language with no semantic meaning. —Keenan Pepper 01:36, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I know that's the standard usage but if it says literal meaning then shouldn't it be that. It's like the verb gustar: it doesn't mean to like it means to be pleasing to. So, encantar is to be enchanting to. Thus, Me Encnta is It Enchanmts Myself. Do non't enchant it, it enchants you. But i'm only a 3rd year speaker, no where at all an expert on this. I do, however, believe that my teacher (who has several masters degrees in spanish, teaching a foreign language, etc.) would agree with me. He stresses this a lot in his classes. schyler 02:41, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The literal meaning of encantar is to love or enjoy. It's not an idiom. Translating me encanta as it enchants myself is not a literal translation, it's Spanglish. In contrast, an idiom like naranjas de la China has a literal translation (oranges of China) and an idiomatic translation (nonsense). Do you see the difference? A literal translation doesn't have to preserve the same grammatical form, it just has to mean the same thing. This would be more obvious with a language whose grammar is farther from that of English. If you tried to take a Chinese sentence and translate it word-by-word into English, you would get ungrammatical or at least very strange-sounding English. A proper translation, even a literal one, has to change the grammatical form. —Keenan Pepper 02:54, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Giving to be pleasing to as an equivalent for gustar is a great teaching tool, because it allows you to mechanically replace the Spanish word with an English phrase and get something that at least makes sense, but it doesn't mean that's the only way to get a literal translation. —Keenan Pepper 02:56, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

yes, a literal translation is usually distinguished from a word-for-word translation.--K.C. Tang 03:39, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A word for word translation is called a gloss in linguistics, for instance if you have an example sentence in an unfamiliar language you put a word for word, actually morpheme by morpheme translation below it, as in the example below. Then below that, you provide a real translation.

me encantan las naranjas de la China.

me enchant the oranges of the China

"I love nonsense" /"I love oranges from China"

Although I must say I never heard of naranjas de la china used to mean nonsense. mnewmanqc

I just picked a random idiom from my dictionary. It's probably old-fashioned, or only common in a certain country. —Keenan Pepper 14:59, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't all oranges come from China (or Asia) to begin with, anyway? As the German "Apfelsine" from apfel (apple) + sine ("Sinæ" - Chinese, compare "Sino-") indicates. "Naranjas de Islandia" would be more nonsensical. :) --BluePlatypus 16:59, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First blue platypuses, now Icelandic oranges. What will your crazy brain think of next? :--) JackofOz 03:27, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Leave it to Lionel Richie to show us the difference between "love it" and "loving it":

"Because I wonder where you are
"And I wonder what you do
"Are you somewhere feeling lonely?
"Or is someone loving you?
"Tell me how to win your heart
"For I haven’t got a clue
"But let me start by saying I love you"

(From the song "Hello")

The lyrics tell us that while Lionel permanently loves this girl, he is curious as to whether she is having a relationship with someone else at this moment. -- Mwalcoff 23:18, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ART HISTORY[edit]

What does the word faux naif faux-naif mean in art hisrory?

French form of Naïve art. MeltBanana 13:21, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Latin Translation[edit]

Hello i would like to know how to say "While we breathe there is still hope" in latin could you please help me...

Thank you Steve Panton

The Latin proverb is Dum spiro spero, which literally means "While I breathe, I hope". Angr (talk • contribs) 11:39, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's the state motto of South Carolina. User:Zoe|^(talk) 02:42, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

                                                                         what is the language of afghanistan when they say magandang hapon sa inyong lahat ako po si paulo na nakatira sa san mateo carigara leyte

panaceum - panacea[edit]

I was taught that "panaceum" is singular, and "panacea" is plural, like bacterium-bacteria, medium-media, criterion-criteria, etc. Is it only in Latin - because American/English dictionares say "panacea" is singular? Is it?

Rich [email removed]

Panacea is singular. There's no such word as panaceum. The plural is either panaceas or panaceae if you want to be pedantic. —Keenan Pepper 17:26, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would say panaceas because one of the earlier forms was panacæa, and panacaeae looks a little out-of place ;) porges 11:28, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. Change the c to a k and you get Panakaeae which looks like it ought to be the name of a Hawaiian volcano. Angr (talk • contribs) 11:50, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are there panacaeae on Aeaea? —Keenan Pepper 18:02, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sources[edit]

i need to know who wrote the article on george allen smith

Look in the edit history. AnonMoos 17:28, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Many people contributed to it. See Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia for how to cite Wikipedia. —Keenan Pepper 17:29, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can also use this link to find the primary contributors. [11] Daniel Šebesta (talk • contribs) 17:31, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Someone speaking English and hearing another language[edit]

I am learning Spanish, Japanese, and some other languages. During the years I've spent learning, some peculiar things have happened.

1. Someone will say something to me in Engilsh, and I will hear it in Spanish/French/Japanese. The meaning isn't the same however. This especially happens alot when whatever they are saying is garbled by background noise.

2. I will be looking through the Spanish side of a Spanish-English dictionary for an English word. Same thing happens in a Japanese-English dictionary, which kindof wierds me out, seeing that the symbols look nothing like English letters.

3. A person asks me a question in Spanish and I answer his question in English, without realizing it. Then I have to say it in Spanish, much to the annoyance of the person.

4. Sometimes, Japanese people look at me funny when I talk to them in Japanese (I'm white). However, they aren't looking at me because I am slurring/butchering the language. They just have a hard time believeing it's possible, and they think they've been transported to a Japanese version of the twilight zone.

Why do these things occur? Thanks! 68.52.56.111 19:04, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your reactions are a combination of perception, habituation, distraction, and startle reaction effects.—Ëzhiki (ërinacëus amurënsis) • (yo?); 19:13, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've some times ansered questions in English when asked in German and vise versa. I tend to "hear" the question in whatever language I've been using for the past few hours.

Sometimes I cannot remember for the life of me what language someone told me something in. The Jade Knight 23:20, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I definitely have a set transition time between German and English modes. When I get asked a question in an unexpected language I have to pause, realize what language it is and then replay the question. Strangely, my train of thought has no problem spontaneously switching, which really weirded me out at first. Almost as weird as those German gibberish dreams I had before I was fluent enough to compose dreams fast enough in German. People are strange things when it comes to language. — Laura Scudder ☎ 17:04, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wondered how people can keep two languages separate like that, but I suppose even those which speak a single language have the same issue, as there are formal and vulgar forms one needs to use in the correct contexts. So, we must have a built-in ability to keep different sets of words, phrases, and usages in our brains for different settings. StuRat 01:13, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have heard that the Japanese are very impressed by any foreigner (or at least any Westerner) that speaks their language. I don't know exactly why, but it may be because they think most Westerners are too snobbish to take the effort, so they are touched by anyone who does take the effort. I don't know. Whatever the case, take their unbelief as a compliment. Linguofreak 14:47, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One thing that really suprises them is when you speak Japanese, and you sound Japanese as well. Just like in English countries, the majority of non-native speakers are really easy to pick out, and due to the relative monochromatic society that exists in Japan, foreign accents are given a very strange and sometimes hard to understand reception. Japanese-dubbed movies always imploy impeccable (and often incredibly annoying) Japanese, no matter what language or situation the actors are in (unlike most American movies that often enlist evil British accents and sinister bad-guy Russianisms: "Boris no happy!!!") and American style accents are fairly common in advertizing and hip-hop music, although it's almost always a Japanese voice actor who can't actually speak English at all.
Basically they've got a long way to go in Japan before they really understand the North American concept of nationality, where a guy born in China and receiving his Canadian citizenship only after attending a Canadian university is called a "Canadian" though he can barely speak English, whereas a guy born in Japan speaking nothing but Japanese with two parents speaking almost perfect Japanese and holding permanent Japanese resident passes is still considered a "Korean". Oops... I ranted. freshgavin ΓΛĿЌ 06:27, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hej, I don't think you guys are snobissh... :0 but it's ture that I wonder sometimes: "why on earth does this guy dare to learn Japanese, a language completely useless outside these small islands?"... well I know there're many languages with far less native speakers than Japanese, but somehow this kind of thought pops up occasionally. Basically, even today, just to meet a foreigner is already a relatively rare scene for us Japanese (especially in the countryside, except Narita where an international airport locates). So, to be spoken to in (fluent) Japanese by an apparent foreigner is, in a sense, a special experience (again, in urban area it might not be the case). If the event occured in a small town, I can imagine s/he'll tell the "news" to his/her friends the next day: "Kinou Gaijin ni NIHONGO DE hanashi kakerare ta saa..."(I was spoken to by a foreigner IN JAPANESE yesterday) "Maji de?!!"(You kiddin', aren't you!?) ... ;) - marsian 19:44, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You said "why does he dare to learn Japanese", which sounds like he has no right to learn Japanese (he doesn't deserve to learn Japanese). I think what you meant to say was "why does he bother to learn Japanese".
I think the answer to that is pretty simple: Even though there's many less Japanese speakers than, say, Chinese speakers, Japan has a much better reputation as a comfortable and safe place to live in, and thus attracts more long-term residents. freshgavin ΓΛĿЌ 06:28, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aha, thanks Freshgavin. I meant "nande wazawaza...". Seems I misunderstood how to use "dare". I agree Japan is a safe country... so safe that I usually forget that it's safe. - marsian 16:30, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Frocio[edit]

I assume the term is Italian, because it was used by a defender of Silvio Berlusconi on his talk page. Presumably, it's a term of abuse. I'm curious to know what it means, as it doesn't show up in my minimal Italian-English dictionary. Bhumiya (said/done) 20:22, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to my middling-sized dictionary: a vulgar term for homosexual; ‘faggot’. (Which, if you have been unable to avoid that user’s previous comments, will surprize you as little as it did me.)—Ian Spackman 20:36, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I wasn't expecting anything high-brow. Thanks, Ian! Bhumiya (said/done) 21:31, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone translate this?[edit]

اود ان اجد لعبة لكود ليوكو Pacific Coast Highway • ^blah 21:58, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The machine translation is: "Perishes that serious game [lkwd] [lywkw]" using this translator. Hope that helps. --Fuhghettaboutit 21:34, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It looks kind of like it should be in Arabic, but doesn't really hold together as a sentence, as far as I can tell. The word لعبة lu`bah means a "plaything" or "laughing-stock". The word اجد (an elative of a doubled root, which should properly be spelled إجد with hamza) could mean "more serious" or "more recent". The letters ليوكو look a whole lot like a transcription of a foreign word, but "Lioko" or "Liuku" or whatever doesn't really suggest anything. AnonMoos 21:43, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Likud ? --DLL 21:01, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Likud in Arabic would be حزب ليكود [12] or similar. AnonMoos 21:10, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's Arabic and it starts with "I want to find game (or toy) ..." and then that لكود ليوكو "likud lioko (liuku)" which doesn't mean anything in Arabic, sounds more like Arabic speaker speculating about the name he/she couldn't remember right … Cheers.86.62.226.102 09:30, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Russian preposition во[edit]

How is the o in the Russian preposition "во" pronounced - is it always a normal "o" or does vowel reduction apply somehow? For example in the phrase "во всём". PeepP 22:45, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I pronounce it as "vah vsyom" (if the both words are stressed), "vuh vsyom" (if it's fast speech, where the 'uh' part is the a-schwa).

The letter "o" in Russian has unique rules for pronunciation. More often than not, it's pronounced more like an "a" than an "o". This is especially true in words that include two "o"s. As a general rule, never more than one "o" in a word is pronounced as an "o", and the rest are pronounced more like "a"s. However, in many words with one syllable, the only "o" is pronounced as an "a". Take the phrase "DO CKOPOBO", a common greeting of farewell meaning "until soon" (as in the French "à bientôt".) Of the four "o"s in "DO CKOPOBO", only one is pronounced "o", while the others are pronounced more like "a"s. Hence "DO CKOPOBO" is pronounced something like "DA SKORAVA". I know this isn't the best response, but I hope it helps. Loomis51 01:45, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The other thing to bear in mind is that "во" where used prepositionally is virtually never stressed, as it is a variant of "в" (which is inherently unstressable). The only 2 exceptions I can think of are "вó-время" ("at the proper time"), and "вóвсе" ("at all"). "во" of course occurs stressed in non-prepositional contexts such as "вóдка" (vodka). JackofOz 03:16, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, Loomis, you're mixing up Cyrillic and Latin letters in the same expression, DO CKOPOBO. The Cyrillic is "до скорого", the letter-for-letter transliteration is "do skorogo", and the pronunciation is "da skorava". JackofOz 03:16, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the answers. If во is virtually never stressed, then can you give some examples of prepositions with an "o" that can sometimes be stressed - or are other prepositions (со, ко, etc.) similar? I'm only curious about the cases when the preposition is separated with a space, because I consider "во-время" one word and thus not that confusing. PeepP 11:41, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would say they all follow the same principle. I don't think any monosyllabic Russian preposition is normally stressed. In conversation you can stress any word you like in order to make a point, but that's a different thing. JackofOz 03:27, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oz, I realize that I'm using latin letters. My problem isn't that I'm illiterate in Cyrillic, I just can't figure out how to get my computer to produce Cyrillic characters. For example, I know that a "д" in Russian isn't represented by the latin "D". I'm also aware that sometimes the "г" in Russian, although generally representing the Latin "G", is occasionally pronounced as a "V", as in the word "eгo", pronounced "yevo". (In case you're wondering, I was able to reproduce these characters by cutting and pasting from yours.) So the problem isn't a matter of illiteracy in Russian, but rather computer illiteracy! Loomis51 00:35, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Go into Word and open up a new document. Use the Insert > Symbol function to type your Cyrillic characters (pressing the Insert button for each character). Then copy the text into here. Not stunningly sophisticated, but it's quick, simple and it works. JackofOz 03:36, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

!"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;!"#$%&'()*+,-./01123456789:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_`ab

...... not quite sure how to interpret that post, Loomis51. JackofOz 00:09, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It means I tried what you said and that was the result. Oh well. Thanks for trying to help though, Jack, I appreciate it.Loomis51 21:21, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I confirm that that "о" is reduced to "a" or to schwa when pronounced quickly (in fact, it’s there just for the ease of pronunciation). Off the top of my head, I can think of only one example when "во" is stressed, "Во поле берёзка стояла", but this usage is archaic. The stress is transferred from the following noun. Prepositions with other vowels are more often stressed, like in "из лесу" (from a forest) or "на день" (for a day). (And "вовремя" doesn’t have a hyphen in it.) Conscious 17:53, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

April 22[edit]

Sweeeeeeet[edit]

In my spanish class, when there is a 3 day weekend (for example last weekend) our teacher usually doesn't give us a dily homework assignment for over the holiday. One of my friends (last week) said, "Dulceeeeeee," like the English Sweeeeeeet. He also sometimes add fregando because it sounds like frigin', but it is of course washing dishes (scrubbing). I know this is not correct though. What could someone say in Spanish and get the same point across? schyler 02:05, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The answer depends on the dialect, though I like your friends linguistic creativity. A common northern Latin American expression indicating something like cool is que chévere. In Spain, que guay. On the other hand, maybe young native speakers can come up with something better. mnewmanqc

Don't Mexicans sometimes use the term ¡órale! in this sense? Bhumiya (said/done) 21:39, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard "Muy amable" (very kind (of you)" in the ironic sense used in your example. Jameswilson 23:30, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sweet or cool is sometimes translated as genial in Latin America, chulo in Spain and some other areas, and padre in Mexico. The first two translations, however, are quite rare. The nearest equivalent that is widely accepted is ¡Eso!, which means something like All right! Mnewmanqc's translation chévere is also close in meaning to cool, and can be used even as an adjective besides an interjection.--El aprendelenguas 18:19, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

German to English translation: Spätheimkehrer[edit]

I am looking for the english translation of the german "der Spätheimkehrer". It is a term describing a german WWII soldier returning from soviet imprisonment as late as 1955. There is a german wikipedia entry for the term: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spätheimkehrer. Thank you! Don420 07:45, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if there is an English word for German POWs returning to Germany as late as 1955. "Late returners", perhaps, though the term would have to be explained to an English-speaking audience. If you're translating de:Heimkehrer into English, I'd say just leave the term in German and explain what it literally means. Angr (talk • contribs) 08:56, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Resources for learning Chinese (Mandarin) (moved from April 19)[edit]

My fiancée has recently promised to by me any one item to help me learn Chinese.

What would you say is the most effective tool (CD, book, etc.) to learn Chinese? I'm looking for something I can buy here, not a suggestion like "visit China" or "speak with a native". Any suggestions? The Jade Knight 07:30, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where is "here"? Notinasnaid 07:41, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are Chinese classes at your local community college or private language school an option, and if so, do they count as "something you can buy"? Because despite the big industry in language self-teaching, it really isn't particularly effective in most cases. Angr (talk • contribs) 07:44, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here = United States (or something one can get over the internet). I know that immersion is the best way to learn, but I'm really just asking, of all the books, CDs, and multimedia programs out there, what's the best? The Jade Knight 22:15, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See what your library has, and search for a while on the internet. After a while I was able to assemble enough sources to learn Hindi including audio lessons, video, exercises, etc all for free. There's probably more available for Mandarin than Hindi. If your library has the Pimsleur CD series, those really are pretty good, but to buy them they're $300 each and there are 3 levels for Mandarin. Depending on your reasons for learning you may want to learn Mandarin and a dialect, though standard Mandarin is a good start. Also you have to decide if you want to learn how to read and write or just speak. But the free route gives you time to see if you really are committed before spending any money. I find commuting time is the best otherwise wasted time I can utilize, so I try to get as much audio material as possible. I've been wondering if the Rosetta Stone software is any good. They do have a guarantee, but given I have a lot of other stuff I'm not too motivated to spend any money. - Taxman ^Talk 22:29, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I really thought the Rosetta Stone demo was good, but I'm not sure if it's worth it over something I can get for $50 or less with an Academic discount. The Jade Knight 06:13, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From your user page, you seem to be (or seem to fancy yourself!) quite good with languages. In that case Pimsleur is too basic- even at the end of level three you've had only 45 hours of instruction and have only reached a very low (albeit secure) level. If you're up for learning to read and write as well, the Practical Chinese Readers from the Beijing Language Institute are solid, if dull, but I don't know if their oral textbooks are available in the US. Henry ^Flower 12:13, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, yeah I didn't see your user page which is pretty impressive. What are you saying you can get for $50 with the discount? And as a good example of what I was saying, a google search for Practical Chinese Reader (which is a great suggestion btw and seems to be exactly what you are looking for.) gives a link to http://ktmatu.com/chinese/practical-chinese-reader/ that has the vocabulary for both books and the audio for the first one. Everything I see does point to that one being considered very good. - Taxman ^Talk 19:08, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Update: The software I can get is Instant Immersion Chinese. Should I go this route, or fork out the cash for Rosetta Stone, or go with Basic Chinese Reader, do you think? The Jade Knight 23:36, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've played around a bit with Rosetta Stone and Pimsleur, and would personally prefer the latter. Rosetta Stone is very good in some ways -- it's really easy to use, somewhat fun and it's very good at building vocabulary. Unfortunately, it's not as good at building knowledge of grammatical structures. The [Amazon review by Eleanor Lin] is a good explanation why. The Pimsleur program is better at covering grammatical issues, and it also provides a more real-world use. The first things you learn in Pimsleur are things like "excuse me", "Do you speak English", and "I don't understand". The first things you learn in Rosetta Stone are things like "a man and a girl" "a ball" and "the boy is under the airplane". Which would you rather have in the Beijing airport? One other suggestion I have is to see if there's a Confucius Institute in your area; if the Chinese government is going to pay good money on cultural imperialism, it would be foolish not to take advantage. --ByeByeBaby 03:16, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

April 23[edit]

Gibberish[edit]

Hi, I just barely bought this Relient K cd. On the cd is a song written almost all in Gibberish. here are the Gibberish parts of the lyrics. I was wondering if you could tell me what they are saying. Thank you!

LYRICS arg wu sentafinticate nar dunderford bida menti kosticated interserd thorphilliate stinded yilla billa zay wentora yate paravillintiniay paravillintiniay

dorga orpha dorga billa dorga orpha stifaleare dorga orpha dorga billa tonalation fonamere

Thanks again!

It seems they're saying... gibberish. That is, nothing intelligible. From the looks of it, it looks like it might be a commentary on people who try to use big words to sound intellectual (like the words ending in "ticate" and "illiate"). The rest of the lyrics seem to suggest that Relient K has a low opinion of gibberish-talkers ;) (Also, I'm reminded of Blazing Saddles and authentic frontier gibberish, but that's neither here nor there.) —Seqsea (talk) 06:00, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You! so what exactly are the words that they are saying?

Check out our article on Gibberish. freshgavin ΓΛĿЌ 06:05, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My Shadow[edit]

what is the content of poetry 'My Shadow' by Robert Louis Stevenson My Shadow

I HAVE a little shadow that goes in and out with me, And what can be the use of him is more than I can see. He is very, very like me from the heels up to the head; And I see him jump before me, when I jump into my bed.

The funniest thing about him is the way he likes to grow— 5 Not at all like proper children, which is always very slow; For he sometimes shoots up taller like an India-rubber ball, And he sometimes gets so little that there’s none of him at all.

He hasn’t got a notion of how children ought to play, And can only make a fool of me in every sort of way. 10 He stays so close beside me, he’s a coward you can see; I’d think shame to stick to nursie as that shadow sticks to me!

One morning, very early, before the sun was up, I rose and found the shining dew on every buttercup; But my lazy little shadow, like an arrant sleepy-head, 15 Had stayed at home behind me and was fast asleep in bed.

Please do your own homework. Angr (talk • contribs) 07:03, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Teeline shorthand[edit]

I wish to learn Teeline, could anybody reccomend a good free online tutorial?--Keycard ^(talk) 08:34, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

what does "I'm lovin' it" really mean?[edit]

As a non-native speaker, I always thought that the phrase is just an emphatic way of saying "i love it", but after looking at the versions of the slogan in different languages, i began to doubt my understanding. could you guys explain it to me? --K.C. Tang 12:02, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not their invention. It's a kind of colloquial expression that is probably recent. It sounds like something out of the entertainment industry to me. It means I'm really enjoying it. However, the equivalents in other languages may not be translations, just something designed to promote the product based on market research in that country--mnewmanqc

To me it doesn't mean much more than a Micky D's slogan. Colloquial American dialects will sometimes use the be+participle form at times when "standard" forms of the language call for the simple verb. E.g: "He's wanting an x," rather than: "He wants an x." I'm not sure, even as a native speaker who uses these constructions quite a bit (although "love" is not generally one of the verbs I do that with), whether or not the meaning is any different. I can't really give you a confident answer either way. At the moment I would say that (in my dialect at least), "I'm lovin' it," is simply a somewhat different way of saying "I love it," or "I'm enjoying it," without much change of meaning. Linguofreak 22:01, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The only person I have ever heard use this phrase is a Mancunian high school teacher (and I am in Canada). Otherwise it's just a stupid advertising slogan...it's a completely understandable phrase, but no one would ever say that in normal conversation. Adam Bishop 17:03, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe not in Canada, but in Australia all manner of slick/trendy phrases quickly get picked up and used by a certain age group, apparently because that's what "cool people" say. You've got to pepper your conversation with such things, otherwise you just don't belong to the in-crowd. To them, that becomes "normal conversation". Sad, really. JackofOz 03:50, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the phrase existed in the US prior to it's incorporation into McD ads. I would say it means "I currently love it". As in the following exchange:

"Do you want to stay single forever ?"

"I'm lovin' it right now, but in 5 years, who knows ?"

StuRat 20:50, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I would necessarily say that, but I think it could be thought of as a passive form which puts the emphasis on the object, or in this case the verb, rather than on the subject. I'm not knowing for sure, maybe your commenting will help me. -LambaJan 23:57, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One of Maxwell Smart's lesser catchphrases was "...and loving it" (after his boss told him about the dangers his latest spy mission would expose him to...). AnonMoos 17:30, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The "I'm lovin' it" cups in Japan contain a bunch of (presumably less elegant) translations of the slogan into languages such as Chinese, Korean, Russian, French, and Arabic. If my memory serves me the French one translates something like "This is my/what I love", and the Chinese one something about "my love of life". In true Japanese fashion, they don't risk translating it into Japanese and just use the "catchy-cool" English phrase instead. freshgavin ΓΛĿЌ 06:03, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

no, the Chinese version doesn't mean "my love of life", but the Chinese version is rather odd anyway...--K.C. Tang 09:00, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Chinese is "我就喜欢". Doesn't that mean "I simply enjoy" or something along those lines? It sounds strange to me, but I assumed it corresponded to an idiomatic expression. Bhumiya (said/done) 05:21, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

it sounded a bit odd to me at first hearing... it is close to the French version in meaning, but the tone is something like "yes, that's what I like, leave me alone!" Imagine that a mother says to his child: "Don't eat such gabage food!" and his child responds defiantly: "我就喜歡!"...--K.C. Tang 06:42, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As usual my memory fails me. Pardon me - -;;. freshgavin ΓΛĿЌ 06:15, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

American and British English[edit]

I was wondering what people who speak British English think of how Americans speak English. I know many Americans find it amusing under some circumstances, but how do Brits find us Americans? Do you believe we speak the wrong way or is amusing as well? User:Chile 10:02 AM 4-23-06

I would imagine that the popularity and prevalence of American television in the UK and Australia has gone some way to helping many speakers of British or Commonwealth English get used to American English usage, pronunciation and terms. I have, however, noticed there is some irritation about American spelling of words like "colour/color" or "standardise/standardize", and the pronunciation of the last letter of the alphabet as "zee" rather then "zed". --Canley 15:21, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

'Lazy' probably best sums it up. Laziness in articulation and in, like, thought? My parents claim that they can no longer understand American accents in films, but whether that's their ageing or your degenerating I cannot say. Henry ^Flower 16:26, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It seems attitudes toward American English in Britain have changed over time, though. I remember reading a 1930s British novelist (can't remember who now, Dorothy L. Sayers perhaps, but not necessarily), whose stereotyped American characters always used long Latinate words in syntactically highly convoluted sentences. Angr (talk • contribs) 16:59, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds more like an upper-class trait than an American trait. StuRat 20:42, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it depends. When Nancy Mitford described the differences between U and Non-U in Noblesse Oblige, one of the most notable differences is that non-U (middle-class) speech tends to use fancy Latinate words where U (upper-class) speech uses simple Anglo-Saxon ones. Angr (talk • contribs) 22:09, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps "academic" would be a better description. I find the use of overly complex words and sentences (dare I say, polysyllabic words ?) is widespread in academia. I've also found this trait to exist in management consultants, which seem to have spawned vast new vocabularies of terms which typically mean nothing new. StuRat 22:22, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all the feedback. One of my friends asked someone the same question and the British person told himthat "Americans don't talk funny. They talk wrong" --Chile 03:38, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the examples given in the U and Non-U article, I find it rather intrigueing that American speech (or at least my dialect) is split about 50/50 between using "U" and "Non-U" terms. Or more like 40/40/20 between U, non-U, and American-specific terms. Linguofreak 03:51, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm more 40%-25%-35%, myself. The Jade Knight 04:55, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

40/40/20 was more of an approximation than anything. I also find that a lot of American terms are shortened versions of a British term: e.g. "Bike" for bicycle, "Napkin" for Table-Napkin, "Suit" for Dress-Suit. Linguofreak 16:46, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Although I come from Cleveland, I managed to avoid the ravages of the Northern cities vowel shift. Having listened to myself on tape, I was surprised to discover that like most Americans under twenty, I have a flat, low-pitched, nasalized accent. However, I say "y'all" under certain circumstances, and my Cleveland relatives say I sound vaguely Southern. I was unfamiliar with the U and non-U English, but I discovered that I'm upper class, apparently. But that's long-outdated nonsense. Only octogenarians say "greens" anymore, and nobody says "luncheon" without ironic intent.

I'm naturally pompous and caustic, but these traits are distressingly rare among normal Americans (though not nonexistent), and I think this is the key to understanding the American use of language. Americans are, on the whole, overly earnest and conventional in their approach to language. Most "educated" Americans (i.e. those who graduated from college but never read books not stocked at Wal-Mart), when speaking in formal or semi-formal circumstances, begin to emit a sort of bland, inoffensive, circumlocutionary bullshit. Anyone who has ever been trapped in a room with an "administrative official" knows exactly what I mean. The diction is sterile but unsophisticated. It eschews most words exceeding four syllables, but also drops those with fewer than two syllables, resulting in a monotonous Latinate drone. It's so dull that I can't come up with a really striking example right away. Basically, Americans are "lazy" in their choice of words, but very industrious when it comes to stringing these words together.

However satisfying it may be, it's unfair to say Americans speak "wrong". As the most divergent dialect, its features can be easily (and willfully) misinterpreted as barbarisms. The spelling differences, though overblown and invested with patriotic importance, are so insignificant as to scarcely deserve mention. I agree that "General American" is a very dull dialect, but what Commonwealth English speakers often overlook are the massive internal variations. I would perceive, for example, a far larger gulf between Chicago and Alabama English than between Australian and Estuary English. Bhumiya (said/done) 06:29, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Australian Accent[edit]

The previous question inspired me to ask this one that's been on my mind in the past:

As a North American, the Australian accent sounds rather similar to the British (although it's still quite distinct.) In any case, what I'm saying is that it sounds more British than North American. But that's only from my North American point of view.

Do Brits, from their point of view, when hearing an Aussie accent, consider it just as foreign as a North American accent? Or do they find it quite a bit more similar? (I'm not talking about the vocabulary...there the Aussies are on their own little planet of boggeriboos and widgeriwoos :) which I'm sure are much more foreign to Brits than whatever idioms North Americans have dreamed up.) Loomis51 15:22, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you really want to compare the three, the IPA chart for English can help.--The i kiroid (talk parler hablar paroli 说話し parlar) 15:52, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My unscientific impression is that an Aussie accent is more like a US one than a British one. I didn't know that Russell Crowe was Australian until I was told, for example. (It seems that in fact he may be from New Zealand, but that's pretty much the same). Henry ^Flower 16:29, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When you say Australia and NZ are pretty much the same, do you mean like in the same way Scotland and Ireland are pretty much the same? ;) Loomis51 21:16, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Cough, splutter ...) How rude! We Aussies have the greatest difficulty understanding many Kiwis, with their "suxty-sux begs of fush and chups" lingo. Despite our geographical proximity, our histories are very different indeed. Russell Crowe can't quite decide where his roots are, and typically acknowledges NZ, Australia and the USA when he accepts an award. He was born in NZ but did most of his growing up in Oz (some would argue he still has a lot of growing up to do ... but who am I to talk). JackofOz 04:12, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the Australian accent is clearly ~~inferior~~ different to New Zealand's. porges 11:16, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On a day such as 25 April (Anzac Day), it's good to see such an inclusive approach. JackofOz 20:42, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As for causes, North America was colonized by England much earlier than Australia, so I would expect more divergence to occur in the longer time frame. However, since they were both colonized by England (instead of, say, Australia being colonized by the US), I would expect both to be variations on British English, but not very similar to each other. Also, North America is closer to the UK, so perhaps there was more travel and cultural exchange between the two, which would tend to keep the dialects closer. StuRat 20:17, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To me (Irish) all Brits sound the same(exxpting scots who have a distinct accent), all Ausies, New Zelanders and South africans sound the same. However I can generly tell the difrence betwen divrent U.S. accents, Not to the state bu to a general area, eg. West, South

From the U.S. point of view, Australian accents sound a little like Cockney. I don't know what New Zealand accents sound like; sometimes they can be rather difficult to understand... AnonMoos 20:23, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The cockney connection is one we often hear about. To us, cockneys sound so utterly different from the way we talk that we can never quite understand how others hear us as sounding even remotely similar. I guess it all depends on one's linguistic frame of reference. JackofOz 04:12, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have to say, as a speaker of SAE, I never found the Australian accent to be particularly similar to Cockney. When I think of Cockneys, I think of Michael Caine, and he ain't Australian. I have noticed differences between "old" and "new" Australian accents, however. Older accents more closely resemble the Monty Python "Bruces" impression: flatter, with a drawn-out, nasal quality (and I know Americans are perceived as nasal, but Americans for their part tend to perceive Australians as nasal), whereas newer accents seem less distinctive and more like a British or American accent. Bhumiya (said/done) 05:33, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To me (northeastern Welsh) British accents are very distinct - I was reading a chapter of Voices (connected to a BBC radio series) in a bookshop yesterday, which noted how accents can change drastically over a couple of miles. While I'm not one of those people who used to claim to be able to identify where people came from to within a few streets, I can often place someone to a small group of counties. Anyway, to come back to the question at hand, the Australian accent is nothing like any British accent I know; I have trouble distinguishing a New Zealand accent from Australian, unless they're referring to Maori-origin terms, or to the number "sex". I did once mistake someone from Stourbridge (English west midlands) as having a South African English accent, it's very similar! I'm not usually much good at distinguishing Canadians from the General American accent, until I spend a few days in Canada, after which it becomes fairly straightforward. I find the best way to place North Americans in the UK is to ask "So where in Canada do you come from?" - USians will just say "no, actually I'm from..." without taking umbrage, while Canadians will be delighted that you noticed. -- Arwel (talk) 01:12, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would say something like "Howja know I was born in Canada? I've lived in the States all my life." :-) Linguofreak 03:46, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

surely the autralian and US accents are more similar? i'm british but have lived in Oz - for me its the shared (mis)pronouciation of words like pasta (paaaaaaasta rather that a short a)as well as shared idiom like eggplant instead of aubergine that make them undeniably similar. also do americans say capsicums instead of peppers and "chilli" instead of Jalepeno?

Learning Arabic[edit]

I would Like to learn arabic - specially for reading arabic books. Whats the best way to learn ? --mashuq

If you just want a passive reading knowledge of the standard written language only, then don't bother with "conversational" or audio courses -- most such courses teach a form of the language which is rather different from that which you'll find written in books, and learning Arabic is already difficult enough without spending time on skills which are not essential to you. Buy a copy of the Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic, and one (or even better, several) grammatically-oriented -- not conversationally-oriented -- introductions to Arabic. I can't say which one is best, but some which I happen to have picked up over the years are "Teach Yourself Arabic" by A.S. Tritton, "An Introduction to Modern Literary Arabic" by David Cowan, and "Arabic Grammar: A First Workbook" by G.M. Wickens. AnonMoos 20:36, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The best way to learn is to listen to your teacher and / or read your books, but to keep disapproving whenever you want. --DLL 20:54, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If he was enrolled in a formal class, I doubt if he would have been asking the question in the first place. AnonMoos 21:01, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just got back from a week in Tunisia, and it was very helpful when it came to mastering the alphabet. Most signs are bilingual French-Arabic, so you can look at the letters in Arabic and then use the French to check if you've got it right. Trips to Tunisia are dirt cheap. The wife and I paid €1000 for the two of us, airfare, hotel and meals included. It would have been an extra €200 to stay an additional week. €1200 for two weeks in the sun and getting the Arabic alphabet down is not a bad deal when you consider that private tutoring in Europe can be €50 an hour without meals or beach access. :^) --Diderot 12:02, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You really need a teacher. There's no getting around it. If you can't afford classes at a university then see if you can get a deal by just auditing a course, or see if there is a cheap or free one offered at a local Mosque. -LambaJan 05:29, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Language Excerpt from Hot/Cold Pack[edit]

Hello. I have a hot/cold pack from Mueller, and on the back the instructions are given in different languages. I (think that I) know what language all the instructions are in except for one set. If anyone could tell me what language it is, I would appreciate it. I'm thinking something like Dutch, but I'm not sure. Well, here's an excerpt from the instructions:

"KOUD-WARM KOMPRES/OPNIEUW TE GEBRUIKEN"

"Voor koud gebruik Laat het kompres tenminste 1 1/2 uur op de bodem van het vriesvak liggen alvorens het te gebruiken; plaats het krompes in een hoes of wikkel het in een handdoek en leg op het betreffende lichaamsdeel."

Thanks for your help. --Think Fast 21:24, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, it's something like Dutch all right. Something very much like Dutch indeed. Something pretty much exactly like Dutch. ;-) Angr (talk • contribs) 21:54, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll go one better. Actually, it is Dutch! --Dr. Zarkov 06:07, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Um...would it be too much to ask what it actually says? :-) --HappyCamper 21:54, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Cold/warm compress. Open to use. For cold use, Let the compress lie at least 1 1/2 hour in the freezer prior to use. place the compress in a cover or towel and apply to the concerned body-part." Strangely enough.. it reads like the instructions to some kind of cold pack! But don't ask me, I only understand Dutch well when drunk. (That may, however, be true for the Dutch as well - but how would we know? ;) ) --BluePlatypus 00:15, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all for your help. --Think Fast 02:37, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not "open to use", but "can be used again". I actually understand Dutch when I'm sober (which is all too well since I'm living in Flanders and I don't get drunk often at all).

April 24[edit]

Can someone transliterate this Chinese text into English?[edit]

"更老的嫂子" - Please transliterate this text into English alphabet and confirm if it refers to an older sister-in-law. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 06:55, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

a rather odd phrase... yes, it translates "older sister-in-law", it reads in pinyin: geng4lao3de sao3zi.--K.C. Tang 08:55, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks K.C. Tang. You say it's an odd phrase. So, what would be a natural phrase referring to your elder brother's wife? -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 12:41, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You perhaps need to clarify whether you mean the wife of your elder brother, or the wife of the elder of your brothers, or the elder of your sisters-in-law. These aren't necessarily the same thing. Henry ^Flower 12:46, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I meant the wife of the elder of one's brothers. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 12:49, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

you mean the wife of your eldest brother? you call your eldest brother 大哥(da4ge1) and his wife 大嫂(da4sao3), with 大 meaning "big". you call your second eldest brother 二哥(er2ge1), literally "second brother" and of course now you know how to call his wife. note that 嫂 can be used to refer generally to any woman aged above-30.--K.C. Tang 21:58, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot, K.C. Tang. -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 05:05, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

April 25[edit]

Maid in Japan[edit]

Was there ever a time when the term Made in Japan, was spelled like this Maid in Japan? I have a toy Signature sewing machine, and on the outside of the carton it says Maid in Japan, instead of Made in Japan. Thank you in advance for your time.

Ron

You will often see mis-spellings and crazy mis-translations, on goods manufactured in non-English speaking countries. This is an example of that. JackofOz 01:36, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See the Engrish article for information on that. As a resident of Japan at the moment, I do like to find examples of Engrish, for example the "Dericious Sandwich" I bought this morning, and my girlfriend's t-shirt with "Fancifully Handful" written on it. However, in this case, is it possible that 'Maid in Japan' on a toy sewing machine could be a pun? Phileas 01:57, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When my parents lived in Sendai in the early 1950s they were amused by a sign in a tailor's shop that read "Ladies have fits upstairs". Angr (talk • contribs) 07:42, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And then, of course, there's Maiden Japan, but I guess I'm showing my age here :) -- Ferkelparade π 08:06, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When I was up in Kanagawa a few years ago, I was amused at a shop called 'Cute Mumps'. There's another clothing shop near my house here in Aichi, called 'Spaz'. Lovely country, this.....! CCLemon 09:46, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for help dealing with Dutch pigs and singing dentists[edit]

Hi there. For some time now I've been trying to find a translation of the lyrics from a song by the Dutch singer known as "De Aal", aka the "Singing Dentist". This is the page the Dutch WP has on him; I'm not making this up. The song is still better, however. It seems to be some kind of drinking or carnival song, containing atrocious beer fest music and absurd animal noises. The title is "Een barg die hé un krul in de steert" and it seems to be about a pig gone missing (apparently it has met some horrible fate at the hand of some cook). I found two dodgy transcriptions of the lyrics, here and here. It goes something like this (I'll put in the translatin as far as I've come and mark the unknown bits with lots of ?):

   Een barg die he un krul in de steert : a pig, he had a spiralled tail
   En daar kommen ze alle weer aan : And there they're all coming up again
   Ze horen me daar in 't grint gegaan : ????They hear me there going in the dirt ????
   Wah hedde me die barg gedaan? : What have they done with the pig?
   Waor is dat vette beest? : Where is the fat beast?
   Mi loele frie ene trog te gaan : ????? Something to do with a trough?????
   En de tonne en tonne : ??? a barrell? trough????
   Ze rollen mie daar in rochten sjoe : They rolled me there in... something with soup????

You may want to take a look at the sites I linked above to see the whole of the song. I left out all the repetitions and the "hng âh, pfn âh, kng âh aajeeeee aajoo". If anybody is willing to take a look at this, and to have a really good laugh, I'm perfectly willing to send him a sample in mp3 format. Also, I don't quite trust the transcription. We're going to do a reading in Vienna next weekend, and I'd dearly love to amuse the audience by playing this absurd bit of music from the 80s and then do a pseudo-serious scholarly analaysis of it. So... anybody willing to have a go and further the cause of pure art? --Dr. Zarkov 01:47, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm.. Seems like some strange lyrics indeed. :) From what I make of it, the first two lines are pretty much correct. The third line is "gravel" not "dirt" (which makes more sense - walking on gravel makes noise). The sixth line is pretty mysterious. "Mi loele"? ("mij"?) "frie"? ("vrij"?). So maybe "Me ?? free going to a trough". The next is "And the barrels and barrels". I also find "rochten sjoe" in the last line weird. "sjouw" perhaps? --BluePlatypus 07:23, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Huckleberry Finn[edit]

Hi, my question is about Mark Twain's Huckleberry Finn. I'm supposed to write an essay to argue for or against its inclusion in our curriculum, and I was wondering if anyone had anything to say on the subject. I'm arguing for its inclusion but any thoughts on it would be great. Thanks 02:47, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

What sort of curriculum? If it's the curriculum for a middle school math class, I'm afraid I'd have to argue against it. -Elmer Clark 03:10, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

English, high school.

04:44, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's an absolute classic of American literature. You may want to read Mark Twain#Career overview, for starters. The only real problem with the book, however, is the problem of the ending. My opinion. Well, not only mine; there's a whole stack of literature about nothing but the problematic ending of that book. Frankly, it sucks. Don't let yourself be fooled by goody-two-shoes arguments about the abominable stereotypical depiction of black people. (These are the same kind of arguments brought forth against books like To Kill a Mockingbird, of all things). Read it with open eyes and you'll notice there are a few eye-openers, so to speak. (Alas, if it were not for the ending, this would be one hell of a novel). --Dr. Zarkov 06:35, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

pompeii???????[edit]

why is the city that got burned by the lava, pompeii, named pompeii? what does the english word for pompeii? what does it mean?

As always, it is a good idea to look up the article Pompeii. Which will tell you that "in 80 BC Pompeii was forced to surrender after the conquest of Nola. It became a Roman colony with the name of Colonia Cornelia Veneria Pompeianorum." Looking up Pompeius and Roman naming convention will take you even further. If I add that "Pompeianorum" is genitive plural meaning "of the gens Pompeius" or "of the Pompeians" and "colonia" means "colony", this should be enough to enable you to do the rest of your homework properly. (Please correct me if there's some oversight; I worked nightshift and may not be thinking quite straight for the next ten hours or so.)--Dr. Zarkov 06:17, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Total number of sub-Saharan African language speakers[edit]

I'm interested in knowing how many people speak a native sub-Saharan African language, i.e. Nilo-Saharan, Niger-Congo, Khoi-San, and all unclassified sub-Saharan languages, but not Afro-Asiatic. I couldn't find this data on the African languages page. Bhumiya (said/done) 12:51, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No takers, eh? I should have known better. At least no one was rude/honest enough to say "do your own fucking arithmetic." Bhumiya (said/done) 02:05, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

resume[edit]

Where can I find help creating a resume?

http://www.uwgb.edu/careers/Creating_Resume.htm just some basic tips, I suggest going to the library, and getting some books Treleth 06:18, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spanish to English help[edit]

Can someone give me the English translation of "faldeos". I think it might be related in some way to mountains. Online Spanish dictionaries have been no help. Thanks in advance. --Fuhghettaboutit 23:20, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Diccionarios.com [13] defines it as "the slope of a mountain." -- Mwalcoff 00:41, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated and a new dictionary to bookmark! --Fuhghettaboutit 02:28, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My name in Korean and Chinese[edit]

Hello, I've seen my name in Korean once, but I can't remember how it looked (I speak English and no Korean or Chinese). I was hoping to find out how to write my name in Korean and traditional Chinese. The name is Charles Newnam II (Newnam is actually pronounced New-num and the II represent the second, not Junior). Thanks for any help. --Chuck 23:39, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

as to your Chinese name, you may care to take a look at transliteration into Chinese characters--K.C. Tang 00:12, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Is there any place where I can find what specific syllables translate into what Chinese symbol (I couldn't find it anywhere on that page). --Chuck 00:23, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, for chinese, you can transliterate your name in one of two ways. You can translate it by meaning—so for Charles you would write the words for "full-grown," as that is the original meaning of the name, and then you'd write the word for what "Newnam" means. Or, you could write it phonetically, so you would find the symbol that is said as "cha," ( optional "er,") "le" "su" (or simply "cha" and "li"). Which one would you want?--The i kiroid (talk )^{(Help Me Improve)} 00:25, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, which is traditionally used? I think that I would prefer the meaning version in any case. (BTW: Newnam means "new homestead") Chuck 00:39, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The point is one can use whatever characters he likes, because there are so many homophones or near-homophones. Anyway, your name would be usually transliterated 查爾斯‧紐納姆二世 (二世 meaing "second generation"), hope you like the characters.:)--K.C. Tang 00:51, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have heard that it is recommended to use the phonetic pronunciation because it's easier to learn to respond to the familiar sound of one's phonetic name. --Ginkgo100 02:40, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, thanks!!! Chuck 01:13, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone know what it looks like in Korean? Chuck 06:07, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps 척 뉴넘 2세 (RR: Cheok Nyuneom i-se)? The a in Newnam depends on how you pronounce it – some IPA would be helpful. Wikipeditor 15:43, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As far as meaning, see Carl (name). Ardric47 01:05, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

April 26[edit]

sanskrit equivelants ( devanagari )[edit]

Can anyone give me the sanskrit ( devanagari ) equivelants to the following transliterated /translated words ? They are all somehow related to Buddhism : ( a buddhist sect )Theravada - ( the eight fold path )Samma Dithi - Samma Sankappa - Samma Vaca - Samma Kammanta - Samma Ajiva - Samma Vayama - Samma Samudhi - ( the ultimate goal )Parinirvana - ( thusness )Tathata - ( emptiness )Sunita - ( disciple of buddha ) Upali - ( buddhist texts ) Milinda Panha - Mahayana Sutras - Awakening of Mahayana Faith - Termas - ( buddhist sect ) Mahasamghika ....... Thank you very much Hhnnrr 01:45, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the terms above are Pali, and others are Sanskrit. Do you want the Devanagari form for both languages? Angr (talk • contribs) 07:58, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes please , I would rather they be all in sanskrit , but then again if that is not possible , just put a ( P ) or ( S ) next to the word so i can tell which langauage it is .. thank you very much for your help . Hhnnrr 09:01, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The red links are all listed in both Pali and Sanskrit in the Buddhism article, under the heading Noble Eightfold Path (though with a rather odd spelling convention). The blue links all seem to be in Sanskrit already. See here as well. Shantavira 12:58, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you but I need them in devanagari script ..Hhnnrr 15:05, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, you need an on-line Sanskrit dictionary (since I can't type in devanagari). Try going to this site, click on the link at the bottom (where it says Harvard-Kyoto input), then input your string using the H-K scheme, for example, "nirvANa" for nirvana. Take a look at Harvard-Kyoto if you're not familiar with this system. Apparently you should be able to see the devanagari script on this site without installing a special font. Hope this helps. Shantavira 17:38, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell, Terma (Buddhism) is a Tibetan word, not Sanskrit or Pali, so it doesn't have a Devanagari spelling. Angr (talk • contribs) 19:42, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've added Devanagari spellings to most of the blue links above: Theravada and Parinirvana in Pali and Sanskrit; Tathata, Upali, Mahayana, and Mahasamghika in Sanskrit only. Hhnnrr, you can extract them from those articles. I still don't have Devanagari for Milinda Panha or for any of the red links, though, sorry! Angr (talk • contribs) 20:40, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much Angr , I sincerely appreciate it .. never mind the red links .. but please try to get ( Milinda Panha + Sunita + Ashoka ), I wasn't able to use the site Shantavira gave me since I'm not familiar with HK system , and the article about it didnt help much . Thanks again Angr :) ..Hhnnrr 20:50, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Sanskrit name for Milindapañha is milindapraśna मिलिन्दप्रश्न. My best guess for the Pali spelling is मिलिन्दपञ्ह, but I can't find that confirmed anywhere. It doesn't get any Google hits, but then neither does the Sanskrit Devanagari, which is confirmed for me by Monier-Williams' Sanskrit dictionary. Angr (talk • contribs) 21:16, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sunita is सुनीत sunīta and Ashoka is अशोक aśoka. Angr (talk • contribs) 21:21, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you .. don't know what I would do without you .. Hhnnrr 22:05, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

French Word Origin[edit]

What is the origin of the French word bras which means arm?

From Latin bracchium. schyler 02:33, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Which, in turn, comes from Greek βραχίων "upper arm", from βραχύς "short" (because it's shorter than the forearm), from Proto-Indo-European *mr̥ĝhús. In case you were wondering. —Keenan Pepper 02:50, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

and, yes, it is cognate with bra.--K.C. Tang 03:37, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are we sure that the Latin comes from the Greek, and isn't just a cognate from a common IE ancestor? User:Zoe|^(talk) 20:29, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That reminds me of a joke:

Q.How do you say brassiere in German?

A. Keepsemfromfloppin.

Ok, well I thaught it was kind of funny the first time I heard it. schyler 12:43, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zis is not funny.--Dr. Zarkov 12:48, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's mildly better in the standard form: stopemfloppen. —Seqsea (talk) 01:57, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's also the well-known "over-shoulder boulder-holders". There've been quite a few questions about breasts and related things lately. Maybe there's not enough titillation happening out there in the real world. :--) JackofOz 02:45, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let's see what wiktionary says of this: wiktionary:bras. Yes, it's there. – b_jonas 19:43, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Correct usage of "politics"[edit]

Is "politics" ever singular? Would one say "that is the politics of the issues" or "those are the politics of the issue?" I'm worried, because I want to study political science and I don't know the answers to these questions! --Impaciente 05:24, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Like mathematics, gymnastics, and pyrotechnics, it can be either singular or plural. —Keenan Pepper 05:52, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

True. The politics in "I'm going into politics" would probably be construed as singular. But you would say "My politics are conservative", never "My politics is conservative". JackofOz 06:09, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note, however, that English speakers (down my way, at any rate) would invariably say "politics makes me sick" and not "politics make me sick". Americans disregard the -s ending, regarding this sense of the word "politics" to be semantically and grammatically uncountable, just like "milk" or "sadness". Still, JackofOz is right that no one would ever say "my politics is conservative", but this is because this sense of "politics" is different and more novel.

When faced with an unresolved discrepancy between semantic meaning and grammatical form, Americans tend to rephrase or resort to circumlocution, saying things like "my political views are conservative" or "my political ideology is conservative" or "I'm politically conservative" or "when it comes to politics, I'm a conservative", etc. etc. Among the Englishes, I've observed SAE to be perhaps the strictest when it comes to matching grammatical number with semantic number. Americans would never say "mathematics are my favorite subject", although this could (I assume) be used in a colloquial context in some varieties of Commonwealth English, where words tend to be reanalyzed more freely. Bhumiya (said/done) 02:20, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

...unless one is talking about the body politic. Shantavira 13:04, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In which case one is using politic as a postposed adjective, not as a noun. Angr (talk • contribs) 13:11, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks you all for the help. --Impaciente 03:17, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My username in Arabic[edit]

How would I write my username in arabic? It is "ikiroid," pronounced ɪ'kiː'rɔɪd. I'm not sure how to write an "o" (should it be a waw or an alef and a waw?) and I don't know if I should write an alef or a ya for the initial short "i" sound.--The i kiroid (talk )^{(Help Me Improve)} 18:04, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can't read your pronounciation key , but if its pronounced the same way it looks it would be written :إيكيرُوْيْد ..Hope its a help Hhnnrr 21:15, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, the first "i" is pronounced as in bit, the second "i" is pronounced like machine, and the "oi" is pronounced like boy.--The i kiroid (talk )^{(Help Me Improve)} 22:52, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Arabic doesn't have an [oi] diphthong, and there's no real way to write it in standard Classical orthography. Hhnnrr's attempt is probably as good as any, but the vowel marks wouldn't be used in most contexts, of course. If you want a short-vowel transcription in the first syllable, then it might be إكيرويد (without vowel marks). AnonMoos 01:38, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent. But isn't there an "o" sound in Farsi, or do they just use waw for that too?--The i kiroid (talk )^{(Help Me Improve)} 01:42, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't forget the definate article! You have it in English, you should have it in Arabic, الاٍكيرويد. And I think the Persians just use the waw, but in instances where it's acting like more of a consonant it takes a v sound. They even call it vav. -LambaJan 05:44, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

what next after French?[edit]

hi, i currently speak French fluently and am english mother tongued. I am also just about to study an MA in translation, however to get a job in translation you really need to speak two foreign languages fluently - is there a "natural "progression. I.e. what language would be most commerically viable, without being impossible, for translation work. if it helps, i live in Europe (UK). any thoughts? andrew

Peering into my crystal ball, I would think that knowing a Chinese language would probably be helpful for future economic reasons. Although Japanese might be useful, as well. User:Zoe|^(talk) 20:31, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but chinese and japanese are quite different from one another, as well as most european languages (although the word order of japanese seems to resemble Latin in some ways). But french can be useful too, it's studied alongside english and german by many europeans. I'm trying to learn all three.--The i kiroid (talk )^{(Help Me Improve)} 22:50, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, where did I say anything about Chinese and Japanese being similar? User:Zoe|^(talk) 01:43, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nowhere. I'm just telling him they're different, despite what many people think.--The i kiroid (talk )^{(Help Me Improve)} 01:51, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is "i am english mother tongued" a standard English expression or did you make it up, andrew? I've never heard that construction before. JackofOz 23:38, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

um, i dont really know to be honest. i used to live in Paris where you'd see, for example, EMT receptionist in the job section; but i agree that it does sound a bit robotic when you write it out in full but i quite like it - i think it makes it sound as though my tongue is phyisically different from everyone else's... i'm weird like that.... andrew

There's a lot to be said for Spanish. It's pretty easy to learn, it's one of the top four languages on the planet, and it's a gateway to Portuguese, which is the sexiest-sounding language in the world (he says assertively.) --jpgordon ∇∆∇∆ 23:58, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

yeah how easy is portuguese though? am going to brazil soon so want to pick some portuguese (and by the sounds of it, some brazillians) up - is it impossible?

Portuguese isn't really any harder for English speakers to learn than Spanish. Especially not Brazilian Portuguese. In my opinion, of course. Angr (talk • contribs) 15:16, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not saying that it would be the most useful third language for you, but Italian would certainly be the easiest language to learn given your knowledge of French. Like you, my mother tongue is English, and I have significant fluency in French (I'd be considered fluent by American or UK standards, but living in a French city my "fluency" is constantly being challenged). In any case, I have an Italian friend who I chat with on the net, and I came to realize that Italian is so similar to French that one could almost say that one is practically a dialect of the other. With absolutely no instruction in the Italian language, I can read Italian and usually get the gist of what is being said. However the oral aspect is a totally different story. When I hear spoken Italian I can't make any sense of it. Loomis51 01:35, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The easy transition into spoken Italian is from Spanish in my opinion. I grew up around Spanish in Texas (never studied it though) and found communicating in Italian quite reasonable. Can't make any sense of spoken French though. — Laura Scudder ☎ 17:15, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Spanish and Portuguese seem quite similar to me. I can get the gist of something in Portuguese even though my Spanish is not very good. Slightly less so for Italian, so depending on the level of proficiency you need to get to you could pick up Spanish, Portuguese, and Italian in fairly short order at least enough to get by. With those five languages I think you could pick up women on all seven continents if that was the goal. - Taxman ^Talk 17:02, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

-wouldn't say that was my goal - just referenced it in regard to portuguese being a sexy language. just to clarify though, i'm gay...andrew

All the British translation majors I knew in Germany were German/French, so apparently that's a popular pairing. I always thought that although German would be a useful economic language, I'd pick a pairing with more speakers across non-European continents, which would mean probably Spanish or Chinese. Of course, Spanish is more useful where I grew up than in Britain generally. — Laura Scudder ☎ 17:23, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Arabic! Then you would be able to communicate with nearly the entire continent of Africa! -LambaJan 05:49, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese! Lots of money in translation/interpretation , although like Zoe says, the future might be in Chinese. Spanish is very enjoyable to learn for me. I am attempting Latin.--Jondel 06:02, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tibetan ?[edit]

I'm not sure what language they use in Tibet ( Chinese ? ) but can anyone give me the equivelant to Terma in the " Tibetan " language ?Hhnnrr 21:32, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It says it's gter ma in Tibetan language on the Terma (Buddhism) article.
Slumgum | yap | stalk | 21:54, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible (but this is a 100% guess) that gter ma is written གྟེར་མ in Tibetan script. Angr (talk • contribs) 23:19, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thesis Statement[edit]

How would I be able to improve the following thesis statement? "Therefore, Langston Hughes, through his various forms of writing such as poetry, short stories, and essays, attempted to battle and condemn racism and oppression in all forms through his writing and cultural influence in the 1920’s through the 1960’s."

Thank you for your help.

71.225.78.22 | 22:00, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, please read the guidlines up at the top of the page: Do your own Homework. We don't know what your assignment is, or what your essay focuses on with Langston Hughes (expository, persuasive, et cetera), and we don't want to know. However, you can help yourself by looking at the articles on Thesis, Essay, and Expository writing. Good luck.--The i kiroid (talk )^{(Help Me Improve)} 23:10, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, I woud tend towards: "Therefore, Langston Hughes—through his various forms of writing, such as poetry, short stories and essays—attempted to battle and condemn racism and oppression, in all forms, through his writing and cultural influence in the 1920s through to the 1960s." But, then, I'm living in Oz. --61.69.186.251 05:01, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

April 27[edit]

Please help[edit]

I always wonder if there has been a period of time when the English people said "if it pleases you" instead of just "please", as the French says s'il vous plait. I can imagine the German used bitten as an adverb at the very beginning, but i can't imagine the same thing about "please"...--K.C. Tang 00:17, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen "An thou wilt", though I don't know how common it was. User:Zoe|^(talk) 01:44, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There probably was, most short polite words came from a longer phrase. Although the french usually don't use "s'il vous plaît" in its literal sense of "if it pleases you," the connotative meaning is much closer to the english "please." Don't the chinese simply state 请 at the beginning of a sentence? Or is that only in mandarin? I don't know much of cantonese. I'd bet that 请, like "please" was originally part of a much longer phrase.--The i kiroid (talk )^{(Help Me Improve)} 01:50, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

um... the cases are different, as 請 means pray/beg, just like the German bitten, so it can well stand alone to express a request, while "please", because of its primary meaning, cannot.--K.C. Tang 02:16, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Please" is not an adverb. It is a verb in the subjunctive mood, governed by "if". JackofOz 02:11, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just check the dictionary, it says that "please" is the abbr of "if you please", so maybe people did say "if you please" in the past?--K.C. Tang 02:21, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"If it pleases your majesty/ladyship/grace" were used. Jameswilson 02:41, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to the American Heritage Dictionary (the most linguistically sophisticated one), please in this sense is an adverb. I thought it would be classified as an interjection, but I can see the reasoning. If it has the same function as "if you please," then it would be an adverb since an if clause is an adverbial clause. However, It is certainly not an abbreviation by any normal sense of that word. An abbreviation would alternate with the full form. Sometimes dictionaries show poor linguistics confusing etymology with current structure. See: [[14]] mnewmanqc

According to the Macquarie Dictionary, the principal Australian one, please comes from the French. I have to remind Jameswilson (kindly) that courtley English is very much based on French too. I have a Commission on my wall that you would fall on the floor laughing about if you were being unkind. We, reposing especial Trust and Confidence in your Loyalty, Courage, and good Conduct, do by these Presents constitute and appoint you... You can see that Americans, too, are still following that punctuation. --61.69.186.251 05:12, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Word "budgerigar" and Aboriginal languages[edit]

The name of the small parrot called the budgerigar is widely considered to have originated from an Australian Aboriginal word. The apocryphal story is that it means "good food," from "budgeri" (good) and "gaa" (food). However, I have never seen a reliable citation for this; it just circulates 'round and 'round the Internet. A fellow editor of Budgerigar found this:

The English word budgerigar is propably an alteration of the Kamilaroi Aboriginal Australian name gijirrigaa [1] and means litterally "good cockatoo," from budgeri "good" + gar "cockatoo." [2]. References:

^ The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition.
^ Online etymology dictionary

See the article for the links. Can anybody help resolve this etymology confusion? Thanks in advance. --Ginkgo100 02:17, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The OED also says it is "Native Australian (Port Jackson dialect, [according to] Morris Austral English), f[ormed on]. budgeri, boodgeri = good + gar = cockatoo". (It is origin of "kangaroo" that is really fun to investigate.) --Shantavira 07:27, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your answer. Do you know of any verifiable sources on the alternate translation ("good food") that's all over the Internet? --Ginkgo100 23:23, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is no shortage of popular etymologies on the Internet. I'd be inclined to ignore this theory unless you can also find budgerigar recipes on the Internet, which might be considered further evidence of their palatability. --Shantavira 08:25, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Latin[edit]

hi would you be able to translate "Never forget" into latin

-colin

May you never forget is numquam obliviscaris or numquam obliviscare if you're addressing an individual, or numquam obliviscamini if you're addressing a group of people. Do not forget is noli oblivisci for an individual or nolite oblivisci for a group. Beware lest you forget is cave obliviscaris... there are a lot of ways to say it. —Keenan Pepper 13:16, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can you also say numquam obliviscate? ->'Never (should you )forget( this horrible event ). --Jondel 10:25, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

German preposition "im"[edit]

What is signified by the preposition "im" in German titles? It occurs often in genealogical trees of early German nobility, for example "Hrudobertus, Graf im Wormsgau" or without a title, e.g. "Chrodobert im Neustria." My guess is it could be translated as "in" like "Count in Wormsgau," indicating the the individual held the rank of count within the region of Wormsgau, but was not ruler of the entire territory. But that is just a guess. Any help would be appreciated. --User:spiny-norman 19:52, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

im is a contraction of in dem, literally in the. I've never seen it used in titles, though, and your examples don't really sound all that German to me. Could you specify in what context you've seen im used? Anyway, your explanation sounds pretty plausible to me, and I can't think of any other ways it could be used. --Rueckk 20:16, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There was a question about German titles a little while ago, though I can't find it now. I have a feeling someone did mention titles with in. Category:German_nobility, however, only has vons and zus. Henry ^Flower 20:39, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"...im ___gau" are real titles; see Gau (German) or perhaps de:Gau (Landschaft). Ardric47 01:14, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"im" turns up in genealogy a lot in the titles of ancestors of early rulers like Charlemagne or the Capetian kings of France. I've only seen it with early German or Frankish nobility - I mean really early, like 6th or 7th century. ("Germanic" might be more accurate than "German." I say German because I only see the word "im" occuring with other German words like "graf".) Later in history I see "von" used instead. I want to know what if any diffence in status is implied by the different prepositions. Perhaps I should have posted to the Humanities section to get some historians.

I forgot about "zu," I've seen that too. From searching Wikipedia, it looks like that means about the same as "im?" Can anyone disambiguate these for me?--User:spiny-norman 20:51, 27 April 2006 (UTC) --User:spiny-norman 20:45, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My German is fuzzy, but I remember "zu" meaning "at" or "to". So "zu Hause" means "at home". Isopropyl 20:56, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's also "von und zu". I think it has something to do with owning not only a title, but also the associated land. Ardric47 01:22, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

April 28[edit]

Are proper nouns uncountable nouns?[edit]

I always thought that proper nouns were semantically and grammatically singular, and sharply distinct from uncountable (mass) nouns. However, on Wiktionary, the category for uncountable nouns lumps together mass nouns and proper nouns. In addition to genuine mass nouns like "bread", "furniture", and "news", it contains proper nouns like "Chunnel", "Bollywood", and "9/11". These nouns may not take an indefinite article or grammatical number, but that doesn't make them uncountable, does it? These are simply characteristics common to proper nouns and uncountable nouns. Am I wrong? I want to confer with the experts before raising the issue back at Wiktionary. Bhumiya (said/done) 02:42, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

there are three Johns among my friends. Is John a proper noun?--K.C. Tang 04:40, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The two categorizations (common vs. proper and countable vs. uncountable) are orthogonal. Here are some examples:

Nouns	Proper	Common
Countable	Skittle, Band-Aid	telephone, book
Uncountable	Nutella, Drano	water, furniture

—Keenan Pepper 10:51, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are several approaches to a problem like this.

The traditional approach (I've always liked to call it "Confucian lexicography" from Book 13 of Analects but this is not standard terminology) is to compel words to fit their categories. Thus, it is incorrect English to talk about "building a second Chunnel" or how "Angela Merkel might be a Margaret Thatcher". The correct way would be to "build another cross-channel link like the Chunnel" or how "Angela Merkel might be like Margaret Thatcher".

However, this school of thought is largely absent in modern thinking about language. A more descriptive approach would see that proper nouns do, in fact, under highly conventional circumstances, take indefinite articles and quantifiers of many kinds. The most conventional solution - the orthodoxy if you will - is to create a category called "metaphorical usage" in which certain rules are relaxed. This line of thinking lends itself well to Optimality theory, in which the "wrongness" of speaking of "a new Hitler" is overridden by other considerations: the evocative power of Hitler as an image, the succinctness of the phrase, and perhaps other political and social considerations.

The principal alternative approach is to lexicalise the distinction. In effect, one would agree that Bollywood in isolation could be either of two distinct words: Bollywood₁, the proper noun which cannot take an indefinite article or a quantity; and Bollywood₂, an abstraction that we might define as any Indian centre for the production of commercial cinema. This approach is supported by a number of linguists, particularly those of the Meaning-Text school centered on Igor Mel'čuk and the cultural semantics of Anna Wierzbicka. It is also tacitly accepted in some form by most professional lexicographers. Furthermore, it fits neatly into an uncomplicated conception of referential semantics.

Personally, I am dissatisfied with both approaches. The first does not really seem to me all that well founded, since the genericisation of proper nouns is a widespread historical process (see Genericized trademark for instance) that appears likely to be present in all languages at all times. The second, in contrast, while I acknowledge its practical value for the study, teaching and documentation of usage, does not seem to me to address the problem of how users are able to construct, understand and ultimately conventionalize novel usages of words; and it relies on a highly naïve kind of semantics.

My own preference is for a radical Saussurian (Americans call it post-structuralist) approach. Language consists of a system of oppositions that can live a life of their own with only tenuous referential links. Thus the sentence "This film comes from Hollywood" is different from "This film comes from Bollywood". There is thus an opposition here that tells us that in some sense the words Hollywood and Bollywood are the same. So, just as dogs and cats are both pets, we could view Hollywood and Bollywood as the same in that they are both proper nouns relating to centres of film production. (I think Derrida would identify this with his notion trace, but in purely linguistic terms, it's equally explainable as an aspect of hierarchial word categorisation. The principal difference is whether this play of opposites depends on the nature of references, and there I take my leave of both Derrida and traditional referential semantics.)

In contrast, let's consider the sentences "Calcutta has become a new Bollywood." versus "Calcutta has become a new centre for Indian film production". Here, there doesn't seem to be an opposition. So, we can treat this like an equation: Hollywood != Bollywood and Bollywood == centre for Indian film production. But if this equation were true, we could substitute centre for Indian film production for Bollywood in the sentence This film comes from Bollywood". But if we do, we end up with *"This film comes from centre for Indian film production". This sentence is gramatically incorrect. For Optimality theory, this could be used as evidence that there is a rule forbidding the use of indefinite articles with proper nouns. For lexicographers, this motivates seeing "a Bollywood" as a different word from "Bollywood".

But wait! Saussure says that in order for there to be a meaningful difference, there has to be a minimal pair. For example, in English, there is no meaningful difference between the aspirated /p/ in pot and the unaspirated /p/ in spot because there is no word where using the one instead of the other changes what word it is. We can evaluate words the same way. The sentences "This film comes from Bollywood" and "This film comes from Holywood" mean different things, so "Hollywood" and "Bollywood" mean different things. But can you construct a sentence with the word Bollywood where it is possible to interpret it either as Bollywood₁ the proper noun or as Bollywood₂ the abstract noun? If not, then the two "Bollywood"s are in complementary distribution and you can't assert that they are different words. The same argument can be used to question whether any kind of rule is being broken by adding an indefinite article to a proper noun.

I suspect that this has completely muddled the question to the point where it seems unanswerable. If so, then you have just penetrated the essence of modern linguistics. If not, read again. My position is there is no rule in English preventing the productive use of an indefinite article with a proper noun, nor any reason why it couldn't be understood by all competent English users.

--Diderot 14:59, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How would you say three Skittles with correct "Confucian lexicography"? —Keenan Pepper 17:08, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Skittles isn't a proper noun - its a brandname, same as "three Chevies". --Diderot 21:16, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh? What makes brand names not proper nouns? I'm just going by what I learned in grade school, so you're probably right, but please explain it. —Keenan Pepper 21:33, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I sort of just argued that there are no proper nouns, since there is no context in which they behave differently from normal nouns. The pre-modern prescriptive approach, and many modern theories, would explain that a proper noun has a different kind of reference than a common noun. A proper noun refers to a specific entity by a name that refers to it and only to it and not to any abstract category. I think that explanation is ill-founded on linguistic grounds, but that's the traditional grammarian approach.

A brand name like a Skittle or a Chevy refers to an class of things, not to any specific thing. "Skittles (a division of Mars, Incorporated)" is a proper noun because it is a single thing with a name: a corporation. Same for "General Motors". But Chevy or "three Skittles" refers to an abstraction, the class of all vehicles marketed under the Chevrolet brand name, including non-existent cars that might have been made by GM in an alternate universe or cars that will be made in the future (if GM dodges bankruptcy), or all possible sets of three Skittles including those that have already been consumed. --Diderot 22:13, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's fascinating, Diderot. The concept of proper nouns has always puzzled and interested me, and I wasn't aware Saussure had written much on the subject. But what about Wiktionary? You have a background in lexicography. What would you suggest as a practical solution to the category problem? Should the proper nouns simply be removed from the uncountable noun category, or should I follow Keenan Pepper's suggestion and leave in proper nouns that are generally used as mass nouns, such as "Drano" and "Nutella"? I'll certainly be removing "Chunnel" pretty soon. Bhumiya (said/done) 22:44, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Saussure didn't actually write much about proper nouns, but he did write about applying notions like minimal pairs and complementary distribution to words and morphemes.

I would take a functional approach. Proper nouns generally behave nothing like mass nouns, they behave like count nouns. However, you need to make a distinction between a brand name and a proper noun. They don't behave the same way in English. A brand name might be countable, like a Chevy, or a mass noun like Drano, but it's different than "Margaret Thatcher" or "Chunnel". Does that help? --Diderot 06:33, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It sure does. Bhumiya (said/done) 20:01, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hebrew translation[edit]

What would be the Hebrew for "rejection", "rejection of" or "to reject"? --210.246.47.172 04:48, 28 April 2006 (UTC) (User:Superiority)[reply]

סרוב AnonMoos 15:24, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I meant an english transliteration of the Hebrew. --Awesome 04:37, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AnonMoos' translation would be transliterated as: "Seruv" Loomis51 08:37, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What is this?[edit]

It's a representation of the display that was on the countdown timer on a recent episode of the ABC television series Lost. --LarryMac 14:50, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It transliterates as swdɛ, I think. I don't know what it means. Nifty display of hieroglyphs, though. Daniel (☎) 16:13, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like an Old Kingdom phrase or word with connotations of death. If it is indeed Old Kingdom, then the 'sw' (the first two glyphs) could be 'he', with the 'j3' being a separate word (relating to death), as the 'sjm.f' form of the verb was not so much used then. Just speculating, though.CCLemon 09:36, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Saying "Wiki" instead of "Wikipedia"[edit]

Sometimes I see people say "Wiki" when they mean to say "Wikipedia" and not any other wiki. Is this incorrect usage? or is it an acceptable shortening of the word Wikipedia? --Sonjaaa 12:57, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's incorrect usage because there are many wikis other than Wikipedia. Wikipedia wasn't even the first wiki. —Keenan Pepper 13:09, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But just like many other uses of language, when the context is clear, incorrect usages can still convey the needed meaning. So "incorrect" is prescriptive in this case, though descriptive in the case where the context is not clear enough or taken out of context. - Taxman ^Talk 16:55, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've only ever seen this in contexts such as "please discuss this off the wiki". In such cases, it's clear that we're talking about this particular wiki, and the usage is perfectly correct. However, I can't rule out the possibility that people have been using it in other contexts behind my back. Henry ^Flower 20:57, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I hear it constantly from fellow high school students. Due to the prominence of this project, the word "Wiki" seems to be increasingly synonymous with Wikipedia, whereas it was formerly seen as just a bizarre pair of syllables. The abbreviation in question is used almost exclusively by casual users, i.e. those who rarely if ever edit pages or check out the sister projects. Bhumiya (said/done) 22:51, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And then there's the reverse, where any wiki is called "a Wikipedia", even if it isn't really an encyclopedia at all... —Zero Gravitas 07:24, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This may represent a semantic shift; it may well be that, Wikipedia being as preeminent as it is, wiki and Wikipedia will one day be considered synonymous terms. This is simply a reflection of potential usage, not etymology, and those who prescribe grammar will likely be irritated by it. The Jade Knight 07:43, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Latin construction[edit]

What are the parts of speech and the cases in the phrase "mirabile dictu", that wonderful saying, which means something like "wonderful to say"?

Mirabile is an adjective in the nominative case, and dictu is a supine in the ablative. —Keenan Pepper 18:04, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Submarine Races[edit]

What does it mean when someone asks you if you'd like to go watch the submarine races?

Why don't you ask them? Without more context, I'm not sure anyone not privy to the details could say with any degree of context what they meant. Could it possibly have something to do with submarines?--Prosfilaes 18:19, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I should have been more clear. This is an expression, which I have heard on several occassions throughout my life, but have never understood. It seems to be a euphemism for making out. I was wondering what the origin of the expression was.

It's a fairly old euphemism for "making out by the lake." [or other body of water]. Here is one reference that attempts to make it specific to a locality, but the term was widely used. --LarryMac 18:53, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I first learned it in Berkeley, where the expression was, "going to watch the submarine races at Strawberry Creek". I was, however, never invited. --jpgordon ∇∆∇∆ 02:32, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Asking someone to go watch the submarine races began as a disparaging way for a male to determine the intelligence of a female he found attractive. If the female responded with, "Sure, I'd love to." in an innocent manner, it meant that she was, well, stupid. This is because submarines by definition, are not supposed to be visible on the surface of a body of water. Therefore, it would be impossible to actually see a submarine race from the shoreline. As has already been stated, this phrase does indeed convey the intention to "make out". A smart girl would respond with a put-down of here own if she was not interested, or a sly come-on rejoinder if she was. DDGordon, 3 May 2006. --70.230.198.110 17:23, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

April 29[edit]

Epexegetically[edit]

In Roald Dahl's short story The Great Automatic Grammatizator (Someone Like You, he uses a word I've never seen before or since - epexegetically. The context is (very roughly, as I haven't read the story for over a year):

"Sometimes a writer will use a very long, very obscure word to show how very clever he is," he said, epexegetically.

Is it a real word or did Dahl just make it up? Howard Train 05:23, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Real. http://www.answers.com/epexegetic&r=67 --jpgordon ∇∆∇∆ 06:07, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
...and now there's a wiktionary article. --Hughcharlesparker 12:07, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a bunch everybody. That one was gnawing at me. Howard Train 04:38, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Capoeira songs[edit]

I wonder if any Portuguese speakers would like to translate one or more of the songs at Capoeira music to English—thanks! 07:01, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Use of personal titles[edit]

I know that I have read this somewhere in the wikipedia guidelines, but after having searched for nearly two hours I still have not found it. What is the policy on the usage of personal titles, like Mr. Dr. Rev. Ms. etc? When should they be used in the articles, if at all? Examples of what I am think of include this school and this project. (Both probably violate other guidelines as well) rxnd ( t | € | c ) 07:50, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See MOS:BIO and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles). Phr 08:17, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that answers most of my question. rxnd ( t | € | c ) 08:32, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hinari[edit]

I've heard the Japanese word 'hinari' used, and translated as 'spirit'. I'm not sure that's a totally accurate translation. I tried putting it in to the Japanese wiktionary as ひなり, but it didn't come up with anything. I think I probably need the kanji - does anyone know the kanji or, better, a good translation of the word? Thanks. --Hughcharlesparker 11:21, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think you probably need to hear it again. As far as I, Kojien, Daijirin and Daijisen [15] know, there isn't a word 'hinari' in Japanese. Probably something similar but different... to your dissapointment, however, I can't think of the word at the moment. - marsian 14:34, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Erm. A possibility is that you've got the vowels wrong. English speakers tend not to hear the difference between "i" and "ii." Other possibility is that you mean hikari which means light, afaik. I am far from fluent, but that's a fairly common word amongst people who don't speak it, and the only one I can think of that sounds like "hinari". --Keitei (talk) 16:19, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

spirit is せいしん (kanji:精神)--K.C. Tang 20:52, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you looking for the nature spirit called a kinnari? --Shantavira 08:51, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

German dialect[edit]

So, I recall an older American male who was probably born in the 1940s telling me that his grandparents, farmers in New England somewhere were German immigrants who spoke English poorly or not at all. He grew up with some limited knowledge of their German dialect. In school, he was given an audio recording of vocabulary words to learn at home. While playing the record, his grandmother walked in and was shocked and appalled because one of the words on his record was extremely rude in her dialect, though perfectly normal in the standard German he was learning in school. Anybody have any guesses what dialect/word this was? Tuf-Kat 21:43, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just one possibility: While the word "mist" in English refers to water vapour or fog, in German it refers to excrement. Loomis51 22:47, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The question is about standard German and a German dialect, so that seems unlikely. Henry ^Flower 23:05, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have heard of settlers from Germany in Pennsylvania. Maybe research in that direction will be fruitful. Also check out the Pennsylvania Dutch. Don420 09:13, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's possible to say, there are almost always such words in any dialect. Since dialects and languages are formed with semantic drift, it's pretty natural that some words will aquire offensive meanings they didn't have to begin with, and vice-versa. E.g. the Swedish cognate of "fuck", "focka" isn't dirty at all. --BluePlatypus 15:02, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

True. Cultural sensibilities differ. In English, "shit" is a coarse word and would probably get bleeped on TV, yet the french equivalent, "merde" is considered part of respectable French speach. Loomis51 00:22, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article title editing[edit]

I would like to edit the title of Banja luka airport to Banja Luka Airport, ie with capital letters. Can you please let me know how to do that or, if you have a minute, to do it yourself. Regards, Vladq

I don't understand. The article is already at the correctly capitalized Banja Luka International Airport. Angr (talk • contribs) 23:17, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Or were you talking about the redirect? I've made a redirect now from Banja Luka Airport to Banja Luka International Airport, in addition to the existing redirect from Banja luka airport. Angr (talk • contribs) 23:20, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

April 30[edit]

Korean alphabet keyboard[edit]

I've seen a computer from Korea, and it's keyboard is equipped with the ability to type Korean and English letters. While I know I won't be changing what my keys look like anytime soon, is there a way to make it so that I can type in Korean with my keyboard, perhaps with the same setup as a Korean computer, and maybe just put little decals on each key. Maybe there is something I could download...does anybody know? Thanks for any help. Chuck 08:39, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Typing in a different character set is usually done with a switch of layout. See Keyboard layout#Dubeolsik Hangul (for Korean). Check if your OS supports it. If not, it probably can be downloaded, depending on the OS you have. --Keitei (talk) 08:51, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, works great. Chuck (척뉴넘) talk

on smell[edit]

hi for people who have been to india it is common to have come accross the excreta of cows and bulls on the streets generally called "GOBAR". i was wondering if there is any exact word for the smell that comes from them. it is not pleasant, neither does it hurt, its just not good. also if there is any adjective to describe it would help. thanx

Not that this is at all an authoritative answer to your question, but I believe in North America, the term "Funky" might apply. Loomis51 23:40, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Latin Valles[edit]

Before embarking on filling in red links at List of Valles on Mars, I wanted to be absolutely certain that "valles" is indeed the Latin plural for "vallis" (valley). The Valles page says so, and because of this google says so to. Marskell 16:08, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, sometimes the singular is valles instead of vallis, but whatever the singular, the nominative plural is always valles, yes. Angr (talk • contribs) 16:13, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd just like to point out that it seems to be becoming dated to pluralize borrowings from latin into English in their original latin plural form. It seems to be becoming more and more acceptable to pluralize these words according to the rules of English construction. Consider a couple of examples: "Genius". Geniuses or Genii? "Penis". Penises or Penes? "Hippopotomus". Hippopotomuses or Hippopotomi? These words have become part of the English language, and their pluralizations have as well. Loomis51 23:33, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. A related story: I was corrected a few days ago by a pedantic friend, after I said "octopi" (which was how i was always taught to pluralize "octopus"). I expected him to say that it should be "octopuses", but instead he told me that the plural of octopus is octopodes, because of the Greek root. I told him that we're not speaking Greek; but then, if we're speaking English, the plural should be octopuses, not octopi. At what point does English take over the language of the word it's borrowing from? Another example; is "katas" acceptable as a plural of "kata"? I don't think so, but in a few years, maybe? СПУТНИК^{ССС Р} 23:49, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your friend is only half right, Sputnik. Octopus is formed from a Latin root (octo) and a Greek root (pus). It is neither a Latin nor a Greek word, it is English, and requires an English plural (octopuses). Same for platypuses (not platypi or platypodes). JackofOz 06:25, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On the general question of pluralising words borrowed from other languages: it is tempting to display one's erudition and use the relevant foreign plural form rather than the English -s or -es. However that gets away from the point of communication. There are enough challenges in advocating correct English spelling and grammar as it is these days, without requiring people to know these arcane rules about languages of which they have no knowledge. In any case, for every foreign word that the pedants say requires a foreign plural (tableau > tableaux), there's another foreign word for which an English plural has always been acceptable (sonata > sonatas, never sonati). Who decided that a particular set of foreign words requires foreign plurals, but a whole stack of other foreign words don't? I'm all for plain speaking, and plain English. I certainly wouldn't consider a person wrong for using "criteria" (assuming they were writing in the plural), but equally they should be able to get away with "criterions". What they should not be able to get away with is using "criteria" or "phenomena" as singular nouns - but that's a whole other issue. JackofOz 06:25, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As long as we're being pedantic, we may as well get our facts straight. octo- is a Greek root as well as a Latin one; the word octopus is Greek "on both sides". And the etymologically correct plural of sonata is sonate, not sonati. Angr (talk • contribs) 11:33, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I actually thought I was attempting to be anti-pedantic - but thanks, Angr, I stand corrected about the details. If anything, though, that just reinforces the point I was making. If a world-famous self-acknowledged expert such as I can't even get foreign plurals right, what hope do the great unwashed have? Like Loomis and Sputnik, I can foresee a day when foreign plurals are a thing of the past. Some would say English will lose some of its richness, and they would have a point, but we would also lose an element of cultural snobbery that we can well do without. JackofOz 12:05, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is "with out" a slang phrase and what does it mean if so?[edit]

Dear Wikipedia,

I could swear i have heard "with out" used as a phrase before, as in "she's without" but I can't seem to find it anywhere on the internet and I asked a friend and he has never heard of it. I think I heard it on the movie "10 Things I Hate About You" spoken by Heath Ledger's character (so it could not be an american phrase) but i could be wrong (and renting/buying the movie and setting it on the subtitles is time-consuming and impractical) also I don't really know what it means if it IS a phrase so I was wondering that as well.

Anything you could tell me would be great, thanks!

KB

With out an escort/companion/lover ? StuRat 18:31, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Using a very old, still current, but little used form of the word "she's without" -> "she is outside (here)". Notinasnaid 19:13, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not "outside here," it means "she's on the outside" as opposed to "within" or "on the inside."

Hi KB, You can find such use of language in Shakespeare. I can think of the phrase, "The messenger waits without." I can remember in the late 1940s that elderly people would use such English, particularly people from the UK.

Lin 08:13, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Current PC term for decendants of dark skinned indiginous sub-Saharan Africans?[edit]

Originally, those people who were dark skinned and whose ancestry was that of indiginous sub-Saharan Africans were known as "Negros" (which is basically Spanish for Black)

Unfortunately, the term "Negro" took on a pejorative connotation and so in order to keep up with the political correctness of the day, "Negro" was replaced by the less harsh sounding "Coloured".

During this time in America, the civil rights movement had just begun to take hold and the National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People, or the "NAACP" was formed.

Of course, before long, the term "coloured" too began to take on a derogatory feel, and organizations of these people began to be formed, proclaiming "Black is Beautiful," and insisting that "Black" was the most sensitive term. Fine enough. Black is indeed beautiful and is a good, simple term.

Of course some time in the late 80's or 90's, certain groups in the U.S. (mostly consisting of non-Black people, ironically) seemed to be on some sort of guilt trip and decided for some reason I can't understand to rename Black people as "African-Americans". To me this was not only an unnecessary change, but one that has the potential of absurd misuse. For example, I remember one night watching the tonight show when Jay Leno had his wife on as a guest for some reason, and she proceeded to describe the Taliban regime in Afghanistan's treatment of women as comparable to "the way African-Americans were treated in Apartheit South Africa". Really? Were there really that many African-Americans in South Africa at the time? What were they doing there? Were they tourists?

Plus there's the fact that not all African's are "Black", for example North Africans as well as Africans of European decent in countries like South Africa and Zimbabwe. In addition, being a Canadian, I was utterly bewildered when a colleague of mine made reference to another, Black colleague of ours and referred to her as an African-American. Really? I thought she was Canadian!

I know my question is extremely lengthy, but I'd like some opinions on this. Has it now become offensive to use the term "black"? If so, what term should I be using, given the fact that I'm not American and so African-American would not apply?

More importantly, when will the madness end? How long will it be before "African-American" becomes as passé, backward and pejorative as would be the case if someone were to use the term "Negro" today? Loomis51 23:15, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You've come across the euphemism treadmill. The name of every (well, not every) minority group must change every once in a while. For example:

Hebrews --> Jews
Crippled --> Handicapped --> Disabled --> Differently abled
Deaf --> Hearing impaired
Indians --> Native Americans (disputed)
Indians --> Natives --> First Nations peoples (in Canada)
Homosexuals --> Gays
Gypsies --> Roma
Mad --> Mentally ill --> Person with a mental illness
Old people --> Senior citizens --> Senior adults/older adults

And so on. If you think this type of political correctness is silly, you should see how far it goes in Japan. The original words for "foreigner," "blind," "deaf" and "illiterate" are taboo. I once met someone who had worked for a Japanese textbook publisher. In a book about the U.S., they wanted to write about the Negro Leagues. However, the bosses at the publisher would not allow the word "Negro" to be used under any circumstances, and they had to find a way to write around it. -- Mwalcoff 00:08, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe calling someone "black" is politically correct right now, to answer your question. In addition, I've never heard a black person call another black person "African-American" or "colored." Rather, black people accept the term "black."--El aprendelenguas 01:06, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, in the UK the commonly-used term is "Black." It's usually capitalised, at least when used as a noun.

"PC" is region-specific. In the US "Negro" isn't an acceptable term, while in Trinidad some people prefer it to Black because "black" can be used as a blanket term for non-white people. There is no single term which is universally acceptable other than "people of African descent" (which, of course, also includes non-Black North African, but its usually clear in context). But, when it comes down to it, why do you need a universal term? Guettarda 04:49, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When I was in South Africa, people used “blacks”. I think Mandela's autobiography uses “Africans” in a sense that excludes whites, but I think this is bad usage, as it may imply that whites are somehow less African. “Blacks”, in turn, has the disadvantage of not clearly excluding blacks on other continents (or including other dark-skinned indigenous sub-Saharan Africans). Wikipeditor 22:07, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, "Hebrew" used as a noun in 19th-century English was a mock-grandiose euphemism used somewhat condescendingly -- Victorian newspaper-speak had a whole series of these, such as "Celestials" for Chinese, "Sons of Erin" for Irish, "Romans" for Italians, etc. etc. Some of them sounded rather elevated, but when used by White Anglo-Saxon Protestants, they were usally NOT complimentary or respectful. The word "anti-Semitic" originated because "Semitic" was another mock-grandiose condescending euphemism for "Jew" -- the ordinary word in English has been "Jew" for many centuries. AnonMoos 07:49, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What is wrong with using the real name of a person's ancestory: Maori, Tongan, Fijian? Papuan, Aboriginal (especially if you mean a native person of some territory!), Kenyan, Nigerian, Bantu and so on? If you don't really know the person's/people's ancestory why does it matter what you might like to call them other than by their country of residence. For example, I am annoyed at being called an Australian just because I live here, but most Aussies can't detect New Zealanders in their midst anyway. In fact I had a set of workmates who used "curry-muncher" to one bloke that I knew was Tokalauan, almost on the opposite side of the world from India! --Lin 08:30, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I should point out that in North America, due in large part to the dreadful fact that most "Blacks" were brought here by force and put into slavery (ironically most often sold by their fellow Black "enemies" of different tribes who were at war with each other and took them into slavery) the actual national origin of most Blacks is unknown, and if it were known, the carving up of Africa into different "countries" was mostly a European excercise, and so few, even if they could possibly trace their origins back to "Kenya" for example, would describe themselves as "Kenyan" as "Kenya" was largely a European creation. In fact, most "Blacks" in North America have a significant amount of "White" blood, making the matter all the more confusing.

In any case, I should also point out that I am "Jew", and I'm very proud to be referred to as a "Jew". My people have been refered to as "Jews" since Biblical times, as far back as the Old Testament, where we described ourselves in Hebrew as "Yehudim", which is basically Hebrew for "Jews". It is true that at times, some people (including Jews) have used the term "Hebrew". I have no problem with that term either. In any case, the term "Jew" is short, simple, and to the point, and I'm proud to call myself a "Jew". I would only wish that there were such a short, simple, proud term for "Black" people. "Black" is indeed beautiful, and I only wish that people within that community would once and for all make it clear to the rest of the world that the term "Black" is also short, simple, and to the point, and that to be refered to as "Black" is not in any way a racist description, but a perfectly acceptable term, to be worn with pride by those people who are indeed "Black". Loomis51 09:28, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just realized that I was being quite anglo-centric in pointing out that my people are know universally as "Jews". In fact in several languages, for example Russian and Greek, "Hebrew" seems to be the root form of what we are referred to, as in the Russian "yevrei" (sorry Jack, still haven't figured out the Cyrillic thing!). Nonetheless, as I've mentioned, I have no problem with the term "Hebrew" either. Call me a "Jew" or a "Hebrew", but please, no euphemisms. Loomis51 09:56, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's еврей. (Не за что). JackofOz 10:24, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe "Black" is perfectly acceptable to you, but the problem is that it's not perfectly acceptable to the people in question. Just as you get to decide that "Jew" is ok, but presumably "kike" is not. I haven't greatly researched the issue, but it seems to me that the implication of referring to somebody as a "black" is that the colour of their skin more or less defines who they are. It goes way beyond racism. It allows bigots to put all dark-skinned people into the same bag and treat them all poorly, and this includes a lot more racial groups than people of African origin. If it's ok to call black-skinned people "blacks", then it's ok to call some Asians "yellows", or American natives "reds", or lots of other people "browns", or some Jews "hook-noses", or obese people "fatsos". There are far more differences between races than merely their skin colour, and I think that to use skin colour alone for a label, just because it's the most immediately visible thing about a person, is what they resent. It's not an easy question though. JackofOz 10:24, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is definitely the euphemism treadmill, and I don't think it's so clear that Black is not acceptable to the people in question. There are differences of opinion on it. I have plenty of research recordings of the word being used by people of African descent, if you will. I've used it myself with Blacks, and I have never been "corrected." African American, on the other hand, does have an advantage. It equates US slave descendents with other immigrant groups that use compound names such as Jewish Americans or Italian Americans. It is also useful to differentiate American rooted Blacks with Caribbean immigrants, and that is why I use it in my research. My guess would be only half the NYC Black population is actually African American on this definition, and so you cannot tell an African American here just by looking. On the other hand, it does create confusion, particularly in places with considerable recent African immigration. I wish Afro-American had been popularized. Then, African American could be these voluntary immigrants.

What I think is more of a purely linguistic problem is Asian to mean exclusively people from East Asia, who used to be referred to as Oriental. This is a US usage only. In Britain, I believe, Asian is subcontental primarily. mnewmanqc

That one's kinda funny, too, since "Asian" and "Oriental" mean exactly the same thing: "eastern". --jpgordon ∇∆∇∆ 15:51, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's also the rather new usage of Person (or People) of color. Although this in general is used to refer to all people who feel they are non-White, including African-Americans, Asians, Pacific Islanders, Native Americans and Hispanics. User:Zoe|^(talk) 15:49, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not that we are a disdvantaged minority, but I've never been 100% happy about being called a "Brit". I've got used to it via the internet but... . Jameswilson 00:00, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My main reason for asking the question and inviting debate was to learn. If the general consensus of Black people is that "Black" is an offensive term, then I surely wouldn't use it. However, that doesn't seem to be the case. It seems to me, and this is just a general observation, that the term "African-American" is more popular among White people than among Blacks, whereas, it would appear, Black people tend to prefer the term "Black". That should explain one of the main reasons why I'm so annoyed by the term "African-American". The term seems to be more of a product of White PCness than an actual case of refering to a certain people the way they would prefer to be refered to. For example, I have a great many friends of Chinese decent. Some are Canadian citizens while others are Chinese nationals. I've spoken at great length to them about the whole controversy over the term "oriental". The honest truth is that they are completely bewildered at why we in the west have become so squeamish about the term "oriental." After all, "oriental" is simply latin for "eastern", similarly to the way "Australian" is derived from the latin for "southern" (of course Australia is an actual country, so the analogy isn't perfect). But once again, it's more a case of White PCness than the actual preference of those being refered to.

I'd also like to point out, that I'm not proposing that Black people be referred to as "Black" in every possible situation, but only when the context of the situation calls for it. For example, if I have two colleagues, one White and the other Black, and I want to refer to the one who is Black, it just seems to be absurdly PC to try to work around the colour thing and try to describe that person in some other way than simply saying "the Black guy". As humans, it's only natural to rely on our senses, in this case our sense of sight, to describe some thing or somebody, when we have no other means of differentiating that person. To call this racism is absurd.

Of course the colour of one's skin is an extremely superficial aspect of that person's humanity. But to avoid using one's skin colour as a quick and easy way of differentiate one from another out of fear that so you're "defining" that person by their skin colour is an absurd conclusion. For example if one were to attempt to point out one person in a group by saying "the one with the red hat," no one in their right mind would accuse you of defining that person's humanity by the colour of hat that person is wearing.

In any case, the colour of one's skin is only one of many characteristics that define individuals. I pointed out that I'm a Jew, and I don't at all mind the term, but in saying so I was in no way trying to argue that that fact is my sole defining characteristic. I'm also Canadian, right-handed, somewhat tall, a lawyer, politically conservative, neurotic, male, heterosexual, unmarried, a zionist, white, and my eyes are grey. There are probably hundreds of other characteristics of mine that define who I am. I'm proud of each and every one of them.

With regards to terms like "kike", "hook-nose", "fatso", "retard" etc ... well, those terms are downright insulting and bigoted and are of a completey different category than a word like "Black". It's as if I were suggesting Black people should be refered to as "niggers" or "jungle bunnies". The insulting nature of these disgusting words is beyond description. My question is a simply query as to what would be the most respectful, yet not overly PC term for what so far I have no choice but to refer to as "Black" people. Loomis51 23:12, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Loomis51, when you say "... if I have two colleagues, one White and the other Black, and I want to refer to the one who is Black, it just seems to be absurdly PC to try to work around the colour thing and try to describe that person in some other way than simply saying "the Black guy"" why not just call each by their first or family name? Say "Charlie" was one bloke's name and the other is "Fred", couldn't you use their given names? If you were a Pom you could say, I suppose, "Cartwright" and "Dooley" if those were their family names. That way you avoid the whole issue. --Lin 05:55, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes we don't know people's names. Like, imagine you're in a store, and you got helped by someone. You go to the cashier and they ask, who helped you. If one is White or Asian, and the other Black, then you can use those distinguishing characteristics. Just like if one spoke with a French accent, you might say "the one with the French accent." Why would you avoid mentioning someone's race? Look, I worked in a highly diverse high school in NYC, and this kind of thing went on all the time, kids and adults. However, I have noticed that mentioning race or asking "What are you?" which kids do in NY, was somewhat taboo in Ohio. I think this is because of greater discomfort there.

Also, I want to repeat something I said earlier, but in a different way. Black is not the same as African American. African Americans are one group of Blacks. In New York, as generally used the term Black is not the same as African American or African Canadian if such a term exists. Black is a racial category, but race is socially constructed so it includes people of various national origins that identify with it. It operates at a level above national origin, including most Jamaicans, all sub-saharan African indiginous people, about half the Trinidadian and Guyanese population and so on. It also includes the group, African Americans who are descendents of the original African slaves, for the most part. Black however usually (though not always) excludes people of Latin American origins here. In other parts of the US, the usages may vary. What is considered Black certain does vary radically in other countries. So you might want to use African American to be more specific not PC. BTW, in social science work, the usual term for White is European American. mnewmanqc

It's interesting. I've heard so much about racial tensions, but I have yet to actually encounter any of it. In my school, at least among the people I hang out with, it's more something to joke about than something to beat someone up over. The officers in our math club called themselves The Brown Regime in their campaign last year because they're predominantly asian. For awhile, we called a large Puerto Rican I know Sanchez, because he was obviously just another Mexican, and he loved it. If there happened to be any black people in my classes (and that's the only term I ever hear people use), I'm sure they would be treated the same way. Unless they got pissed off. Black Carrot23:42, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

does this make sense?[edit]

Here is a few sentences out of my assignment....

This brings us the question; is there enough computer access for the physically disabled? The blind? The deaf? Or even the people who just have difficulties reading and writing.

Now does this make sense? escpecially in the part wher it says the blind? the deaf?....i am not sure if this is correct english grammar and if not how should it be written?

Thank you

Your sentence is difficult to correct without completely rewording. Here is my version:

This brings us the following question: Is there enough computer access for the physcially disabled, the blind, the deaf, or even for the people who just have difficulties reading and writing?

I recommend rewriting this long sentence into separate, shorter sentences, as well.--El aprendelenguas 01:00, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence makes sense (in that one can see what you're trying to say), but it has its flaws. The semicolon shouldn't be there, although I'm not sure whether a comma or a colon would be better. I'd probably use a colon, or preferably rewrite along the following lines.

This brings us to the question of whether there is enough computer access for people with physical disabilities. Blind people, deaf people, and those with dificulties reading and writing....

Some of the surrounding text would be useful to provide context. Howard Train 04:29, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You started by saying, "Here is a few sentences out of my assignment...." and some of us should have pointed out that you meant to say, "Here are...". But the bit that you wanted fixed could be done like this: "This brings us the question, is there enough computer access for the physically disabled? The blind? The deaf? Or even the people who just have difficulties reading and writing." or like this, "... brings us to the question: Is there enough...." And you can see from my examples where a comma is used and what happens to the next word when I have used a colon.

As a writer and editor of Australasian English I consider that the best way of deciding whether to use a comma or a colon in your example is to read the piece out loud to yourself. If you make it sound right with short pauses, stick a comma in there. If it needs longer pauses, a colon is a good choice. However, if you're an American I can tell you that my Webster has a couple of pages of puncutation examples in the back. You could look in yours and see if it is the same. --Lin 06:10, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]