Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

The Wikipedia Reference Desk covering the topic of language.

Welcome to the language reference desk.
Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

How can I get my question answered?

  • Provide a short header that gives the general topic of the question.
  • Type ~~~~ (four tildes) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
  • Post your question to only one desk.
  • Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. We'll answer here within a few days.
  • Note:
    • We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
    • We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
    • We don't do your homework for you, though we’ll help you past the stuck point.

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

  • The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.
See also:
Help desk
Village pump
Help manual

March 19[edit]

Passato remoto[edit]

In Italian, verbs ending in -ere are often irregular in passato remoto, but I'd like to know about the regular ones. There are two endings for 1st-person singular (-ei/-etti), 3rd-person singular (-?/-ette) and plural (-erono/-ettero) respectively. The question mark is either -é or è because sources I've found don't agree with each other. I know there is confusion about "perché" and "perchè" even among Italians because people from different regions pronounce it either closed or open, but "perché" is considered the only correct form. Then how about passato remoto? Compared to -are (-ò) and -ire (-ì), one could think it's -è, but it:Passato remoto says it's -é. It seems that even my printed dictionary isn't sure about it. It knows both -ei/-etti and -erono/-ettero, but only gives one option for the 3rd-person singular (-ette). Is the acute or the grave accent correct? -- (talk) 04:02, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Latin distinguishes –ēre (more regular, less common) from –ĕre (less regular, very common); if Italian conflates them, that could cause some confusion. —Tamfang (talk) 07:51, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
See the 30 entries listed at User:Wavelength/About Italian/Accent shifts.
Wavelength (talk) 19:17, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
I've often had difficulty finding definitive answers on acute-v-grave final accents in Italian, but in this case I'm pretty sure it should be acute. It doesn't come up an awful lot because (i) passato remoto is a bit uncommon in the first place, (ii) most second-conjugation verbs have "irregular" passati remoti (not really irregular, usually, but not falling into the most common paradigm), and (iii) for most "regular" second-conjugation verbs, the -ette form is more usual. The only exception to (iii) that pops to mind is potere, where I think potette just "sounds bad" to the Italian ear, because of the repetition. And as I say, I'm fairly sure that it's poté rather than potè, but that's just my own intuition, which mayb be wrong.
Just a tangent that may be interesting to someone here: There's an interesting difference in meaning between the imperfect and the two perfect tenses (passato remoto, passato prossimo) for potere. Potere means "can", so its past tense would be "could" in English. But if you mean "could" in the sense of "had the ability to, whether or not it was brought to fruition", you use the imperfect poteva. The two perfect forms (ha potuto or poté) both tend to imply that the thing was actually successfully accomplished. --Trovatore (talk) 17:52, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
See "perse; perdé; perdette" at
Wavelength (talk) 19:41, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
See "pèrse o perdé o perdètte" at
Wavelength (talk) 22:58, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
For some confirmation, I checked two standard dictionaries, Garzanti and Treccani. potere, Garzanti says "pass.rem. io potéi (meno com. potètti; ant. possètti), tu potésti, egli poté, noi potémmo, voi potéste, essi potérono". For perdere, it gives "pass.rem. io pèrsi (o perdéi o perdètti), tu perdésti, egli pérse (o perdé o perdétte), noi perdémmo, voi perdéste, essi pèrsero (o perdéttero o perdérono)". Treccani says pretty much the same (potere, [1]), although it gives pèrse instead of pérse.
For the completely regular verbs, like credere, neither unfortunately gives the third person singular. There does seem to be some disagreement, some giving credé, some giving credè (in additon to credette). You might try asking at the Italian Wikipedia's Oracolo. Lesgles (talk) 00:02, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Spanish grain elevators[edit]

What's the typical term for grain elevator in Spanish? I'm finding translations as "elevador de granos", but I don't want to use a calque by accident. To my surprise, there's no es:wp article on these things. I'm using File:Idaville elevator complex.jpg at Idaville, Indiana, and I want to do the same thing at es:Idaville (Indiana). Nyttend (talk) 16:47, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

No need to worry, Nyttend, elevador de granos is indeed the proper term. See the Portuguese article when the Spanish one is missing. It won't always be the same or exact, but it will usually put you on the right track or confirm your intuition. PS, next time you are in Spanish joint, ask for una ensalada de avogados bien picados. μηδείς (talk) 17:31, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. I'd checked both pt:Elevador de grãos and ca:Elevador de gra, but you never know; it's always possible that Spanish would use a different term. It's such a basic concept that I'm quite surprised that it has no es:wp article; my first assumption was that they likely had an article under a different title. Nyttend (talk) 21:11, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Copyrights of images violating ruels and regulation[edit]

Hello, I'm trying to get the understanding of the word copyright in images. Can I modify one image add/subtract a little in order to create a different/brand new one. I'll give you an example, [2], [3], File:Craniums of Homo.svg; say i change the background, change the colour of the sleeve, flip the image horizontally, will it work or will I be violating the copyright rules and regulations...? -- (SuperGirlsVibrator (talk) 21:32, 19 March 2015 (UTC))

I took the liberty of changing your <ref>s to inline links. Also by the way, when I share links I like to strip out fields that don't change the result, thus: [4], [5]Tamfang (talk) 22:30, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
No problem! Btw, I did not grasp the rest, I can't view your link, it comes, probably as a warning in a different language. Also if you mean to tidy up the URL, I'll try my best. I have not learnt web page designing yet... I don't have much idea about it... -- (SuperGirlsVibrator (talk) 19:16, 22 March 2015 (UTC))
With or without the stripped fields, I see a notice in Bengali presumably warning that something is trying to redirect me to the target page. —Tamfang (talk) 06:00, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
Please read the derivative work article. Yes, by modifying the original, you've created a new work; however, the original copyright automatically covers derivative works. If the original is copyrighted by Alice, and Bob makes a derivative work, the derivative work is copyrighted by both Alice and Bob, because both have played a part in its creation. Nyttend (talk) 00:58, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
I've read through what you stated, my brain is mailfunctioning, if I'm not wrong, they allow it... I still would like to be reassured if you don't mind.
Q: I don't have the references (website links, book names and so on), no matter what the work will be derived. The problem(s) I have is, 1) Referencing, 2) I read some website(s) 'copyright laws' they strictly forbids copying/selling their material... If/when they find out, will it create a problem for me or will I be violating any rules and regulations if this material becomes a 'derivative' work? -- (SuperGirlsVibrator (talk) 07:31, 20 March 2015 (UTC))
You certainly have a lot of questions (cf article contributions). As for this question, see also this advice. -- Hoary (talk) 02:18, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
The advice you stated was for words/sentences/paragraphs. This is for images. The first underlying issue I have is 'referencing', in both posts. I understand Wikipedia's terms and condition (a lot of Wikipedians helped me in order to understand them), I feel safe too, Other websites, I don't trust, its a bit confusing to understand their copyright terms and condition, they don't give the privileges, strictly forbids...
Anyway, sorry for asking a lot of question, which seemed to have bothered you. This is how I learn. Wikipedia is the only place I learn things from now. This is my School/College/University, and Reference Desk is where I have my 'tutors'. Face-grin.svg -- (SuperGirlsVibrator (talk) 07:31, 20 March 2015 (UTC))
  • I wonder if this covers redrawings? A lot of old textbooks used to say redrawn from Romer or the like. μηδείς (talk) 05:43, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
My work is very old. Its more than a years work with no references... I have images with the work so i'm just confused... A Wikipedian gave me an excellent advice i.e. 'the Golden rule is to modify anything and everything in your own way'... -- (SuperGirlsVibrator (talk) 07:31, 20 March 2015 (UTC))

You ask: I read some website(s) 'copyright laws' they strictly forbids copying/selling their material... If/when they find out, will it create a problem for me or will I be violating any rules and regulations if this material becomes a 'derivative' work? It seems to me that you're not so much asking about language as asking for the legal interpretation of (unidentified) "copyright laws" and of the word "derivative" in particular. One way to interpret the warning We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice at the top of this page is that you shouldn't be asking this at any WP reference desk. I cannot locate the string the Golden rule is to modify anything and everything in your own way, and out of context its meaning is unclear. In some applications it would be very wrong. If you take a photograph for which I possess the copyright and modify it in your own way, I normally still possess the copyright. There are certain ways around this but they depend on the particular legal system (in the US, it would help if you were a rich and famous artist and I a poorer and less known artist); you haven't specified the jurisdiction and if you did then you should almost certainly be asking this elsewhere. -- Hoary (talk) 08:00, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

I have English understanding problem, which improved a lot since the time I've been with Wikipedia.
I know what you mean, currently I don't have the facility to do so. That's why I sought advice in order to grasp the whole picture. I'm in a rut I can't get out of until/unless I accomplish some tasks which will take some time (already taken 3/4 years...). The jurisdiction would be UK, USA, Canada, India and Bangladesh (later two optional). There is no photos. I'm happy with Wikipedia, I know what to do, a lot of advice helped in order to grasp the complete picture of Wikipedia's copyright laws and referencing. At least I know I'm going the right way with Wikipedia's information. When time comes, I will seek lawyers advice... Its just the other websites/books..., Wikipedia does not possess the information, I wished to upload but I've been advised not to without references.
I clearly understand about the photo, logical. I'm not modifying any photos as it will look off putting... Only such images as outlined.
'The Golden rule', its stated on the link you provided earlier, not exactly the way I stated, well, I guess I understood that way. Correct me if I'm wrong please. I'll be grateful If you guys could direct me the right way. My over one years of work consisted some of Wikipedia's material. I didn't know at that time I had to redo it in order to make both my work and Wikipedia seem better... -- (SuperGirlsVibrator (talk) 08:59, 20 March 2015 (UTC))

March 20[edit]


I have difficulty coming up with trisyllabic English words whose primary stress is on the final syllable. Magazine and Japanese (or anyway in my pronunciation, though I know magazine is common and would not be surprised to hear Japanese), and, er, that's it. But magazine doesn't sound at all exotic to me, and I therefore suspect that there's a minor swarm of such words, which for some odd reason I just can't think of. ¶ Of course I can easily come up with Balinese, journalese and so on; but I'm not at all sure that I (let alone others) don't give primary stress to the first syllable, and even if I stress the last one they'd be uninterestingly close to Japanese. As for compounds, New Orleans (if not disyllabic "Nawlins") is OK too, but people may argue (however wrongly) that it's not a word. Tips for lexical anap(a)ests with the primary stress on a vowel other than /i/ would be particularly welcome. -- Hoary (talk) 02:10, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

To start with, there are a bunch of -eer or -ier words like that: brigadier, fusilier, racketeer, balladeer. Also consider smithereens, and for a different accented vowel sound, macaroon and the fictitious Brigadoon. -- (talk) 02:56, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
Thank you, O anonym. There's certainly stress on the third syllable in each of those; but in my own (atypical?) English, the primary stress in three of the examples is on the first syllable and I'm not confident about the other examples. -- Hoary (talk) 04:42, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
Suffragette. Picayune. Mayonnaise. Bolognaise. Polonaise. Re-employ. Disregard. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 04:47, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
Cigarette & maisonette. Basically any word ending in -ette is a candidate. KägeTorä - () (もしもし!) 04:56, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
Excellent, thank you both. -- Hoary (talk) 06:12, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
acquiesce, adios, afrikaans, afternoon, antitrust, anymore, apprehend, apropos, ascertain, attache, baronet, bourgeoisie, cabaret, cabernet, cavalier, chandelier, chaparral, chevrolet, circumvent, clarinet, clientele, coalesce, coexist, coincide, colonnade, commandant, comprehend, concierge, connoisseur, contradict, convalesce, correspond, debonair, decompose, denouement, diagnose, doctrinaire, dossier, entertain, entourage, esplanade, expertise, faberge, fiance, figurine, grandiose, guarantee, halloween, illinois, immature, infrared, introduce, kangaroo, katmandu, l'oreal, marguerite, marianne, masquerade, minaret, minuet, montreal, mozambique, nonchalant, nonetheless, organelle, palisade, perrier, persevere, personnel, potpourri, promenade, questionnaire, raconteur, rapprochement, rationale, recommend, reminisce, repartee, represent, resurrect, saboteur, serenade, sobriquet, souvenir, statuesque, submarine, supersede, tambourine, tangerine, tennessee, trampoline, vietnam, violin, (deep breath) absentee, addressee, appointee, devotee, licensee, nominee, referee, refugee, disagree, disallow, disappear, disappoint, disapprove, disarray, disavow, disbelief, disconnect, discontent, disengage, disinclined, disobey, dispossessed, disregard, disrepair, disrepute, disrespect, incomplete, incorrect, indirect, indiscreet, indistinct, inexact, inhumane, insincere, misapplied, misconceived, misconstrued, misinformed, prearranged, preconceived, predisposed, premature, preordained, reabsorb, reacquire, readjust, reaffirm, realign, reappear, reappoint, reappraise, rearrange, reassert, reassess, reassign, reassure, recombine, reconfirm, reconstruct, reconvene, redefine, redeploy, redesign, redirect, redisplay, reemerge, reenact, reignite, reimburse, reimpose, reinforce, reinstate, reinvent, reinvest, repossess, reproduce, resubmit, resupply, reunite, unabashed, unabridged, unaddressed, unadorned, unafraid, unannounced, unapproved, unashamed, unattached, unaware, unbeknownst, unconcealed, unconcerned, unconfined, unconfirmed, unconstrained, uncontrolled, unconvinced, undeclared, undefined, undeserved, undeterred, undisclosed, undisguised, undisturbed, unemployed, unexplained, unexplored, unforeseen, unfulfilled, unimpaired, unimpressed, unimproved, uninformed, uninsured, uninvolved, unopposed, unperturbed, unprepared, unprovoked, unredeemed, unrefined, unreleased, unrelieved, unremarked, unresolved, unrestrained, unsecured, unsubscribed, unsurpassed, untoward, interact, intercede, intercept, interfere, interject, interrupt, intersect, interspersed, intertwined, intervene, overblown, overflowed, overjoyed, overruled, oversize, overstayed, overtaxed, overthrew, overworked, undercooked, underfoot, undergo, underlie, underneath, underserved, understand, undertake, underway, underwrote.
(Found with grep and the CMU Pronouncing Dictionary.) -- BenRG (talk) 06:35, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
Ace! CMU I know, grep I know, but I'm ashamed to say that I'd not heard of the CMU Pronouncing Dictionary. I'll have to investigate. -- Hoary (talk) 07:00, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
And your next challenge is to write a short story using all of those words. {The poster formerly known as} (talk) 13:37, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
That is a great resource Ben, thanks! SemanticMantis (talk) 14:45, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Need help verifying Japanese[edit]

Hi, if you read Japanese, could you please check this edit to verify if the change this IP user made is appropriate? Their edit summary is not helpful. Much obliged, and please ping me if you need me. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:18, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Unless there is some explained reason to deviate, I would be inclined to go with the spellings in the ja version here, which (though I haven't checked all of them) seem to match the original English version rather than the edited one. (talk) 01:15, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
All but one of the changes are to Japanese script. These faithfully transliterate from hiragana to katakana. I have no opinion either on the correctness of the hiragana or on the relative appropriateness of hiragana versus katakana, but the transliteration (whatever its desirability) seems error-free. -- Hoary (talk) 01:35, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
As long as it was not something vulgar or shenanigan-y, I'm good. Thanks much! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:43, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
You can also check against the (I assume) official character profiles at (let the animation run through to the end if the names are too quick to read). Again, it seems that the original English article was correct, though again I have not checked all of them. (In case not clear, the edit to the English article changed hiragana to katakana, which, extremely loosely speaking, is a bit like changing lower-case to upper-case, in the sense that both still make sense, but there may be conventions about which to use. When naming fictitious characters, I believe the creator can basically write the names in whichever style they like, but the article should follow the creator's choice.) (talk) 01:48, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Commas, maybe?[edit]

This sentence hurts my head: "Hwang Kee was inspired to develop his own martial art after having witnessed as a child a man defend himself using the martial art Tae Kyon against a large group of men." (from the article Moo Duk Kwan) I am not even certain a liberal sprinkling of commas can solve all of its problems. Any suggestions? Rmhermen (talk) 17:30, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

After watching a man defend himself against a large group using the martial art Tae Kyon as a child, Hwang Kee was inspired to develop his own martial art.--Thomprod (talk) 17:34, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
As a child, Hwang Kee witnessed a man using tae kyon to defend himself against a large group. The experience inspired him to develop his own martial art. ―Mandruss  17:56, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
If he developed the martial art as an adult (do kids develop martial arts?), perhaps the word "later" should be inserted between "experience" and "inspired". ―Mandruss  18:04, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
I used Mandruss' version. Thanks. Rmhermen (talk) 03:23, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Plural of poet laureate[edit]

Is it poets laureate or poet laureates or even poets laureates? Even the official sites don't agree... -- (talk) 22:27, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

According to our article, it's "poets laureate". "Laureate" is an adjective, and English adjectives do not have number. However, "poet laureates" is what most people are likely to actually say. Tevildo (talk) 00:39, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
All true, but I'm surprised to find that "poets laureate" is what they're more likely to write (for dead-tree publication). -- Hoary (talk) 01:40, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
I'm not surprised at all, and I'm comfortable with poets laureate, as I am with attorneys general, sergeants at arms, etc. ―Mandruss  02:25, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
I call [citation needed] on Tevildo's "poet laureates" is what most people are likely to actually say . The people who write "poets laureate" still outnumber the "poet laureates" crew 2 to 1, despite some narrowing of the gap since 1950. Why would anyone who knows the proper way of pluralising the term say and write it in different ways? I suggest Tevildo is moving in the wrong circle (which is also the minority circle), and he should make the appropriate social adjustment asap and start mingling with folks what know how to talk gooder. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 07:30, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
You'll have to excuse Jack; he gets hards on for these kind of debates. Matt Deres (talk) 21:05, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
You know me too well, Tevildo. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 22:01, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
I'd use "poet laureates", because the other way sounds way too formal. And, you could omit "poet(s)" and just say "laureates", right ? So, we've established that "laureate" can be made plural, then. And note that "laureate" is a noun, when used in this context: [6]. The adjective would apply to the meaning "literally wreathed with laurel". StuRat (talk) 22:27, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
I don't think "Nobel laureate" and "poet laureate" are the same sense of "laureate". That's like saying "attorney generals" is ok because "general" is a noun. I'll leave it to someone more educated to say why with the correct terminology. ―Mandruss  22:39, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
Personally, I say that "attorney generals" and "poet laureates" are correct because the pluralizing S ending in English becomes a clitic in such expressions. But in the end correctness is a matter of opinion. -- (talk) 23:14, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
It should be "attorneys general" and "poets laureate" because the people concerned are attorneys and poets resp. They are not generals, which is a rank in the army. Similarly for " directors general", whose job is that of director! not general. But in the (UK) army, the plural of major general, lieutenant general and lieutenant colonel is major generals, lieutenant generals and lieutenant colonels because the people concerned are generals ( not majors or lieutenants ). Widneymanor (talk) 10:38, 22 March 2015 (UTC)←
Arguments from logic are really of very little value in discussions about language. If you are concerned with "correct", then that is a purely social judgment, and is essentially arbitrary (though there is often a logical rationalisation given). If you are concerned about how the language actually is, then the only effective method to determine this is to examine how it is used and understood. --ColinFine (talk) 23:29, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
It's true that languages evolve, and what is considered correct today may not be considered correct in the year 2115. But that doesn't mean that correctness is an invalid concept. If it were, this thread and all threads like it (which comprise a large part of what is discussed on this page) would lack any legitimacy. I believe that poets laureate is more widely considered correct today, especially by sources widely regarded as authoritative. I'm open to being corrected on that. ―Mandruss  23:47, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

March 21[edit]

Direct and Indirect Descent[edit]

When we say that A is a direct descendant of B, does the word 'direct' add anything to the meaning? Would we ever describe someone as an indirect descendant? Maybe of an uncle? Rojomoke (talk) 12:19, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

A direct descendant would be a child of A and B. An indirect decendant would be a step-brother/sister. KägeTorä - () (もしもし!) 15:38, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
Here is one answer, and it seems reasonable. As I interpret this, your son is your direct descendant and your nephew is your indirect descendant. As stated in one of the other Google hits, it's not about biology; obviously your nephew is not descended from you biologically. Presumably, all direct and indirect descendants of your indirect descendants would also be your indirect descendants, so your nephew's son would be your indirect descendant. ―Mandruss  17:42, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
(Taking that source very literally, your first cousin would be your indirect descendant but your nephew would not. I choose not to take it that literally. It's a forum post. For one thing, their wording implies that someone who died centuries before you were born could be your descendant, which stretches language to the breaking point. At the very least, your descendant should be in a later generation than you, and even your first cousin is not.) ―Mandruss  18:12, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
That seems to make logical sense, but I think that applies only to direct descendants/ancestors. The genealogical/legal fraternity talk of "lineal descendants" rather than "direct descendants". See also [7]. Obviously a lineal descendant can only be a child, grandchild or n-greats grandchild of their ancestor. However, people who share a common ancestor but are not direct descendants/ancestors of each other are known as collateral descendants, e.g. nieces, nephews, cousins and their progeny. You and I might be 5th cousins, meaning we have to go back to a great-great-great-great grandparent to find a common ancestor. We are each separately direct descendants of that long-dead person, but we're collateral descendants of each other. And that's where the semantic link is broken. Logically, if A is descended (in some sense) from B, then how can B also be descended from A? Well, it's not that they're descended from each other, but they're collateral descendants of each other. It's no different from two people being each other's cousin, or each other's sibling. Pick at random any two humans, living or dead, and they will almost certainly be at least collateral descendants of each other. Identifying the actual genealogical connection might, however, take a little longer than 5 seconds. The term "collateral ancestor" is also used. (OR begins here) My sister's children and their progeny are my collateral descendants (we call them nephews, n-grand-nephews, etc); my father 's sister's children and their progeny are my collateral ancestors (we call them 1st cousins, 1st cousins n-times removed). But that's weird since 1st cousins are also collateral descendants. Maybe it's that people in the same generation (siblings, 1st cousins, 2nd cousins, 3rd cousins ...) are collateral relatives, but neither ancestors nor descendants. If in doubt, you can never go wrong with "collateral relative". -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 21:54, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
I see. I think. So the use of "descendant" in that context is counterintuitive and utterly confusing, and should cease herewith. I vote for that. ―Mandruss  22:27, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
Only confusing if you assume "descendant" has to mean their very existence depends on the existence of the ancestor. As I say, that's true only of linear (= direct) relatives. Nth cousins (n-times removed) are linearly descended not from each other but from a common ancestor, and are thus relatives collaterally (rather than linearly) of each other, hence collateral relatives, or in a specific case, collateral descendant or collateral ancestor. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 23:27, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
I agree with Mandruss that such usage of "descendant" is counter-intuitive and confusing, but apparently the word collateral has a long-standing special legal meaning (from 1425: "Qwhen þe succession lynealle Endit, þe collateralle Ressawit") meaning in a parallel line from a brother or sister, applied originally to succession and hence to descendants. I prefer Jack's collateral relative. Dbfirs 21:24, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Here's a story from today's news. The headline says "Richard's closest descendants", but if you read down further you see they're directly descended from Richard's sister, and hence collateral descendants of Richard III. If any of his direct descendants have died out, then the collateral lines are next cabs off the rank. They all share Richard's parents' genes, and hence Richard's own genes. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 22:09, 25 March 2015 (UTC)


When and why did the word "apology" flip from meaning "argument in defence of something" to "expression of remorse for doing something"? Iapetus (talk) 17:28, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Mowhawk vs. mohawk (hairstyle)[edit]

Is a "mowhawk" a different hairstyle than a mohawk, or just a variation of the spelling? (I thought a mowhawk was like the trademark hairstyle of Mr. T, whereas a mohawk was hair styled like a rooster comb. When I searched the web for "mowhawk", I kept getting hits for "mohawk" instead. That made me wonder if I'd been mistaken.) -- (talk) 19:31, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

When it first appeared in the UK it was called a Mohican. But I think the 'tide' has now turned firmly towards Mohawk. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:38, 21 March 2015 (UTC) [8]
"That's a funny name for a caterpillar!" Tevildo (talk) 22:41, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
Here's my uncool two cents, FWIW. I have never seen the word "mowhawk". It's listed at Urban Dictionary, but it doesn't contrast it to "mohawk", which makes me believe they might be alternative spellings of the same word. "Mohawk" at Google Images shows a lot of things that look closer to rooster comb than to Mr. T's style. I always thought that was called a spike. Sorry I couldn't be of more help; perhaps a 20-year-old (or a cooler 60-year-old) will happen along. ―Mandruss  19:47, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
Upon reflection, Mr. T's style is short, like freshly mown grass, so "mowhawk" makes sense and would contrast to the photos linked above. I may be a little cooler now. As for why your search was misleading, maybe the search engine needs to get with the times too. ―Mandruss  20:23, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
So more of a mowerhawk maybe? Martinevans123 (talk) 20:53, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
I first came across "mowhawk" sometime in the last decade when I saw this joke on the Web. I thought it was a misspelling at first, but something I found on the Web made me think that it was a word coined to refer to a hairstyle like Mr. T's. My notion was challenged when I searched for pictures of "mowhawk" but didn't quite get what I expected. -- (talk) 21:28, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
Here is the Google search for "mowhawk". It says "Showing results for mohawk", guessing that the user just misspelled "mohawk". Just below that is a link for "Search instead for mowhawk", and clicking that link produces hits including some of what you were looking for. Not a lot, so I guess the term is having trouble catching on. I'm in favor of it. ―Mandruss  21:50, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

March 22[edit]

Whatquam ex ungue leonem?[edit]

Johann Bernoulli, after reading an anonymous paper in 1697, said that its author was obviously Isaac Newton. And he commented in Latin: "Tanquam ex ungue leonem", which is often translated as "I recognize the lion by his claw".

But in my Cassell's Latin Dictionary, there's no verb that tanquam could be an inflection of. (The nearest thing is tango, tangere, meaning "touch", which would produce "tangeam" in the present subjunctive.) However, there is an adverb tamquam, for which an alternate spelling tanquam is shown in parentheses. The direct translations are given as "so as", "just as", or "like as".

Now Cassell's shows classical Latin, but Bernoulli would have been using the Latin of a Renaissance-era scientist, which might therefore include words or senses not in that dictionary. So is his tanquam actually a verb as the common translation implies, and if so, what are its principal parts? Or was he using the adverb? Oh, I just realized: I bet he meant "just as a lion from its claw", meaning simply that that he recognized Newton "just as" he would recognize "a lion from its claw". Have I answered myself correctly, then? Or was my first thought, that this was a non-classical Latin word, right after all? -- (talk) 04:32, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

An implied verb makes more sense to me. —Tamfang (talk) 05:04, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
Tamquam is a conjunction. The verb is implied by the context. “As if from the lion´s claw”. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 10:03, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
Cassell's says adverb, but anyway, thanks for the responses. -- (talk) 18:01, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
It seems that Bernoulli didn't invent the expression, though. See this letter by Laevinus Torrentius in 1587: "...ingenii tui, quod ex disputatione Parisiis abs te instituta, tanquam ex ungue leonem, agnovi": "...your genius, which I recognized from the debate undertaken by you in Paris, just as (one would recognize) a lion from its claw." Lesgles (talk) 02:56, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
Ah, agnovi, "I have recognized". Yes indeed. That settles it. And if this passage was familiar to Bernoulli, it makes sense that he'd just quote the key phrase. Thanks for finding that! -- (talk) 03:36, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Official status missing on language infobox[edit]

It has come to the attention of many users such as myself that the official status section on the infobox language template is now blank, not showing a list of countries where a certain language is official. However, on an article's edit page, the list of countries is still visible and editable. This problem is found both on articles with collapsable country lists such as English language and French language, as well as on articles that list one to a few countries with no collapsable list such as Japanese language and Norwegian language. Is this a system error or is there a new policy to not show where languages are official on their respective article page? — Moalli (talk) 05:56, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

This might be a better question for the Help Desk (WP:HD) - the question has also been asked (with no answer so far) at Template talk:Infobox language. Kwamikagami seems to be primarily responsible for this infobox, so is probably the best person to give an answer. Tevildo (talk) 10:36, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
I recently added some new fields to the info box, so I might have messed it up. I'll take a look. — kwami (talk) 05:48, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
Yup. I'd failed to renumber all the fields. Fixed. — kwami (talk) 05:57, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Persian help and Arabic help? (transcription needed)[edit]

This is for German Embassy School Tehran. What is the transcription of the Persian in this image?

Also what is the Arabic in this image? For École Française Internationale Djeddah and in this image? For German International School Jeddah

Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 17:03, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

"Friends Council of German Schools in Tehran" (انجمن دوستان مدارس آلمانی تهران). Omidinist (talk) 18:20, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
Thank you! I look forward to the Arabic as I'm starting the stubs about the French and German schools in Jeddah soon! WhisperToMe (talk) 18:22, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
1) المدرسة الفرنسیة العالمیة في جدة
2) المدرسة الالمانیة العالمیة في جدة. Omidinist (talk) 18:32, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Thank you so much! If you don't mind one more, should have the Arabic name of the American school. WhisperToMe (talk) 18:34, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

You are welcome. (المدرسة الأمریکیة العالمیة بجدة) Omidinist (talk) 19:11, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
With the Arabic names I will post requests for these schools at the Arabic Wikipedia, to see if anybody is interested in starting Arabic language articles about them WhisperToMe (talk) 19:20, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

March 23[edit]

"coffee grounds" vs "coffee grinds"[edit]

Having always heard (and used) the phrase "coffee grounds," in the past week I've met two people who use "coffee grinds." Is this a matter of dialectal variation or idiosyncratic? Evan (talk|contribs) 15:26, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

I've only ever heard "coffee grounds", but Google ngrams shows that "coffee grinds" has bumbled along at a very low level since about 1960 (the occasional appearances before are probably accidental instances of this sequence of words with a different syntax). Since about 1986 it's taken off (though still far lower incidence than "coffee grounds"). --ColinFine (talk) 15:33, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. I suspect ngrams wouldn't be too useful in this case, though, as there is the other meaning of "coffee grinds" that can refer to specific coarseness (e.g., a "coarse coffee grind" or a "fine coffee grind"), which is more of a descriptor of the grounds than a generic term for them. There's a technical term for that which is eluding me at the moment, probably because I have a head cold--a type of reverse gerund, perhaps? It's syntactically similar to something like "a rough chop" or "a close shave." The key is to somehow weed out instances like that from the cases where "coffee grinds" is used in place of the usual "coffee grounds." Hard to do with a computerized search. Evan (talk|contribs) 16:43, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
FWIW, our own article Coffee preparation refers to "spent coffee grinds", and that references a source that uses the term in its title and body. The Wikipedia article also uses "grounds". ―Mandruss  17:58, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
I've heard both terms, with "grounds" used more commonly. Not sure what this illuminates or doesn't but I did an Ebsco database search for both terms, and this is what I found: "Coffee grinds" yielded 960 results, dating from 1991. The types of titles the term appeared in tended toward four main clusters: British, Canadian, & Australian publications, restaurant trade journals, environmental magazines like Mother Earth News, Organic Gardening, and E: the Environmental Magazine, and literary journals like Southwest Review (where the term showed up in poetry). "Coffee grounds" yielded 12,607 results, dating from 1885 (though the database was behaving strangely and wouldn't let me see those oldest results). There was less noticeable clustering of types of titles, but academic and scientific journals in fields like radioanalytical & nuclear chemistry and advanced applied bioceramics did show up in the results set, along with titles like Men's Health and Businessweek. Now, this is just based on what I noticed looking through the results, and not good science, but there was the suggestion of a difference in where the two terms predominate, if someone were to want to pick up the thread and run with it. --some jerk on the Internet (talk) 13:16, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Lightnin' up the mood[edit]

What's the proper form for the possessive form of Lightnin': Lightnin's, Lightnin' '​s or "Lightnin'"'s? Clarityfiend (talk) 18:23, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

I doubt there's a rule covering that situation, so I'd bypass the problem by using "Slim's", "Lightnin' Slim's", or "his". The majority of that article refers to him as "Slim", so why would "Slim's" be problematic? ―Mandruss  18:28, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
So circumlocution for Hiadeľ and its ilk too? Clarityfiend (talk) 18:34, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
If writing of Hiadel' is circumlocution, I'd say yes. But I'm not familiar with names of that form (is that a contraction of some kind?), so if the ending apostrophe isn't an essential part of the name perhaps it would be acceptable to write its possessive as Hiadel's.
The last letter of Hiadeľ is U+013E LATIN SMALL LETTER L WITH CARON (LATIN SMALL LETTER L HAČEK). Why the diacritic looks like a little ‹9›, I cannot say. —Tamfang (talk) 06:23, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
I see, so there is no apostrophe there, and it's a different animal from Lightnin'. Still, considering zero Google hits for Hiadeľ's, the circumlocution of Hiadeľ seems preferable to non-linguist me. ―Mandruss  07:16, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
  • The proper phrase is to lighten up the mood, "lightening" wouldn't normally take a possessive, but it would be "lightening's". μηδείς (talk) 18:45, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Taking the general prescription literally and without thought, we'd have e.g. /lightnin''s gun/. Obviously this isn't covered in our WP:MOS. I'd think /lightnin's gun/ would be acceptable in most cases. I suppose you could check a copy of Strunk & White or Fowler's A_Dictionary_of_Modern_English_Usage - but I don't recall they address the issue. Agree that /Lightnin' Slim's gun/ would be more common. Usually people with names like that go by both, or by the second name. Sometimes this has humorous effect. When asked by 2 Chainz for rights to sample a song, Tom Lehrer responded
Hope that helps. SemanticMantis (talk) 18:54, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Strange things among English irregular verbs[edit]

Hello, this question is posted from France. In the list below, I don't understand why only some verbs are in bold letters. It comes from a recent and good grammar : Bescherelle "L'anglais pour tous" Editor Hatier, 2014

I rejected some hypothesis.

H1) It has nothing to do with verbs that can be regular. This last verbs have a (R) in exponent.

H2) I don't think it has something to do with their frequency in English. They seem to be all very common.

H3) I don't think it has something to do with transitive verbs.

So what is there hidden below these verbs in bold letters? I thank you all to be courageous enough to read up to this end.--Jojodesbatignoles (talk) 21:40, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

I don't know.
But I noticed "ate" has the suggested pronunciation /et/. To the best of my knowledge this is considered obsolete, but there may be pockets of resistance where it's still said that way. In my experience, children who say /et/ are corrected and told to pronounce it as written, viz. a homophone of "eight". I dimly remember hearing adults say /et/, but they were of my grandparents' generation and are long dead now. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 22:01, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
I think that's a lower case e followed by a capital i, which would make sense. But you're right that saying "ate" as "et" sounds like something hillbillies would say. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:17, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
Oh, and check quickly (or download it), because they're about to delete it. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 22:18, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
Actually, /ɛt/ is the IPA for the archaic past tense that rhyme with "set" and the chart says /eɪ/ (not et) which is the proper IPA rendering of the RP and SAE pronunciation of vowel of "ate" that rhymes with "eight". The authors are not using standard IPA, however, since simple /e/ is not found in RP or SAE, and is the "clipped" vowel of "eight" in Scottish and some varieties of Welsh English. In other words, say and said are /seɪ/ and /sɛd/ in RP and SAE. But since /e/ nd /ɛ/ never contrast without the /eɪ/ dipthongization in the two standards, they may simply be simplifying by avoiding the extra /ɛ/ symbol. μηδείς (talk) 22:27, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
Re the hillbilly thing: I seem to remember /et/ was once considered the 'proper' way to say "ate", and I'd give that some credence. I couldn't say when and why it changed, but it might have been chucked out in the same batch as "ain't", which I still maintain is the correct, legitimate and proper word to use for the tag question to "I am", viz. in expressions like "I'm wonderful, ain't I?". I'd much rather that than "aren't I" or "amn't I". -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 22:34, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
"How many eggs did you have for breakfast, Juli?" "Et two, Brute." --Trovatore (talk) 17:35, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
Lay's Potato Chips have or had a slogan that "no one can eat just one". In some print ads in the 1960s, featuring Bert Lahr as Caesar, they used that same idea. You're either very good or very old. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 20:32, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
Lo and behold, here it is:[9]Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 20:35, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
[The French "à voir avec" is equivalent to the English "to do with". In your three hypotheses, you evidently mean "nothing to do with" and "something to do with".
Wavelength (talk) 22:52, 23 March 2015 (UTC)]
I can't see the image (I suspect it has been removed as a copyright violation). Is it available online, so that you could link to it? As for "ate" /ɛt/ is absolutely standard in my native (Southern England, somewhat close to RP) pronunciation. --ColinFine (talk) 11:07, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
In my dialect, we pronounce 'ate' as 'et', because prouncing it as 'eit' makes it sound like 'hate', as we do not pronounce the 'h'. A - "What do you think about the dinner I made for you?" B - "I /eit/ it." <- could cause some domestic misunderstandings, and we are not hillbillies - we don't live in the hills and we are not called Billy. KägeTorä - () (もしもし!) 11:13, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
If you are suggesting that you rhyme ate with set in your dialect, KT, you should either use the ett re-spelling or the phonemic transcription /ɛt/ with the symbol for what in English is called short e. The sounds [et] and [eit] are either nonexistent or only found in contexts I can't think of in RP and SAE. As mentioned before, say and said are [seɪ] and [sɛd] in RP and SAE.
Some people cannot read IPA. I was following Jack's example above of using 'normal' writing. Apologies. Also, I believe it is called 'phonetic transcription' and not 'phonemic transcription'. KägeTorä - () (もしもし!) 13:05, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Phonemic transcription is in /slashes/ and phonetic transcription is in [brackets]. By the way, in my dialect, if someone answered that question with "I ate it" it would sound like they didn't particularly like it and were making a thinly-veiled attempt to be diplomatic. — Ƶ§œš¹ [lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt] 14:40, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
It's perfectly alright not to use IPA, but you should avoid /*/ or [*] if not doing so. Anything between // is interpreted as a phoneme, which is usually a distinctive sound-symbol that exists across an entire language, or at least most of it. For example, English has only one /r/ sound. But anything in [] indicates how the sound is precisely said in a specific context in a specific dialect, or even by a specific person. One way to put it is that if you know the phonemes of a language you can speak it with a foreign accent, but if you master its phonetics you will speak a dialect like a native. Again, for example, the entirety of English has only one /r/ phoneme, but phonetically in SAE it is always [ɹ] (which British actors imitate to sound American). In British accents it may be [ɹ], [ɾ] (flap or [r] )trill) or even [w] word initially, and [ɹ], [ɾ] or [r] or even [0] (with vowel lengthening or colouring) in non-rhotic dialects. Spanish, however has two R (capitals imply generality) phonemes, spelt "r" and "rr" and realized as a flap [ɾ] and a trill [r]. Russian also has two R phonemes, one with a following "y" sound, and one without. When not speaking technically, it is best to use quotes and examples rather than slashes or brackets, as the latter will be taken to mean something different by the initiated from what the layman intends. μηδείς (talk) 00:08, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Hello, I asked the same question hear and on the French equivalent (called The Oracle) where I got an insight that I consider is correct. The verbs in bold letters are the most important to learn. That was nearly impossible for you, native English speakers, to measure what verbs are more important to know for a French learner. I thank you all for your long answers.--Jojodesbatignoles (talk) 13:30, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Unfortunately, it is impossible for us, both native or not, to confirm whether your insight is correct or not. Is it possible to reload the scan to a third-party image hosting and give a link?--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 04:42, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Korean punctuation[edit]

Does the hyphen exist in Korean? According to the article the tilde (~) is used for ranges in numbers, but what happens if you transliterate double-barrelled names into Korean? Is there a hyphen, a space or nothing? The linked article talks about something different and I have yet to find an article about a person with a double-barrelled name which has a link to a Korean article. -- (talk) 23:38, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Tim Berners-Lee has an article in Korean. Unfortunately his surname is rendered as ಬರ್ನರ್ಸ್ ಲೀ in the article title but as ಬರ್ನರ್ಸ್-ಲೀ in the lead sentence, and both versions occur again in the article. I think a more reliable source is needed. -- (talk) 04:48, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
That's Kannada, not Korean. FWIW, his Korean article is here, and I don't see any hyphen there.--William Thweatt TalkContribs 06:24, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Dang, sorry about the bum steer there. I was fooled by the abbreviation "kn" in combination with Wikipedia's practice of providing interlanguage links in that language (and with Korean therefore alphabetized under G, not K) rather than the language of the source article. It makes perfect sense if you can actually read the language, but I don't know either Korean or Kannada. -- (talk) 05:28, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Korean writing looks very different in style from South Indian writing. —Tamfang (talk) 23:48, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Agreed. In Korean, Japanese, and Chinese, no hyphen or tilde is used for double-barrelled names. The tilde actually just means 'from'. In Japanese, a ・ would be used between the first part of the name, i.e. the first name, , but an = sign for the hyphen, but not so in Korean. In Chinese, the hyphen could be used, but I doubt it is obligatory. KägeTorä - () (もしもし!) 11:26, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
Googling turns up some Korean pages that use hyphens or spaces to separate his last names. The = sign is a double hyphen. -- BenRG (talk) 18:41, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

March 24[edit]

ASL sign in "Unbreakable" theme song?[edit]

At 55 seconds into this video, I'm presuming that the girl in the dark school uniform is making some American Sign Language sign. (The kids in the white school uniforms, in contrast, look like they either aren't intended to be signing, or they're just really bad at it.) What is that girl signing, if she is indeed signing? From the context, my guess would be that she might be signing something that would translate to "unbreakable" or perhaps "miracle", but I haven't been able to confirm or disprove that by googling. Red Act (talk) 22:24, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

March 25[edit]

Seven deadly sins - multilingual![edit]

A friend told me that he's planning to get a tattoo with the seven deadly sins, in various languages. Having seen the horror that can come from bad translations and transcriptions, I advised him to get advice. Could you please help me check them? I'm interested in:

  • Correct spelling
  • Suitable word choice: suitably serious/biblical tone.
  • Font choice danger (what letters look similar to others in fanciful fonts? Are certain diacritics or similar marks crucial to meaning?)


  • Superbia: גאוותנות
  • Avaritia: תאוות בצע
  • Luxuria: תאווה
  • Ira: זעם
  • gula: זוֹלְלוּת זללנות
  • Invidia: קנאה
  • Acedia: עצלנות
Just for the sake of clarity: This list has now been adjusted directly by a Hebrew speaker (diff). ---Sluzzelin talk 13:03, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
...and revised again due to afterthought, but I still stand by my statement below (third bullet). -- Deborahjay (talk) 19:17, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
  • The entry for Gula is inconsistent with the others, as it has a couple of vowels in it, when the others are unpointed. Worse, one of the two vowels present (the chirik under the lamed) is just incorrect (should be a shva, if you want vowels). --Dweller (talk) 13:17, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Be aware that Hebrew can be written in Hebrew block or Hebrew script, both of which have a multiplicity of fonts. In either script and in any font, some letters look similar and can be rendered incorrectly by someone unskilled, changing what you write to gibberish or something with a different meaning. --Dweller (talk) 13:17, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Be likewise aware that the Hebrew language is associated with Judaism which sticks with the Ten Commandments, the Torah, and all the centuries of interpretation and their unending study - making this exercise in finding Hebrew-language equivalents for the Latin largely a travesty. Is this some sort of reverse cultural appropriation? People: getting a "correct translation" doesn't make this authentic. It's fundamentally bogus. -- Deborahjay (talk) 18:58, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
    • Christianity (in this case Catholicism, the branch most associated with the notion in question) claims to hold universal truths for all mankind. If Catholics are correct, then they are correct also for the Jews. You can certainly take the position that they are not correct. I take that position too, at least for some things (if I didn't I would be Catholic, which I'm not). But you can't say "well, Catholicism is OK for cultures that are traditionally Catholic, but keep it away from the things associated with the Jews". That's just not coherent. --Trovatore (talk) 19:50, 26 March 2015 (UTC)


  • Superbia: كبرياء
  • Avaritia: طمع
  • Luxuria: ترف
  • Ira: غضب
  • gula: نهم
  • Invidia: حسد
  • Acedia: كسل


  • Superbia: غرور
  • Avaritia: طمع
  • Luxuria: نعمت
  • Ira: خشم
  • Gula: شکم پرستی
  • Invidia: حسادت
  • Acedia: کاهلی


  • Superbia: 自豪
  • Avaritia: 貪心
  • Luxuria: 豪華
  • Ira: 憤怒
  • Gula: 暴食
  • Invidia: 羨慕
  • Acedia: 樹懶


  • Superbia: 자존심
  • Avaritia: 욕심
  • Luxuria: 사치
  • Ira: 분노
  • Gula: 대식
  • Invidia: 선망의 대상
  • Acedia: 나무 늘보


  • Superbia: гордость
  • Avaritia: жадность
  • Luxuria: роскошь
  • Ira: гнев
  • Gula: обжорство
  • Invidia: зависть
  • Acedia: ленивец

Thank you in advance! --Slashme (talk) 13:58, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Your Russian one is not correct. As it has been advised you'd better go to appropriate articles and look for yourself. For example in Russian even if you cannot read the article you'll find your answer.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 05:03, 27 March 2015 (UTC)


I note you use the Latin terms for the Seven deadly sins. The English equivalents thereof are, in the order you've chosen:
  • Superbia: Pride
  • Avaritia: Avarice
  • Luxuria: Lust
  • Ira: Wrath
  • Gula: Gluttony
  • Invidia: Envy
  • Acedia: Sloth
(I make it a badge of honour to commit at least 4 before breakfast.) -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 16:23, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Sloth, Lust, Gluttony, then Pride, in that order, right? :) KägeTorä - () (もしもし!) 17:06, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Hmm, gluttony before breakfast, eh? That doesn't quite work for me, I'm afraid. Best I can do on an empty stomach is avarice and envy. But I do have an overweening pride in my assorted lusts and appetites. :) -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 23:44, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
OK, so maybe for me, pride comes after breakfast. Does sloth count twice if I add it before gluttony, while I watch her cook? So, sloth, lust, sloth, gluttony, then pride? Then go to work (avarice), envy my boss for having an easy job and his not having a clue what mine is supposed to be, then going to the pub afterwards to calm my wrath. Then sloth, lust, and pride, sloth and gluttony again, and maybe lust again. There - all seven in one single working day - multiple times. Pride! :) KägeTorä - () (もしもし!) 12:25, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Someone should write a paper on how sloths express their lust. Or slugs. I'm sure I've experienced sluglust now and again. Not yet advanced to slothlust. There's still time. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 23:24, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
I don't know from sloths, but slugs are known for their orgies, which we like to call a "slugfest". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:26, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
And speaking of slugfests, congratulations to Australia for getting to the World Cup final. :) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:29, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. Now we have to beat our trans-Tasman co-hosts. Rest of the world, take a break and enjoy the carnage. -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 23:34, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Don't do this before a native speaker verifies every single translation. Seriously, it's a bad idea. In the Chinese list of sins:
  • Superbia: 自豪
  • Avaritia: 貪心
  • Luxuria: 豪華
  • Ira: 憤怒
  • Gula: 暴食
  • Invidia: 羨慕
  • Acedia: 樹懶
The first one, 自豪, does mean "proud", but it doesn't have a negative connotation. The second is correct. The third means "luxurious" or "extravagant", not "lust". The fourth and fifth are correct. The sixth means "admiration", with the same positive connotation as the English word. The seventh is sloth, meaning the lazy animal that climbs on trees.
I suggest this alternative list, from the Chinese Wikipedia (in the same order as above): 傲慢, 贪婪, 色欲, 愤怒, 暴食, 嫉妒, 懒惰 --Bowlhover (talk) 18:06, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
  • "A friend told me that he's planning to get a tattoo with the seven deadly sins, in various languages." Advise him not to. (talk) 20:35, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Agreed. No point in getting tattoos in foreign languages, because A) It will make it a bit difficult to get a job in some cultures, and B) They will be in languages he doesn't understand and possibly can't even identify. KägeTorä - () (もしもし!) 21:40, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
  • There are actually services to certify accuracy of tattoos! Or at least there's one. --jpgordon::==( o ) 03:54, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
  • 傲慢 superbia pride
  • 憤怒 ira wrath
  • 怠惰 acedia sloth/acedia
  • 嫉妬 invidia envy
  • 強欲 avaritia greed/avarice
  • 色欲 luxuria lust
  • 暴食 gula gluttony
  • An easy way to do this would be to go to our Seven deadly sins article (linked to above), then scroll down and look on the far left. It has a huge number of languages to choose from, presumably all written by native speakers. 08:52, 26 March 2015 (UTC)KägeTorä - () (もしもし!) 08:55, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks all! Really good advice. --Slashme (talk) 09:04, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Slashme: I strongly urge you read WP:CHINESECHARACTERTATTOO. Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 10:16, 26 March 2015 (UTC)


If you go for Latin, give all the words consistent capitalisation (some of the selections above are inconsistent), or every copyeditor you pass will want to get out a biro and write on you for the rest of your life. --Dweller (talk) 15:45, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Unless using Mediaeval Latin, in which uncials are perfectly acceptable. Rome only adopted Christianity in the 4th Century AD. KägeTorä - () (もしもし!) 16:19, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
According to our article, uncials are "written entirely in capital letters", in which case they're extremely consistent. --Dweller (talk) 16:28, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Strictly speaking in the time of uncial there were no such things as "capital and small letters". Better to say uncial was unicase (like many scripts of the East today). So our article is misleading.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 05:08, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Pronunciation of "wrath"[edit]

Lately I keep hearing people saying it to rhyme with the non-word "math". But until recently it always rhymed with "moth". In my experience, that is. What could explain this? -- Jack of Oz [pleasantries] 22:26, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

I have always rhymed it with "math". To me the word that rhymes with "moth" is "wroth", as in that which one waxes, though to be honest I've never been quite sure whether it should rhyme with "both" instead. Maybe it's just more progressive Yank contamination of the purity of the Strine language? --Trovatore (talk) 22:57, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Ah, just checked Wiktionary. "Wroth" doesn't rhyme with either "moth" or "both"; it rhymes with "cloth". --Trovatore (talk) 23:00, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
In the American Midwest, "wroth" is a homophone of the surname Roth, and rhymes with both cloth and moth. The word "wrath" comes from the same root as "wroth". (And this saved me the trouble of linking to a specific joke by Groucho on the subject.) In the American Midwest, "wrath" rhymes with bath, math and path. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:07, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
You both puzzled me. Do you in America pronounce both with the "short O" (RP /ɒ/)? Or moth and cloth with "long O" (RP //)? Bath, math and path? Could you IPA-ize your answer as I do not understand this "rhyme notation", it mostly confusing.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 05:28, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
And wiktionary features "wrath" on two lists of English rhymes: -ɒθ (with "moth") marked "UK", and -æθ (with "math") marked "one pronunciation". ---Sluzzelin talk 23:07, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
The OED allows both /rɒθ/ and /rɔːθ/ for British pronunciation, and has /ræθ/ as the US pronunciation, but the entry hasn't been updated since 1928. I've heard the pronunciation marked US used in England, and, of course, in Scotland it is usually /raθ/. Here in northern England, it rhymes with moth and cloth (/rɔθ/), not with math[s], path and hath (/haθ/). Dbfirs 08:53, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Is this a catalog? What kind of publication is Livres-Hebdo (French language help)[edit]

I'm trying to find information on a manga series for an AFD discussion. I wanted to see if this source has any bearing on notability but I'm not hopeful that it does.

Livres hebdo - Issues 547-550 - Page 100. Éditions professionelles du livre, 2004

  • See the end of this search page, See Snippet view #1 of page 100,
    "TSUKIRINO Yumi Pikachu adventures. 1. - Grenoble : Glénat. 2004. - l92p.:ill.cncoul.;18xl2cm Une nouvelle aventure de Pikachu et ses amis, prêts à tout pour devenir les meilleurs éleveurs pokémon de la planète. Lecteurs débutants ( à partir de 6 ans). Br. 7,50€ ISBN 2-7234- 3687-X 782723H36878' 00100 VANOLI"

This shows another Snippet view of page 100.

This looks like a catalog listing, but is it that, or is it "book news"? I wonder if any people familiar with France understand Livres-Hebdo and what it's reporting on. WhisperToMe (talk) 16:42, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

According to the article on this publication in the French Wikipedia, it is a weekly magazine targeted to professionals in the book publishing and distribution world, including librarians and proprietors of bookstores. It includes feature articles about new books and presumably listings of new publications. Marco polo (talk) 17:48, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
I presume that this would be a list of new publications in France. I wonder if there's a way to check which books are covered in feature articles? WhisperToMe (talk) 18:05, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Science Fiction World[edit]

Hi! I wonder if anyone has an idea if and how it might be possible to get one's hands on the magazine Science Fiction World (科幻世界) in North America. Thanks!

Duomillia (talk) 20:33, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Somehow I doubt if the market for Chinese language sci-fi magazines in NA is enough for anyone to set up a distribution system. That would leave you the option of searching for issues on e-bay, etc. StuRat (talk) 21:19, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Amazon China μηδείς (talk) 02:50, 26 March 2015 (UTC)



THANK YOU — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:36, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Here's a page with some audio files, and here's a list of resources and dictionaries. It is easier to find resources for Swahili, though according to Uganda#Languages it is not as popular in the south of the country. (By the way, it's best to turn off your caps lock when posting on the Internet; people read it as "shouting"). Lesgles (talk) 03:37, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Although I would certainly advise learning the local languages, I did spend some time in Jinja, and found that English is very widely and well spoken. Fgf10 (talk) 07:45, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Much depends on your goal. If you take all it seriously and you plan to live in the particular region for more, say, 3 months and most importantly to interact actively and routinely with the locals (not all ex-pats do this, many live in their "ex-pat districts" and speak only with their ex-pat compatriots) you may do a little effort and sign to a language course or at least to find in library or buy books on the language. But if you plan just a short trip, I wouldn't recommend study such a very local small language. Firstly, there are much less materials, very few of not at all courses available, very few natives around to practice with, all these make learning process more difficult. Second, you'd hardly learn the language properly with the problems mentioned above. Better to study lingua francas of the country. For Uganda it would be English (you know it), Swahili and (maybe) Luganda. Though Luganda is a little more "robust" language than Lusoga, it also has the quite same problems (but at a less degree). So I'd recommend to study a little Swahili to impress the locals. It the simplest of Bantu languages, it has a LOT of available resources. At least a basic phrasebook will do.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 06:06, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

The Giver[edit]

Hi I was just wondering what view Lois Lowry's the Giver was written from (3rd person? 1st person?) (talk) 02:49, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

You can read the first few pages at Google Books, which should make it pretty clear. Lesgles (talk) 03:16, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
You can also see Narration#Narrative point of view if you're having trouble with the distinction. — Ƶ§œš¹ [lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt] 03:43, 26 March 2015 (UTC)


I know that 'Tazer' is a brand name for tasers that are used by law enforcement, but I always thought that the verb was 'to tase', rather than 'to taser'. This BBC article, however, seems to disagree. Which is correct? KägeTorä - () (もしもし!) 08:43, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

My UK dictionary says that "taser" is the verb form. Tase is a back-formation based on the assumption that a Taser is "a thing that tases" - in fact the word is an acronym: "Thomas A. Swift's electric rifle". Of course, "correctness" is a slippery concept in language, especially when dealing with neologisms. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 09:52, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
And keep in mind that Tom Swift, as well as his electric rifle, are fictional.[10]Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 20:41, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Other sources checked via give the verb form as follows:
Note: By Oxford I mean whatever dictionary the web site gives you; they don't make clear which of their many print dictionaries it corresponds to. It certainly isn't the full OED. Oxford and Macmillan, like Collins, have separate American and British dictionary listings on their web site, but Collins is the only one of the three that gives different verb forms in American and British use.
-- (talk) 04:21, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
The big OED (Third Edition) in its update of 2008 has "Taser" for the verb, and also the shortened or back-formation "Tase". It doesn't recognise the "z" spellings, but it comments: "also with lower case initial". Dbfirs 08:37, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Gender-specific language[edit]

Do we know of any human society where males and females speak different languages, or different dialects of the same language? If I learn Chinese from a Chinese woman, for example, I'd probably have no trouble at all talking to Chinese men. Is there any society where this is not true, and I'd have to learn the language twice? -- (talk) 08:50, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

I seem to remember that some Australian Aborigine languages do have different 'languages' for male and female, but, of course, they understand both. I read this about 25 years ago, so I am not clear on which languages they are. KägeTorä - () (もしもし!) 09:33, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Sumerian had two distinct forms, one of which seems to have been primarily used by women. AlexTiefling (talk) 09:53, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
See Gender differences in spoken Japanese for another example, though I don't think the variations could be said to constitute different dialects. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 09:56, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Some examples (including Sumerian) are given in our article on gender role in language too, but that article probably needs quite a bit of work ("Among the Kaffir of South Africa ...") ---Sluzzelin talk 09:57, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Some more examples, mostly historical, are given in our Language and gender article (Language and gender#Gender-specific vocabulary).--William Thweatt TalkContribs 10:23, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
A really interesting case, though not quite what you're looking for, is the Tucano people, who practice what's called linguistic exogamy. The incest taboo is carried over into language identity so that men can't marry women who speak the same language. That's the idea, anyway. Tocano people are generally multilingual and there are ways of using ancestry to determine which one language a person is categorized as speaking. The differences between these languages are probably not very significant, though, and might otherwise be considered separate dialects were there not so much importance ascribed to their differences. — Ƶ§œš¹ [lɛts b̥iː pʰəˈlaɪˀt] 15:35, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
  • One phenomenon is avoidance speech where one doesn't use normal terms in the presence of certain relatives (often mothers-in-law) and uses a special, limited vocabulary. There are also examples such as the Lakota language and other Siouan languages that have Men's v Women's Speech. There are also phonetic differences that are skewed by gender, such as dropping of fnal -s in Mexican Spanish, which is associated with men, and creaky voice which is found in young female urban English speakers according to this study. There are no examples where the men and women actually speak fully different languages (outside the sort of multilingualism Auesoes mentions) as an ongoing phenomenon under normal social circumstances. μηδείς (talk) 19:20, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
See "Láadan".—Wavelength (talk) 01:58, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Can someone generate IPA pronunciation guide for me?[edit]

I'd like to add a pronunciation guide to the Grodziskie article for how to say the name. IPA mystifies me, so I'm not the best person to take a stab at it. It's a Polish word, and sounds like grew-JISK-yuh, with some extra rolling of the R. here is a youtube video with the speaker saying the word at the 1:45 mark. Thank you for any help you can provide. Neil916 (Talk) 18:07, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

See Help:IPA for Polish.—Wavelength (talk) 18:42, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
The beer is named after the town of Grodzisk Wielkopolski. In our article on the town, we give the IPA for the first part of that name as /ˈɡrɔd͡ʑisk/. Based on Help:IPA for Polish, I believe that the Polish pronunciation of the beer's name would be /ɡrɔ'd͡ʑiskʲɛ/. Marco polo (talk) 18:51, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Thank you @Marco polo:, that is helpful. Neil916 (Talk) 19:06, 26 March 2015 (UTC)