Language desk
< June 22	<< May \| June \| Jul >>	June 24 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

June 23

Iphis

How does one decline the name Iphis in Latin? I think it's a Greek name. Temerarius (talk) 05:25, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The declination of the Greek name Ἶφις depends on the gender of the bearer; the male name has (transliterated) the stem Iphi-, while the female name has the stem Iphid-. There is no fixed recipe on how a Roman author would have declined the name in either gender; depending on their background (did they know Greek?) the declination of a Greek name could be more like one might expect if the name was native Latin, or carry over some Greek aspects. Ovid uses the Greek accusative Iphin for the male name of the Cypriot shepherd. For a Cretan girl transformed into a boy Ovid initially uses the female Greek accusative Iphide but further on the male Greek vocative Iphi. Valerius Flaccus' Argonautica uses the Greek dative Iphi for a (male) Argonaut character. --Lambiam 07:56, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can I have it in Greek + Latin alphabet then? I looked it up but no soap. Temerarius (talk) 21:34, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Nokia 2.2

In what is now the second section, there is a discussion about whether to use "the" before the term "Nokia 2.2" in the article. I and another user insist on using "the" citing common practice and the fact that it sounds correct, while the other user is citing articles by English teachers saying that using "the" is inappropriate. Could someone (preferably an English teacher/professor or native English speaker) give their opinion on this and an explanation as to why whichever side is right or wrong? RedBulbBlueBlood9911Talk 07:22, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Correct: "The Nokia 2.2 runs Android"
Correct: "The Nokia 2.2 runs the Android operating system"
Correct: "Nokia [referring to the company] uses the Android operating system"
Correct: "The Nokia [referring to an individual smartphone] runs the Android operating system"

Wrong: "Nokia 2.2 runs the Android"
Wrong: "Nokia 2.2 runs Android operating system"
Wrong: "Nokia [referring to an individual smartphone] uses the Android operating system"
Wrong: "The Nokia [referring to the company] uses the Android operating system"

--Guy Macon (talk) 01:43, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The inimitable Guy Macon summed it up nicely. Are there any RS that describe this, not by way of examples, but expressed as rules? --Lambiam 10:19, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Have you looked at the?--Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:51, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also helpful:

--Guy Macon (talk) 17:24, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect: Drawing an argument from prescription and proscription.

Incorrect: There's no leeway between proper noun (Rex), common noun (the dog), and noun (dogs). Compare Wikipedia: the company, the community, the encyclopedia, the English edition, the ideal--The Wikipedia runs on PHP (imagine that, yikes)? That may be correct, but it's awfully rare.

Correct: A test that uses an adjective, "The new Nokia 2.2", would have use believe that an article is needed. But this really only shows that an article is needed, when the adjective is used.

Correct: Referential demonstratives cannot be omitted, at least not when _ adjective is used.

Correct: Uncountable nouns don't require an article, except if counted they use a determiner: Money is printed, Nokia 2.2 is in production, I have no money, no Nokia 2.2, but I have _ money and a Nokia 2.2., still though, you cannot tell what I dropped: The dollar has plummeted, I dropped my Nokia.

This is terribly confusing and the rules of the higher registers aren't universally applied. If users argue for a colloquial register, the reference to rigid, post-hoc rule sets help noone. As long as the requested reading is possible, which it is insofar "2.2" can be read as a determiner, whether or not that's your prefered reading, then it would be easy to find quotes from the text press showing that it has currency.

It has been shown that the opposing side argues from a false premisses, denying the antecedent, and should therefore loose the debate by default, as long as it can be assumed that no notable reference in existence denies that. Which is a big ask that could probably be found only in specialized literature, perhaps somewhere in the depths of CGEL, but surely not in an introduction aimed at beginners. 109.41.1.36 (talk) 17:58, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Smooth move, insulting good-faith editors with tens of thousands of edits as your 4th edit to Wikipedia. Let me know how that works out for you. --Guy Macon (talk) 22:13, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, that wasn't me; I'm not this good at fancy grammar-speak as the IP user. I do stand by my conviction, that using the definite article before companyname/modelname + model number/signifier is wrong, when used alone. It dismays me, that you have overruled me by supporting incorrect usage. My arguments on correct usage remain at Talk:Nokia 2.2, and I continue to stand by them. -Mardus /talk 04:42, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]