Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language

Welcome to the language section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

• Computing
• Entertainment
• Humanities
• Language
• Mathematics
• Science
• Miscellaneous
• Archives

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

   

How can I get my question answered?

• Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
• Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
• Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
• Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
• Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
• 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.
  • We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.

Ready? Ask a new question!

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:

• Teahouse
• Help desk
• Village pump
• Help manual

September 28

Norwegian Language Question

In World In Conflict, a WW3 wargame, there is a scenario which takes place in Northern Russia. The player's troops are backed up by some Norwegian units (which, for some reason, speak with very strong French accents). When giving orders to these units they sometimes respond in Norwegian (again with a French accent) and sometimes in English (with the same French accent). I can understand what they are saying, except for one phrase, which sounds like 'ge ge' (with hard 'g') or 'je je' ('j' as in Norwegian 'ja'). I was guessing it may be an alternative for 'ja ja' (yes, yes), but would like some confirmation. TIA! --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 15:37, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Heh, found a video of the Norwegian voices. I can't discern any French accent, though. Sounds like a Norwegian accent in English and no accent in Norwegian. I'm not sure which sound you're talking about though? (The 'j' in Norwegian 'ja' is soft, so I'm not sure how 'je je' could be 'ge ge' with a hard 'g'). If you mean what they're saying about 4 seconds in to that video, that's simply "go go" in English, albeit with a Norwegian accent. --Pykk (talk) 20:27, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Ha! Excellent! Well found! However, that is not the bit I am talking about. In the game they do indeed shout 'Go! Go!', but there is another bit where the vowel is definitely 'e' (not present in the video). Also, the reason I said French accents is not only because it does actually sound like a French accent in the English part to me, but also because the same voice (and accent) is used in the scenarios set in France with French NATO units helping out. Maybe because it's the same voice and the scenarios in France come before the ones in Norway, and my judgement may be affected by that. --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 20:46, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

As Pykk says, they speak Norwegian with no discernible accent, and English with what I would call a Norwegian accent. Perhaps they're simply saying "yeah, yeah", or maybe "ned, ned" (the d is silent)? It seems unlikely that the same voice actors did the French soldiers though, because they really sound like Norwegians. decltype (talk) 21:12, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Spelling and culture

When did spelling become a sign of being cultivated?--Quest09 (talk) 16:21, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

I think we can all agree that in any culture, in any language, prior to the last 100-200 years, anyone who was well educated was either already wealthy, or used their education to enter the upper reaches of society--in the vast majority of cases.[*] Some wealthy people were not well educated, but almost all educated people were considered cultivated to some degree, whether in Europe or Asia.

[*]In ancient Greece/Rome, slaves may have been the teachers and sometimes scholars, but even they wouldn't have been considered "uncultivated" merely because they were slaves.

--71.111.194.50 (talk) 17:46, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Nonstandard spelling for emphasis → That is trough, but to-hundrid yeres agoe, they roght lyke this. When did spelling become formalized and therefore a symbol of education (okay, writing that first sentence like that was a bad idea... Now I'm having trouble spelling properly). --Falconus^{p t c} 19:45, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Edit: when doesn't answer the question... I should have asked "why" was spelling formalized? --Falconus^{p t c} 19:48, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Back then many people misspelled on purpose because it was "cool"—in fact, one of the theories on where "okay" came from is based on this.

As for language standardization, it has many reasons. The reasons often have to do with nationalism, national unity, or economic development, although of course there are others. Wikipedia's article on Language standardization is woefully lacking in anything useful, but some books that are good, accessible treatments of this subject and should be available in a local library include Peter Trudgill's Sociolinguistics and John McWhorter's The Power of Babel. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 20:07, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi Quest09, I did a quick search for stories in which someone who uses nonstandard spelling gets criticized. The earliest reference I've found so far is frm 1815 (Guy Mannering, [1]). Hopefully other editors can weigh in with earlier examples. (There are plenty in the Victorian era, for example, Vanity Fair, 1847 [2] or Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, 1884 [3], but I know you want the earliest.) English orthography says spelling was standardized between 1650 and 1800, so I imagine this cultural attitude originated in that period too. Best, WikiJedits (talk) 20:59, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm wondering whether the premise of the question is a little flawed. Being able to spell (to whatever degree of "correctness") is an inherent part of being able to read and write. There was a time when being able to read and write was not the norm, being restricted to the clergy and some members of the aristocracy. Later, it spread to the general populace. They were taught to spell as part of being taught to read and write; some teaching was rudimentary, which leads to people making it up as they go along with unfamiliar words or words they've never seen written. Nobody is ever taught to spell incorrectly, but they can be incorrectly taught to spell. Even today, some people come out of a number of years of school with low-grade spelling skills. In some cases, there's a learning difficulty at work; but in the majority of cases, the teaching is at fault. That can apply as much to a "cultivated person" as to someone else, but there's probably a correlation between the degree of one's "cultivation" (however one defines that) and the quality of the schooling their parents can afford. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:42, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

@71.111: your answer doesn't make any sense to me. Thank to the rest.Quest09 (talk) 15:06, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

It's not about spelling 'correctly' per se but rather being able to communicate in an intelligible form. This I'm sure has always been esteemed. Vranak (talk) 01:14, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't know if being able to spell is such an inherent part of being able to read and write . . . yes, the way you spell has to be close enough to the "accepted" spelling, if such a thing exists, that people can figure out what you mean, but there was literacy before there was such a thing as standardized spelling. Look at Chaucer and the other writers of his day, and isn't it true that Shakespeare was even known to spell his own name different ways on different occasions? Until reference works such as dictionaries were there to standardize things, spelling simply wasn't considered that big a deal. Nowadays, it often seems that a person's ability to spell doesn't necessarily correlate to his or her intelligence, general literacy, or even writing ability. (How many brilliant writers would be lost without their copyeditors?) - AJ

This is an interesting question, and one which deserves somewhat deeper analysis than perhaps the OP intended. Orthographical orthodoxy, i.e. conformity to the accepted norms of spelling, is a signature of conformity to the norms of spelling, typically as set out by the various definitives editions of dictionaries by which languages are determined, and is no more an indicator of cultivation (here presumably implying erudition and general savvy) than any other manifestation of conformity. The primary advantages are of utility, since it potentially removes a number of degrees of misunderstanding or ambiguity from the written intention, so that a well-formed lexical block can be more easily comprehended. An unorthodoxly formed word in a sentence will possibly have the reader pondering as to meaning, and since the point of writing is almost invariably to convey meaning, one is tempted at this point to exclaim, "Aha! Eureka, QED!". The downside to this is of course that the progress and direction of language under the thumb of dirigisme tends to be much abated since the uptake of new or variant spellings and neologisms tend to be checked in their stride by the mortmain of lexicography. Moreover much dead wood accrues over time; the English language is still hamstrung with any number of Dr Johnson's pronouncements on the orthodoxy, and if orthodoxy was not culturally enforceable the commonplace spelling of through would now almost certainly be thru, etc. Some would argue this a good thing. Some wouldn't. Sjc (talk) 03:35, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

September 29

Crash Dive

what is crash dive? I changed it to crash-dive174.3.110.93 (talk) 00:15, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I imagine a "crash dive" is what is described in the article called Crash dive. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 01:04, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Difference

What's the difference between "?!" and "!?"? Jc iindyysgvxc (talk) 10:10, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

"?!" --> a very emphatic question, or a question that's really more of an emphatic statement

"!?" --> expression of astonishment with an added questioning tone --71.111.194.50 (talk) 12:05, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Do you have a source for that? I don't think such a distinction is widely used. The distinction in chess punctuation between ?!=dubious move and !?=interesting move is fairly well established, though. Algebraist 12:10, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't have a source, but I agree with the distinction as described. It needs to be added that any combination of two or more "!" or "?" marks is only an informal usage; in "proper" writing only one mark is allowed. See also interrobang. --Anonymous, 20:35 UTC, September 29, 2009.

mirror under car

Security guards at hotels use a long-handled mirror to check under cars for bombs. Is there a name for this kind of mirror? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.93.39.152 (talk) 17:11, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

"Bomb search security mirror", according to these guys who sell them. --Sean 18:24, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

--Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.93.20.216 (talk) 07:12, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

A mirror like that could have any number of uses. Where can I get one? →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 12:29, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

He He, you could use it to see where your voice is coming from. Caesar's Daddy (talk) 16:13, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

That's a good one. Just don't give up the day job. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 17:30, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Note: Caesar[4] was apparently 61.95.140.188 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) before creating his user ID. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 12:59, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Such a tool is a great help if you're an Official Kilt Inspector ...

DaHorsesMouth (talk) 20:55, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Aye, and especially for all the bonnie lasses in Riverdance. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 12:57, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Genitive case for possessive pronouns in Russian

I'm confused here. In the table of "possessive pronouns" it has categories for the nominative (my apple is ruined), accusative (the dog ruined my apple), dative (the dog used its teeth to ruin my apple), etc. What confuses me here is the inclusion of a separate pronoun for the genitive case. As I recall (and some en.wp research confirms), the genitive case refers to possession with nouns (my apple was ruined). So wouldn't all possessive pronouns be modifying something in the genitive case? (This is probably going to be a difficult question, because the answer will reveal my complete misunderstanding of grammatical cases and raise about eighteen more questions) ZS 16:52, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

In the genitive construction denoting possession, it's the possessor who is in genitive, not the other way around (apple of mine was ruined, using your example). So, possessive pronouns replace this genitive, whereas the noun which governs the pronoun may be in an arbitrary case. — Emil J. 17:02, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Could you take the tables from the page I linked and replace the Russian pronouns with English ones/examples of their use? I can't find a table anywhere. ZS 17:13, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Try these

• "my apple is red" - nominative: моя яблока ...
• "she ate my apple" - accusative: ... мою яблоку
• "the colour of my apple is red" - genitive: свет моей яблоки ...
• "the mouse approached my apple" - dative: мыс <verb governing dative case> к моей яблоки (in this case, "my apple" is accusative/objective in English, but dative in Russian)
• "thanks to my apple, which was rotten, I have a stomach ache" - instrumental: ... моей яблоки ...
• "the worm was in my apple" - prepositional: ... в моей яблоки.

It would be a little clearer with masculine examples, where there's more variety in the case endings. -- JackofOz (talk) 20:59, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Яблоко is neuter, not feminine, and you have tons of other mistakes. Here's the corrected version:

• "my apple is red" - nominative: моē яблокo ...
• "she ate my apple" - accusative: ... моē яблокo (for neuter/inanimate it's the same as nominative)
• "the colour of my apple is red" - genitive: цвет моего яблока ...
• "the mouse approached my apple" - dative: "мышь подошла к моему яблоку" (preposition к requires dative)
• "thanks to my apple, which was rotten, I have a stomach ache" (this is not instrumental)
• This is instrumental: "I hit it with my apple": "Я ударил его моим яблоком"
• "the worm was in my apple" - prepositional: ... в моём яблоке.

--Ornil (talk) 04:13, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Ouch! I was rustier than I dared fear. Sorry. I've struck it out now. -- JackofOz (talk) 12:27, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Yiddish

Is the Yiddish translitteration at Komtsukunft correct? --Soman (talk) 21:44, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes. HOOTmag (talk) 01:04, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

thanks, --Soman (talk) 18:01, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

It's my pleasure. HOOTmag (talk) 19:58, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

September 30

Grammar Help

When adding the word "a" in front of the word "utopia:", should it be "a utopia" or "an utopia"?

Also, "When the clap of hands can summon a car..." is that sentence correct? Should "clap" be plural or "hands" be singular or something? 128.84.73.54 (talk) 01:08, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

It should be "a", because 'utopia' is actually pronounce with a consonant at the beginning (it's "yutopia"). Just like you would say "a use of this program...." rather than "an use...".

The second sentence is absolutely fine. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 01:12, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Regarding Utopia: As Rjanag indicated, it depends on the way you pronounce the word. For example, most of the speakers say "horse" as it's written, i.e. they pronounce the "h", so they say "a horse", but some speakers, mainly British and Australians (at least some of them), don't pronounce the "h", so they say "an horse" (i.e.: /an ors/), and there's even an Australian Indie pop band - named An Horse.

Regarding clap of hands: you've asked whether "clap" should be plural or "hands" be singular. I really don't know why you ask about that. Is it really a grammatical question (as you've put it)? Can there ever be, physically, a clap of one hand? I know of a very famous Kōan asking about the sound made by a clap of one hand... However, maybe you've asked about the plural/singular, because you remember the song The Hand Clap, in which "hand" must be singular, but note that when the word "clap" comes first (with "of") - then "hands" must be plural, just because of the physical nature, rather than of grammar rules!

HOOTmag (talk) 10:53, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

/an ors/ sounds very English and very un-Australian to me. We might sometimes say, e.g. "three orses", but never, in my experience, "an ors", always "a horse". -- JackofOz (talk) 12:23, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Have you ever heard of the Australian Indie pop band: An Horse? HOOTmag (talk) 12:25, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Why, yes. I read about it not 10 minutes ago, on this very page. In this very thread, to be exact. Just up above. But it's not meant to represent a pair of words that anyone actually uses in normal parlance. It's either "a horse" or /an ors/. Bands can make up any names they like; they don't have to represent reality.-- JackofOz (talk) 12:35, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

May the singers be of British ancestry? Maybe... HOOTmag (talk) 12:44, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Probably. Their surnames are Cooper and Cox. But maybe you're looking too hard for a logical explanation of the band's name. Where's the logic behind "Frenzal Rhomb", for example? Or thousands of other band names that were completely made up from bits and pieces of scrap language. -- JackofOz (talk) 12:57, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

I definitely agree with you that proper names are not committed to any rules. However, this does not mean that there is no explanation behind the name (including your name and my name). Anyways, I haven't been looking for any logical explanation, but rather for a sociological (or rather: socio-ethnic) explanation. If their surnames are Cooper and Cox then that may explain better why they call themselves "an horse". HOOTmag (talk) 16:47, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Autopia: where the souls of good cars go when they are scrapped. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:49, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Neither of the questions is as trivial as might appear to some (but not to those who are answering it here).

A clap of hands should take a singular verb, just like "a clap of thunder". The reason that it's not so obvious is that in phrases such as "a majority of voters", sometimes one would use the singular and sometimes the plural form of a verb. I should probably write, "a majority of voters believes" but often write "a majority of voters believe".

And historically, as has been pointed out above, "an", "mine" and "thine" were often used not only before incontrovertible vowels, but also before occasional or semi-consonants like "h", "u" and "y", as in "an heraldic achievement" or "Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord". —— Shakescene (talk) 23:13, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

"an" before a word beginning with a "u" - is trivial, e.g. "an umbrella". If you mean "an" (or "mine") before a word which begins with a "u" pronounced like "you", then I'll appreciate any example for this. Similary, I'll be glad if you give any example for "an" (or "mine") before a word which begins with a "y", or with any semi-vowel pronounced like /y/. Good luck. HOOTmag (talk) 00:11, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Spelling is irrelevant, what matters in pronunciation. In English spelling, the letter "u" can be /ʌ/ ("an ugly face"), /ju/ ("a user"), or /u/ ("an über party"). What determines the a/an alternation is not the spelling, it's the presence or absence of a consonant in the pronunciation. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 00:29, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

And about the "semi-consonants".... "eyes" does not begin with any of the sounds you specified, it begins with a fine vowel. And /h/ is not a semi-consonant; it's a regular consonant that happens to be unpronounced in some words in some dialects of English. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 00:33, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I hadn't previously encountered the "h" of English orthography referred to as a "semi-consonant". Rather, at the start of a word either stands for a consonant (as in the standard pronunciation of "heresy") or it's nothing (as in the standard pronunciation of "honor"). (For simplicity's sake, let's avoid mention of glottal stops.) A heresy, an honor. If you don't pronounce "h" at the front of "history", then "an history" is fine; if you do pronounce it but nevertheless precede it with "an", you surprise me, but I hesitate to say that you're wrong. Incidentally, if we're using IPA here, then mention of /y/ comes as a surprise; surely /j/ was intended. -- Hoary (talk) 00:41, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, they meant /j/. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 00:43, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

OK, I'm certainly no scholar and I didn't mean to use "semi-consonant" (which I know has another meaning) in a misleading way. It's just that simple inspection won't tell one if the pronunciation of "herb" or "union" or "YPSL" starts an "h" or "y" sound. Union does, and (for the uninitiated) "YPSL" (contrary to intuition) is pronounced and sometimes spelt "Yipsel", while Britons generally pronounce the "h" in "herb" and Americans don't. There are several words which are now pronounced with a leading "h" like "heraldic", which I think once were not, so one does see "an herald" and "an heraldic achievement". But I'm uncertain whether this is an accurate explanation, or whether something else is at play. —— Shakescene (talk) 00:56, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

P.S. other commonly-encountered examples are "an heroic achievement" and "an historic event". —— Shakescene (talk) 00:58, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

It seems to have something to do with where the principal stress falls. "A history" vs. "an historic event". "A hero" vs. "an heroic achievement". The fact that the h is sounded in all these words doesn't seem to come into it. -- 202.142.129.66 (talk) 03:03, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

The 'h' isn't pronounced in all of these words, for many speakers. For speakers who pronounce the h, it's often "a historic", "a heroic"—again, what determines a/an is whether 'h' is pronounced (I don't know of anyone who would say "an Historic" with a pronounced 'h'...it would always be "an istoric"). Principal stress can influence whether it's pronounced (i.e., speakers may be more likely to drop 'h' in unstressed syllables), but it doesn't directly determine the a/an alternation. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 03:42, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Like the previous poster-but-one, I've heard an aspirated (pronounced) "h" in "an historic event", and almost never "an istoric event". The logical is that "an utopian society" is conceivable, and it got one vote out of ten when this question was asked at Yahoo! Answers earlier this year. I'm trying to remember my classical Latin pronunciation of "u": would the ancient Romans have pronounced "Cuba" as we do ["Kyooba"], or as the Cubans do ["Koooba"]? (Although the idea of Utopia, meaning "nowhere", comes not, of course, from Rome but from Sir Thomas More's 16th-century book.) Searching for "an utopia" on Google yields tens of thousands of positive results, including "an utopia", "an utopian society", "an utopian dream", "an Utopian fantasy", "an Utopian subject" and "an utopian village". In 1821, Thomas Jefferson wrote in a personal letter, "Mine, may after all be an Utopian dream, but being innocent, I have thought I might indulge in it until I go to the land of dreams, and sleep there with the dreamers of all past and future times." (Jefferson's secrets:death and desire at Monticello, by Andrew Burstein, page 81.) In 1811, James Henry Lawrence wrote The Empire of the Nairs, or The Rights of Women, an Utopian Romance, in twelve books (Sorry if these Google book links don't work for others; it's hard to distinguish what parts of those URL's are specific to me or my search.) The best answer for today is probably still "a Utopia" and "a Utopian", which is what I'd write myself, but the alternative is far from unknown or absurd. —— Shakescene (talk) 06:07, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

The letter "u" is pronounced in Latin (and in most of european languages) like "oo", and when Thomas Jefferson wrote (almost two centuries ago): "an utopian dream" he must have said "utopian" in its latinized pronunciation, i.e. like: ootopian. Regarding the minority of people who write on the internet "an utopia": we must, first of all, inquire whether they're native English speakers, and whether they pronounce "utopia" like: you-topia, rather than how it's pronounced in most of european languages, i.e. ootopia. Google doesn't tell us how the pronounce what they write...

The minority of people who pronounce /an historic/ are probably influenced - sub-conciously - by the two legitimate ways of pronouncing the word "historic": they've heard both /a historic/ and /an istoric/, so they - sub-conciously - mix both ways and say: /an historic/. Anyways, I'm sure that every educated person says either /a historic/ or /an istoric/, but never: /an historic/.

HOOTmag (talk) 08:36, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to upset your apple cart, but I'm very well educated and I always say "an historic", always sounding the h. -- JackofOz (talk) 08:45, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

So you're an extraordinary educated person... :)

Anyways, I'm sure that when you say /an historic/ you're influenced by the more common ways of pronunciation you generally hear: /an istoric/ and /a historic/.

HOOTmag (talk) 08:50, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Again, I have to disagree. I don't know where your "sure"ness comes from, but it doesn't take into account me and my people. It may not be so true of the younger generation (many of whom seem to think "a <glottal stop> apple a day ..." sounds euphonious), but Australians of my generation have always said "an historic event", "an heroic achievement", "an hypnotic suggestion", "an heptagonal object", "an heraldic device", "an hospitable household", "an hereditary condition", "an historian", "an holistic approach", and so on for h-words that have their stress on the 2nd syllable and sound the 'h'. As soon as the stress moves to the 3rd syllable, the article becomes "a": "a horizontal alignment", "a hierarchical structure", etc. Which is why I, when I was masquerading as 202.142.129.66 (above), said it's a stress-related phenomenon. Certainly in my neck of the woods anyway. -- JackofOz (talk) 09:08, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

A friend of mine, who is Australian, would say: "please white for me" (or rather, this is what my non-australian ears hear), but I've never heard him say /an historic/ etc. However, one single friend can't base a testimony, while what you always hear from (all of?) the Australians of your generation - is definitely a clear proof. Anyways, this property of the australian accent, of which I haven't been aware, is quite interesting. HOOTmag (talk) 09:49, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Keep in mind the likeliness of divergences between Australian basilect(s) and acrolect(s). -- Hoary (talk) 10:36, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Would you like to add more details about how all of that relates to the /an historic/ issue? HOOTmag (talk) 10:48, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

No, I merely point out that /wait/ vs /weit/ (both in extremely loose quasi IPA) and "an" vs "a" historic may be matters of sociolect within Australia. -- Hoary (talk) 13:12, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, JackofOz has already pointed out that there's a difference between the youth and the adults, however I want him to tell us whether this phenonemon is really general - among the adults (of his age) - in Australia. HOOTmag (talk) 15:01, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't claim that all Aussies of my generation speak this way, but it's certainly the norm in my sociolect. As for the Lect twins, Basil and Acro, they visit each other so often and have adopted so many of each other's mannerisms that it's become really hard to tell who comes from where. You're just as likely to find a city-dweller speaking in what once might have been called a "coarse country manner", as you are to find a farmer who has two degrees, regularly goes to the big smoke to attend the opera and ballet, and speaks in a "refined" way. /weit/ (wite) for /wait/ has become common across all sociolects, but again, it tends to occur in younger people. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:04, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

As for /an historic/ etc., your testimony is very important.

As for "wait" pronounced like "white", some weeks ago I heard the Prime Minister of New Zealand (whose people's accent is clearly influenced by the Australian accent) say on TV: "expla-nigh-tion", although he isn't young, but - as you've said - the phenonemon has probably become common across all sociolects (although it's more common among the youth, and I mention again that he's just a New-Zealander, not an Australian, and there may be a difference between the two peoples, of course).

HOOTmag (talk) 18:14, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

The NZ accent "is clearly influenced by the Australian accent"??? Once again, you seem to be forming opinions (nothing wrong with that) and assuming they represent the truth (a very risky business). It's almost a matter of honour among Australians to regard the typical NZ accent as extremely weird. And probably vice-versa, but I'll let them speak for themselves. I'm serious - some New Zealanders are virtually incomprehensible to Australians (and probably vice-versa again). There may be some aspects of it that sound like the Australian accent, but that's because they share some of the same basic origins, not because we influenced each other to any significant degree. NZ and OZ have developed quite independently, in historical and cultural terms. They had the option of joining the federation back prior to 1901, but opted out. And that's the closest we've ever come to any sort of unity. Our very different accents reflect that. But people from the US often think that the Australian accent sounds like Cockney (which we think is completely risible), so I guess it's not surprising they can see Australian-NZ connections that, to us, are non-existent. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I know that a New Zealander will thank you for mistaking him or her for an Australian about as much as a Canadian appreciates being taken for an American (U.S.), an Irishman appreciates being considered English, an Austrian or Swiss likes being taken for a German, or a Belgian likes being thought of as French (or Dutch). But did Australians and New Zealanders serve together in the ANZACs (Australian and New Zealand Army Corps) or only in strictly-separated units? The British and American armies during World War I and World War II served to acquaint many soldiers with vastly-different accents that at first they were incapable of understanding (Appalachian & Brooklynese, or Cockney, Scouse and Glaswegian). —— Shakescene (talk) 22:21, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I'd have to check, not being a military historian's bootlace, but I've never heard of Australians and New Zealanders serving together in the same units. We had our commanders, they had theirs, and we were jointly answerable to the British. -- JackofOz (talk) 00:45, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

The Aussies and the Kiwis are different peoples, each of which has a different characteristic (including a different accent/speech, of course), as I've aleady pointed out at the end of my previous response; Everybody is supposed to know that, and you don't have to declare "I'm serious" when you tell us that: "some New Zealanders are virtually incomprehensible to Australians (and probably vice-versa again)". Of course, just as some Canadians are incomprehensible to Americans, and some Irish or Scots are incomprehensible to British in the south, etc. No surprise. However, Australians and New-Zealanders share some common typical properties of speech, unknown outside the Australian continent, e.g. saying "expla-nigh-tion" etc. Since this phenonemon (of saying "expla-nigh-tion" etc.) is more common among the youth (according to your testimony), then it's clearly caused by an influence (the Kiwis being probably influenced by the Aussies), rather than by the common origin of both peoples. HOOTmag (talk) 23:25, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I accept most of that. The "nigh" for "nay" sound was considered a hallmark of the typical (to outsiders) Australian for a certain period, and Australian actors in films of the 1940s-1960s would regularly use it; possibly because the film-makers instructed them to sound echt-Australian for the benefit of US/UK ears. It was always more typical of country Australians than city Australians. City Australians have always represented a far higher proportion of the population than their country cousins, as we're one of the most highly urbanised nations on the planet. But despite that, a mythology developed that the only "true Australians" were the country folk, the city people being relatively limp-wristed lily-livered namby-pambies (and some of them are, but not typically). Hence, the "real" Australian accent was the way the country people spoke, and anyone who wasn't interested in farming, mechanical things, animals etc had little to contribute. This cultural mythology became so widespread that many Australians came to believe it themselves. It was certainly the image we often put out to the rest of the world, and to a degree, still do. Hence the frequent questions from foreigners about whether cars on busy metropolitan freeways have to take their chances with kangaroos, and how come nobody's wearing hats with corks hanging from them (I have never in my life seen one of them except in cartoons etc). The Sydney 2000 Olympics opened up a lot of eyes to what this country and its people are actually like. This city/country divide was expressed beautifully in Banjo Paterson's Clancy of the Overflow - see particularly verses 5-7. Off set, actors usually spoke quite differently, except perhaps for people like Chips Rafferty. Then we decided to stop thinking that anything slightly more educated than 2nd grade language was a sign of obvious homosexuality (but many Aussies still stumble over unfamiliar words of more than 2 syllables, and take a certain pride in doing so, because it's still dangerous in some quarters to be seen to be too articulate). The mingling of city and country accents has gone on at a furious pace, and younger people, who are always more open to language change than older people, have tended to take on the formerly banished "nigh" for "nay". But the influence you speak of is one that the Australian and New Zealand accents acquired or developed jointly, not because one necessarily influenced the other. At least, I've never heard of any evidence that that's the case. -- JackofOz (talk) 00:45, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I understand very well your argument, taking us back to the 40s-60s (is there any earlier evidence for saying "nigh" for "nay" among Aussies?), and it sounds to me quite consistent. However, I'm still looking for any evidence (rather than a consistent argument) which may support your claim that saying "nigh" for "nay" is a trait which: "the Australian and New Zealand accents acquired or developed jointly". HOOTmag (talk) 11:39, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

The BBC tend to prefer "an historic". News presenters who most certainly pronounce their "h"s often use this formulation, which has always grated on me. Of course, it could be that their autocues are written by people who don't pronounce the "h" in "historic". A quick Google of the BBC website shows slightly more uses of "an historic" than "a historic" (6,610 vs. 5,410, although some of each are quotes). Warofdreams talk 12:15, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

I am English/British, mid-30s, well-educated (grammar school, university etc.). I have quizzed two others, both of same age and educational background (though one was brought up in Scotland). It turns out that all three of us say "an historic event" but "a history". Two of us say "a heroic act" and "a hero" while one says "an heroic act" and "a hero".62.25.109.195 (talk)

Latin phrase: "He loves the wine and the dog"

As per the title, I recall hearing (or reading) this Latin phrase that translates to "[He] loves the wine and the dog". However, google comes up with nothing. Can anyone help? Thanks, decltype (talk) 12:13, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Sounds like a phrase from the first chapter of a textbook, to help you learn the accusative. How about "vinum et canem amat" or "Vinum canemque amat". Adam Bishop (talk) 13:17, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Latin textbook, eh? I have never owned one of those. decltype (talk) 18:06, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

October 1

Roman Emperors' names

I'm searching for a reliable resource giving the meaning of the names of Roman Emperors. For example: Gaius Julius Caesar Augustus Germanicus (Caligula) =

• Gaius > variant form of Caius;
• Julius > from gens Iulia, supposed to have descended from Julus;
• Caesar > given name of unknown etruscan origin;
• Augustus > means majestic, venerable;
• Germanicus > ethnic name (from Germany);
• Caligula > the diminutive form of caliga, means little soldier's boot.
  

Some of them are easy to find: Aemilianus (from Emilia, Claudius (lame), Flavius (blonde), Lucius (light), Marcus (Mars), Quintus (fifth), Septimius (seventh), Severus (serious).
Others are instead quite difficult: Anicius, Egnatius, Eparchius, Galerius, Messius, Numerius, Olybrius, Trebonianus. --151.51.24.225 (talk) 19:50, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Most of them are simply Roman family names (like "Julius" in your example above) or other names that were passed down in families, and didn't really have any particular "meaning" to the people who bore them. Some would seem to derive from place names—for instance, Egnatius from the town of Egnatia (modern Monopoli) in Apulia and Trebonianus from Trebia (modern Trevi) in Umbria. "Eparchius" doubtless derives from Greek ἔπαρχος, "provincial governor". I'm not aware of any works dealing with the etymology of Roman personal names, but if they exist, I'm sure someone will be along to tell you what they are. Deor (talk) 21:14, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that's exactly what I'm asking: the etymology of the names of Roman Emperors. To be more precise, I've problems with: Anicius Annius Arrius Avitus Boionius Calvinus (from bald?) Carinus Carus Cocceius Commodus Diadumenianus Didius Galba Galerius Geta Herennius Libius (from Libia?) Messius Nepos Nero Nerva Numerianus/Numerius (from number?) Olybrius Opellius Otho Pertinax Pupienus Sabbatius Trebonianus Ulpius Vibius Vitellius (from calf?) Volusianus. --151.51.24.225 (talk) 22:12, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Some of them are just words. Carus (and Carinus) = dear, commodus = happy, Nepos = grandson, pertinax = stubborn. Ulpius probably has something to do with "wolf". Some are place or ethnic names; Boionius looks like the Roman name for Bologna, Geta might be related to the Goths (not all of them are Latin names, per se). Adam Bishop (talk) 00:06, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Some more: Avitus, assuming it is just from the regular word, means grandfatherly; Diadumenianus or Diadumenus is "wearing a diadem"; Galba means either a kind of worm, or the Gallic word for fat (according to Suetonius); and Nero was a Sabine word meaning "strong". Carus, Nepos, Pertinax, Boionius, and Geta are as I said before. We could speculate on the others, since they often look like Latin words, but with words and names, looks can be deceiving. Adam Bishop (talk) 04:30, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Lewis & Short's dictionary says that there's an explanation of how the praenomen Numerius was introduced into the Flavian gens in the epitome known as "Paulus ex Festo" (by Paul the Deacon), a work which I unfortunately don't have at hand. Numerius was the name of a gens as well, though. Otho was of Etruscan descent, so it's probable that his name had an origin in that language. Deor (talk) 06:04, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Note that Germanicus is an ethnic name in that it derives from Germania, but it doesn't mean his ancestors were German. His grandfather got the name because of his military actions against the Germans. 99.166.95.142 (talk) 16:11, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

October 2

Use of IPA for general purposes

A question regarding the International Phonetic Alphabet: has there ever been any serious advocacy for completely replacing an existing writing system with the IPA? For example, someone saying that we should be using it (or at least, the appropriate characters of it) in daily life to write the English language. What with attempts like the Shavian alphabet and so forth, I can't help thinking that somewhere, a believer in English spelling reform must have looked at the IPA and said: "why not?". Or for that matter, someone might want every language to use the IPA, so as to create a universal script that could be understood by all. If people believe in a universal language, after all, they might believe in a universal writing system.

And regardless of motives: if there have been attempts to promote IPA for general use, has anyone actually produced substantial chunks of written work using it? Written a book in it, for example, or transcribed a Shakespeare play? (I mean, someone seems to have done it for Klingon, after all...)

Please note that I'm not claiming that any of the above would be sensible, or for that matter, asking whether it would be sensible (I can see several problems already). I'm just wondering if anyone has had a go at it. -- 203.97.105.173 (talk) 12:53, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

In answer to your second question, the phonetics journal Maître Phonétique was formerly written entirely in IPA, and other works with phoneticians as the primary intended audience may have been as well. +Angr 13:05, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Here is someone looking to use IPA from Wiktionary entries to transcribe Project Gutenberg texts. Nadando (talk) 00:11, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

The issue of use of IPA for general purposes (or atleast the impotantance of it) has always been an issue for alomost all linguists (as they also hold various phonologocal theories).

The problem now as it is, for example, the word ‘cat’ does not represent its actual pronunciation of /kæt/ and then the question on whether such IPA transcription is still a palatalized dialect or is the formal English. These kinds of problems can however only get worse if a language has to be written in the IPA that is in the experimental stages (i.e. more arbitrariness than in the conventional graphemes as they are).

Another misconception in the linguistic literature is the classification of the orthography of a language whether it is based on alphabet or script or on the question about what distinguishes an orthography from alphabets and scripts. I think there are only few languages that are based on scripts and the rests are based on alphabets (but they can be of abugidas).

Are these correct?

Nevill Fernando (talk) 04:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but none of that makes any sense. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 05:10, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

In West Africa I think there have been several languages without well established written forms (bible tracts & the like but not much history of literacy outside that), which may have gone through several orthographies (sometimes marketed by different Christian sects), where a later reformed orthography was based on the IPA. In Togo, for example, you have ɛ, ɔ, ŋ, ʃ, ɣ, and in some languages ʊ and ɩ, though still y for [j] and j for [dʒ], and maybe c for [tʃ]? I don't know much about the details. kwami (talk) 06:58, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

As a sidenote I'm looking seriously at IPA for Text to Speech representation at the moment; Wiktionary has a goodish %age of the words with IPA representation :) This is admittedly a horribly vexed subject though and I am already seeing the issues with IPA as a model. Sjc (talk) 13:06, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Unless your TTS project needs to handle multiple languages, i'd just stick with a phonemic alphabet instead of a phonetic one. That way you could avoid dealing with allophones and unused phones, among other things. Indeterminate (talk) 10:56, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

CV Objective

Hello there, I am writing an objective of my current CV. The job advertisement mentions that it is an agent of Faber-Castell Manufacturing company. At the bottom of page it states itself as rapidly growing organization and the position is written like, "Asst. Managers / Executives (Human Resources). So, I am bit confused in writing objective. I have prepared some precise objectives below:

• Asst. Managers / Executives (Human Resources) position of an established company.

• Asst. Managers / Executives (Human Resources) position of an established organisation.

• Asst. Manager / Executive (Human Resources) position of an established company.

• Asst. Manager / Executive (Human Resources) position of an established organisation.

Which one I should write in objective section? Thanks in advance--119.30.36.51 (talk) 12:54, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't follow. What do you mean by an "objective" in the context of your CV? If you mean something like "the kind of job I want to work in", then that is really not something that you should be including in your CV. A CV is a purely factual document which lays out your experience, education and qualifications. Besides which, if those words you quote are in the job advert, then you really shouldn't be quoting the same words in your application. It would just look like you're copying them because it's the kind of thing they are looking for, not because you're the right person for the job. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 13:42, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

@Richardrj: it sounds like he's asking about a resume, rather than a CV.

@119.30.36.51: Richardrj is right that you should write out your objective in your own words, rather than just parroting the language of the advertisement. As for which wording to use... well, it shouldn't be in plural (ie, it shouldn't be "Executives) because you don't want to be more than one executive—you're just one person. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 14:28, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Huh? A resumé is the same thing as a CV. My point stands; you don't put career objectives on a resumé. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 15:12, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

In Europe, the terms are often used interchangeably, but there is a distinction (which I think is more common in the US): a CV is longer and is basically a record of everything, so you're more likely to have it just sitting around (for example, on your personal website), whereas a résumé you create specifically for a particular job application and is thus shorter, and more targeted, and often doesn't list as much (for example, not as much educational background, not as many past jobs, etc.). Often, academic positions care more about a CV and industrial positions care more about a résumé. And is is common on résumés to begin with a one-line objective (such as "to attain a job in bla bla bla..."). For instance, template resumes in Microsoft Word / OpenOffice / etc. sometimes include an "objective" field. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 15:34, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

@Rjanag: I understand the point. I previously mentioned this type objective in several resume and they were successful (got interview call but did not go due to personal reason). Should I only mention Asst. Manager or Executive (Human Resources) or both? What about organisation and company, which one I should pick?--119.30.36.34 (talk) 16:33, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Company is probably better, assuming that the place where you're applying is a company (it's always good to do your background research before submitting an application). As for assistant manager or executive, that depends on the circumstances of the application, the job offering, what you are applying for, etc. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 18:32, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

The job offering was Asst. Managers/ Executives (Human Resources) (It was written in the advertisement). So my final objective for resume is:

• Asst. Manager / Executive (Human Resources) position of an established company (correct me if I am mistaken)

--119.30.36.34 (talk) 19:18, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

That's awfully vague. It would be better if you could write something in your own words. Just telling them that you want the job you're applying for doesn't give them much new information. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 19:23, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Even it's awfully vague I will use this statement as it is precise. But bit confused with Asst. Manager and Executive. Should I only write

• Asst. Manager (Human Resources) position of an established company

or

• Executive (Human Resources) position of an established company

or

• Asst. Manager / Executive (Human Resources) position of an established company

Thanks--119.30.36.34 (talk) 20:14, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

That's up to you to choose. Wikipedia is not a career advice column and we can't write your resume for you. I think I've answered as much as I can. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 21:17, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I did not ask you to write my resume. I prepared it by myself but got stuck in some point and seek help from here. Of course, it's about nothing but language (grammar).--119.30.36.37 (talk) 08:45, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Well it's really about the terms used by that particular company. Why not research further? Possibly "Executive Assitant Manager" if that is what they call the post? Like other responders, I advise writing in your own words and doing some research. It tells the employer that you are really interested in them and not just filling in forms at random. Dbfirs 05:07, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I need help writing a romantic letter - a clever one

My bf and I are having problems and we are arguing a lot. I want to tell him that I want to work things out and start all over again and fall in love again. There are so many things going wrong in his life like family and work. Every time I try to help him or give him words of wisdom and support, he just get frustrated and negative and says that I just don't understand. I am not good with words.

I need help writing a letter to him explaining to him how much I love him and support him still but I am HORRIBLE with this. Please help me type the perfect love letter! I am desperate for all you experienced writers out there! Maybe even give me an example of a famous writer --Reticuli88 (talk) 13:08, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Abelard and Heloise. Adam Bishop (talk) 13:28, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I would say don't try to be too clever and take lots of suggestions. Something coming from you will mean more than the cleverest copied prose. Why not just say that you find it difficult to write, and then basically put what you wrote here, but directed to him. That kind of writing from the heart really tells; when I read what you say I know you mean it, and I'm sure he will too. I hope everything works out for you both. -- Q Chris (talk) 15:04, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I am a serious writer. I could probably put together some witty, poignant little thing for you and get it done before lunch. But I won't. Because something honest and heartfelt that truly comes from you will get the job done much more effectively. I felt your sincerity in the simple, true words you poured out asking for help, not trying to be clever or pull any fancy verbal maneuvers. I was deeply moved, not because you committed some marvel of eloquence but because you spoke from a place of love and need, and so I understood with that part of me that's been there myself. That's the part of your boyfriend that you want to touch - you're not trying to tickle his intellect. Be yourself. Be vulnerable - if he's vulnerable right now, he's probably not in a mood to be dazzled by your cleverness anyway. He wants to know you can meet him where it hurts so you can go on together, in the awkward and imperfect way we humans have, making your way through life. Give yourself some time to be alone with your feelings and organize your thoughts, and the words will come. Don't be afraid to revise. Best wishes to you both. - AJ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.104.238.248 (talk) 15:53, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Please give me something, anything! --Reticuli88 (talk) 16:22, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

This sounds like Cyrano de Bergerac... ;)

But in all seriousness, Reticuli, Q Chris' advice is good... instead of trying to impress him with your good prose, just explain how you feel and remind him that you care. If he thinks you don't understand his problems and gets frustrated when you say you do....well, then don't claim to understand them, but say that you sympathize at least. There's not much more we can say; we don't know what your feelings are or what the history of your relationship was like.

Wikipedia is not really a relationships advice column so if that's what you are looking for you should try another site. We'll try to answer your question without being bitey, but you shouldn't rely too heavily on Wikipedia for relationship advice. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 20:53, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Requesting translation from a Cyrillic-alphabet language, almost certainly Russian

What does Зелёный mean? "Green"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.104.238.248 (talk) 15:39, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it means "green", and yes, it's Russian. +Angr 16:17, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. (Sigh - I was hoping it meant "plumb-bob," don't ask why.) I should have asked in the first place, how on earth do you pronounce it? I can sound out Cyrillic some of the time, especially if I have some idea what I'm looking at in the first place, but with this one I don't know where to begin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.104.238.248 (talk) 21:21, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

According to wikt:зелёный, it's pronounced [zʲɪˈlʲonɨj]. If you're not IPA-compliant, it can be roughly approximated with "zill-YOH-nee". +Angr 09:16, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Geico gekko

I just saw the new GEICO commercial. Based on his accent, where would you say, to the best of your ability, the GEICO Gecko is from?

If you say something vague like Europe I'll punch you in the proxy.HitmanNumber86 (talk) 16:24, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I haven't heard the ad in a while, but I think it's the UK (English accent)...the question is what part of the UK since there are many variations. If memory serves I don't think it's Australia/New Zealand. --68.175.44.30 (talk) 16:47, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Sounds pretty cockney (=London) to me. --Pykk (talk) 17:10, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

GEICO ad campaigns#The GEICO gecko. --LarryMac | Talk 17:11, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I guess that makes him Scottish/English. I thought I heard something Scottish. But what part of England? Someone should recognize his accent. If you've seen the new commercial, they portray a typical American (sadly, it's quite accurate for many) assuming his accent makes him a posh British snob, whilst the woman say's, "I thought you were Australian." The Gecko him self gets cutoff saying, "It's funny you should bring that up. Actually I'm-" and he get cutoff by the slogan. --HitmanNumber86 (talk) 17:46, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Ugh...really? Well I guess that's not surprising. It's a wonder they didn't have to subtitle the gecko for Americans. Adam Bishop (talk) 21:10, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I did. It's cockney. The article says it's cockney. If this is the accent you mean, then it's cockney. Which would be rather un-snobby in reality, being a working-class accent that's historically been very looked-down upon in the UK. --Pykk (talk) 18:09, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Americans on the whole probably haven't learned the differences between posh and non-posh (U and non-U?) British accents. . . —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.175.44.30 (talk) 21:19, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Notice how the gecko rounds off his L's. There was a question here about that, not long ago. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 05:49, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

What I notice is the th-fronting in "He's like a bruvver to me". Nevertheless, it sounds to me like a rather tame version Cockney – could it be rather Estuary English than the broadest type of Cockney? +Angr 08:56, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

The Geico Gecko may be a Londoner, but his ancestors were from Madagascar. Just because that's where most geckos are from.

As I recall, the early version of the Gecko spoke with a more "sophisticated" British accent and was not actually working for Geico, he was one who kept getting wrong number calls: "Not 'Geico', Gecko!". Then he became an employee, and was shown arriving in a miniature car and parking in the human-sized "empoyee of the month" space. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 05:46, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Here's an early gecko commercial. I don't think this is cockney:[5] →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 06:03, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

No, it's not. +Angr 08:56, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Seems like a "normal" British accent, but perhaps a Henry Higgins-like expert here could pin it down. (If they could pin down which voice actors are doing the various geckos, that would be even better.) →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 08:59, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

According to the Wiki article, the first ones (gecko/GEICO) were voiced by Kelsey Grammer. He's born in the US Virgin Islands :P 80.123.210.172 (talk) 11:24, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

According to IMDb[6] the current voice belongs to Jake Wood. (In fact, it says as much on his Wiki page.) He is from London. Martlet1215 (talk) 12:12, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

To complicate matters, the article and Ray Park both say that the current voice is Ray Park. Not many verifiable sources though. Martlet1215 (talk) 12:18, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

is there a verb tense (in any language) that does all three of these at the same time?

Consider the following:

• I was here.
• I am here.
• I will be here.

Is there any known language that allows the speaker to say:

• I (was/am/will be) here.

Where the (was/am/will be) is all conflated into a single word? dr.ef.tymac (talk) 18:08, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I am told that in Haitian Creole, there are no tense forms in the verbs. According to Haitian Creole tenses are represented with "tense markers". Note that in English, you can kind of use the same form for the present and for the future. "I walk to the store today. Tomorrow I walk to Canada," but it doesn't work in the past tense: "Yesterday I walk to the theatre." Hope this helps, Falconus^{p t c} 18:28, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

What about "So, yesterday, right? I walk to the theatre, and guess who I bump into....."? The present simple can be used for all three. --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 19:12, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Walk and bump are both examples of the Historical present - present tense used to denote past events. Guess is an imperative, which is grammatically tenseless. If the listener did indeed guess (rather than regarding this command as a rhetorical device), that would happen after this sentence was spoken, but that doesn't make "guess" future tense. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:28, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Jack, when I said 'all three' I meant all three tenses the OP was enquiring about, not all three verbs in my example sentence. --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 22:00, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, Kage Tora, I'm not sure I'm following you. Are you saying the present can be used to denote all three tenses, in different contexts? I agree with that. But Dreftymac was asking about a verb that means all three tenses simultaneously. I'm not sure what your example was meant to be illustrating. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:09, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I thought (as does everyone else here) that the question was whether the present can be used to denote all three tenses, in different contexts, as you ask, and that was what my answer to the OP's question was meant to affirm, and written as a continuation of the previous answer written just above it. --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 22:13, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm with you now. Thanks. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:20, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Not sure for the copula itself, but Chinese has no tense markers per se. Tense, if needed, can be conveyed with time adverbs like "tomorrow" or "yesterday" or a few free morphemes that express concepts like completedness. I would imagine you'd find a lot of similar patterns among the world's isolating languages.--el Aprel (^facta-_facienda) 20:32, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Yep, Chinese 我在这里 can mean all three of them if it's not in any context (although, to be fair, I can't picture that ever coming up in natural speech). There are many other languages that lack overt tense marking and thus would be the same. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 20:44, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Also, I believe American Sign Language has no tense marking. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 21:37, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

When I read the OP's question, it seems to me that the requested meaning is along the lines of "I am, was, and will continue to be here." Not some form that can mean any one of the three, but a form that conveys all three meanings at once.–RHolton≡– 03:04, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

October 3

List of 1000 most common French words

I'm getting to the point in my French studies where a lack of vocabulary is becoming my main problem. I have been surfing google, in French and English for a list of the top 1000 or so words in French and their English equivalents. I am not really turning up anything, other than some programs that won't run on Linux (and I'm hesitant about 3rd party software on Windows). If anybody knows of just a plain file that has such a list, I'd much appreciate it.

Merci, Falconus^{p t c} 00:07, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't know of a list off the top of my head, but if you know anyone in a linguistics department I bet they could find something—for major languages like this there are many corpora with this kind of information. From doing some quick googling, I came across this (but I can't tell if it's organized in any way or if it's just the conversations) (nvm, it's just transcriptions) and this (not a corpus, but a paper about a corpus--from there you might be able to find the actual corpus), as well as others that aren't free. If you search for things like "French corpus", "French corpora", "French text corpus", etc., you may find things. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 00:15, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

That being said, I don't think looking at a corpus is the best way to improve your language skills...1000 words is less than it sounds like (so you might already know most of the top 1000), and memorizing words by rote is often not very effective. A better way would be to find some French books, films, etc., and try to read them, looking up new words as you go--when you learn a word in context like that, it sticks better. If you have anyone living in France whom you can contact, they can often find French translations of popular American stuff, so for example if you've already read Harry Potter then you can try re-reading it in French, which is less intimidating, "stepping-stone" sort of thing you can do before diving into actual French novels. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 00:18, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks... I do actually have Harry Potter in French, so I guess I can try that. Falconus^{p t c} 00:31, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

If you have relatively-easily access to U.S. educational publishers, Vis-Ed has put out a set of 1,000 French-English vocabulary flash cards for the last half-century or so (US$14.95 new; ISBN 1-55637-005-9). They have other cards to learn verbs, grammar and conversation. —— Shakescene (talk) 01:16, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

If you like comics or comic books, Tintin was of course published in French long before translation into English, Flemish (Hergé was Belgian) and dozens of other languages. So you could get copies of the same adventure in both French and your native tongue, although when as a teenager I read "Prisoners of the Sun" in French, the English translation had not yet been widely published, making it a little harder to parse out. —— Shakescene (talk) 01:23, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

My all-time favorite comic to read in French will always be Asterix ;) rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 03:27, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree that reading Tintin in the original is an excellent adjunct to learning French - we did so in my somewhat traditional English boarding school some 4 decades ago - but be aware that the English (and probably other-language) versions are far from straight translations: the originals are rich in untranslatable puns, jokes and other idioms, so the (excellent) translators had to make up or utilize entirely new/different ones of equal quality in English to preserve the levels of wit. (The same problem occurs with the works of Stanislav Lem, whose usual Polish-English translator Michael Kandel manages similar feats.) If you can get hold of some popular genre fiction paperbacks such as crime novels (e.g. Ed McBain translated into French, or Georges Simenon in the original), you might find they provide useful parallel texts, as they are often pitched at a less erudite level than, say, Marcel Proust. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 12:38, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

I can hear people's teeth grinding in rage from what you wrote above: "...popular American stuff, so for example... Harry Potter". +Angr 09:10, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

True...but it's not because I like it. Last time I was in France, Harry Potter and Spiderman were everywhere... rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 14:13, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I think Angr's point was that J. K. Rowling is British... Ironfrost (talk) 16:57, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh, she is? Oops. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 17:08, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

ungrinding teethActually the Harry Potter series may not be the ideal solution as the author quite naturally made so many words up. I'm not saying that it won't help, just that you may spend time trying to understand words that are simply not used in the French language outside the realms of magical fantasy, especially if you are looking for the 1,000 most common French words. The concept of reading a book that you have enjoyed in English is a good idea, but the more colloquial it is in English, the more you will come up with some odd phrases in French which when you try and translate (and Google Translator fails miserably on this example off the top of my head: "se faire rouler dans la farine" translates along the lines of "to be taken for a ride") you might end up dispairing. One cheap and cheerful solution is to pick a Wikipedia article that you like, and click on the French version (although the content most probably won't be identical). And if you get stuck, come to my userpage and email me. -- Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 10:10, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

That's an excellent idea! fr-wiki could certainly use the help ;) rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 14:25, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Well this is a bit left field, but... bear with me... when I was doing my shorthand training there was a book containing the 1000 most common words and their shorthand outlines. You could see if there's a similar book containing the 1000 most common French words and their outlines. After all, there are many bilingual secretaries and they have to train in two languages, so there may well be a French/English/Shorthand book, which will probably meet your needs. --TammyMoet (talk) 09:27, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

¶ My Googling "French thousand words" yielded this from Wiktionary: Wiktionary:Wiktionary:French_frequency_lists/1-2000, but pay heed to the cautions at Wikt:Wiktionary:Frequency_lists#French_words. And of course simple frequency lists won't tell you how useful each individual word might or might not be, or how well the words fit together. If, hypothetically, "aunt" (tante) and "uncle" (oncle) were on the list, you'd surely want to learn "niece" and "nephew" even if they weren't on the list. ¶ And, as implied above, the best way to learn words is to use each one a few times until you're comfortable with them and they have some tangible "feel" or reality to you, just as when you were learning new words in your native tongue. That's why you have to do those tedious writing and translation exercises for every lesson. —— Shakescene (talk) 10:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Alright, thanks... So I guess I should try reading French texts/watching French movies and then studying any expression that doesn't make sense, such as rolling in the flour, as referenced above. Thanks to everyone who got back to me. Falconus^{p t c} 16:52, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Je vous offre [7] et [8] ("les mots les plus fréquents", au bas du page) 129.67.37.143 (talk) 19:58, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Monthly anniversary called "Mensiversary"

I've been told a monthly Anniversary should be called a "Mensiversary". Are there similar words that can be used to describe 2 months (1/6th year), 3 months (1/4th year), 4 months (1/3rd year), and 6 months (1/2 year)? Thanks. Anythingapplied (talk) 08:25, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

• This is a complete irrelevancy from the other end of the chronological spectrum, but my favorite story about U.S. President Gerald Ford (who Pres. Lyndon B. Johnson once said wasn't a smart enough House Minority Leader to "walk and chew gum at the same time") is from his address to the 150th-anniversary convocation dinner of Yale Law School—of which he, unlike LBJ, was a graduate. After thanking his hosts, he said, "Obviously, it's a very great privilege and pleasure to be here at the Yale Law School Sesquicentennial Convocation." Then he stopped abruptly to issue this challenge, "And I defy anyone to say that and chew gum at the same time." [9]. —— Shakescene (talk) 09:05, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

• Gerry Ford served the Presidency with honor, which is more than I can say for some of those birds in my lifetime. "Mensiversary"? That's a new one on me, but it's all over google. And what kind of event would qualify as a "mensiversary" anyway? Something that happens every 3 months is typically called "quarterly", every 2 months is "bi-monthly" (which can be a confusing term, though) and 6 months is "semi-annually". Something monthly is a "monthly". This link [10] indicates that you would say things like "6th mensiversary"... and that "mensiversary" itself is a coined word. Since both it and anniversary come from Latin roots for "month" and "year" respectively, that along with the prefix "6th" and so on would suggest you need a Latin prefix for the number, unless there are separate Latin words indicating "6 months" and so on. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 09:14, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

• Assuming the prefix is ordinal (first, second, third, etc.) rather than cardinal (one, two, three, etc.) then an appropriate prefix could be something to do with primary, secondary, teriary, quaternary, etc. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 09:18, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

My partner and I always celebrate the 24th of the month, because we met on the 24th of a month. We sometimes call it our "monthiversary", but "mensiversary" might be even .... nah, it sounds too close to the outdated word menses, something I've always considered a fundamental design flaw on the part of Mother Nature. Funny how "woman trouble" could refer to menses, or just to men.  :) -- JackofOz (talk) 12:03, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

That makes sense - basically making a thing out of the specific day of the month, instead of just one day a year. "Monthiversary" as a word makes more sense, in a way, since it's a better-known prefix. It's an etymological mixed metaphor, but this is English, so it doesn't much matter. As you say, about the only time you hear the root "menses" in English, has to do with menstruation - which is simply a Latinized way of labeling a woman's "monthly". Indications are that "Mensiversary" is a fairly recently coined (some sources say "fake") word, so "monthiversary" or "six-monthiversary" could be equally valid. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 16:31, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

The overiding purpose of a language is to communicate effectively. I think that if you came up to me and talked about a mensiversary I would get confused, especially if I had never had Latin. If I wasn't thinking, I'd be trying to pin it to the words that sound similar (such as adversary and monthly cycles or mental [from mens]) and come up with something about opposing the mind or periods. Maybe I just have my head screwed on strangely, but perhaps it would be more effective to just say "Monthly anniversary", which while not being technically correct, conveys the meaning perfectly, at least to me. Falconus^{p t c} 17:02, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Indeed. "Monthly anniversary", I think, even though an etymological oxymoron, would be more quickly understood than a coined work like "mensiversary", which I suspect many (as hinted by Jack) would take to be a synonym for, or more likely a joke about, "menstruation". As a vague comparison of using language the way feel like using it, consider the various high-level scandals since 1974 that have the suffix "-gate" even though it makes no literal sense. It's a referback to "Watergate", and "something-gate" is understood to be shorthand for a scandal. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 18:38, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I've never even heard "monthly anniversary"; more common is "x-month anniversary". e.g., "My boyfriend and I are celebrating our 3-month anniversary". It may not be logical, but there are far more illogical things that people say (ever heard my favorite, "I just ran my first 5K marathon!" ?) rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 18:43, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I had never heard of the concept either until I saw this. But what you're talking about is kind of different from what Jack is talking about. He's talking about celebrating the 24th of every month. I think you're talking about milestones (or millstones) like 6 months, a year, maybe 1 1/2 years, 2 years, etc. In effect, Jack would be celebrating, for example, a 37th month. 5K marathon, eh? Well, if it's their first 5K, it probably felt like a marathon. "Nike!" [drops dead from exhaustion and improperly laced shoes] →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 19:52, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Sportspeak is a whole new world, linguistically speaking. We really ought to have an article on it, as it's commented on often enough. Some things that come out of the mouths of sporting commentators and players are fine additions to the language. But others ... don't get me started. -- JackofOz (talk) 21:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

See Colemanballs. Malcolm XIV (talk) 11:11, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Why is there a J in 'Juventus'?

Why is Juventus FC so called when the Italian alphabet doesn't contain the letter J? Barra21 (talk) 16:11, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Your answer is in the very first sentence of the Juventus F.C. article: its name comes from Latin, not Italian. And Latin 'i' was sometimes also written 'j'. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 16:21, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

The Latin letter "I" at the beginning of a word was the "consonantal" version, which evolved into "J", just as "V" was both a vowel and a consonant depending on where it was used. Hence "IESVS" for "JESUS" and such as that (see INRI). →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 16:35, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

There are also a very few words in the Italian language that use the letter "j", as well as some proper names (I remember wondering about how to pronounce the name of a lighting manufacturer called DeMajo; a native informed me it is pronounced as if it were "DeMaio"). There's more on J in the Italian Wikipedia. --Rallette (talk) 09:44, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Expats using local words even if there is an English equivalent

I've noticed that among people who live in a foreign country, it's quite common to use some local words, even when speaking their native language with other native speakers. It seems like there are 3 categories of words this applies to: words that don't have an equivalent in their native language, words whose official translation is obscure or very long, and words which already have a direct, commonly known translation.

I'm interested in the third category, and I was wanting to read more about it but I don't know what to search for. So my questions are:

1. Is there a word for this, i.e. using a word in the local language in preference to the English equivalent?

2. Where can I find good articles discussing this phenomenon (does Wikipedia have one?)

P.S. the discussion that made me want to look this up was about the word "ayi", which is basically just Chinese for "maid", and my initial theory is "it's because people are embarrassed to admit to having a maid". But that's not the only word like this, and I guess there must be someone on the internet who has researched this sort of thing and written about it. 221.122.110.21 (talk) 16:51, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

This is a kind of code-switching. I don't know if there's a more specific term for this particular type of it. If you search google, google scholar, a local library, or most linguistics journals, you'll find lots of research on code-switching. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 16:53, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

As for why expats do it...I'm not very familiar with the code-switching literature, but judging by my personal experience there are two big reasons. One is that it's fun and mixing languages sounds funny (I mean, who doesn't love speaking franglais). Another (for at least some people) is that the speaker actually speaks little to none of the local language, but likes to throw in the few words he knows to feel like he's 'exotic' and living like the 'natives'. A third reason can be expressing solidarity with others who have the same language background as you...for example, I have an American friend with whom I studied both French and Chinese together, so often when talking we mix things together just because we can, and it creates a conversation that most other people around us can't totally make sense of but we can since we happen to have the same several languages in common. (For an example without French... she recently left me a voicemail that included "so 今天 like 现在 i'm supposed to move into like this new 公寓, 可是..." .) rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 16:59, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Is "ayi" exactly identical to "maid"? Or does it have some different connotation in Chinese, linguistically or culturally? I'm asking because in America, having a maid implies that you're relatively wealthy and can afford to have someone else do the drudgery around the house. Maybe that's considered a bad thing in Chinese culture, i.e. that having a maid implies "laziness"? →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 16:59, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

More literally, it means "auntie". But kinship terms have a lot more uses in Chinese than English (for example, I call friends' parents aunt and uncle if I'm not being formal, random kids call people like me big brother, etc.). As for maids...it's relatively common there, in expat communities and foreign students' dorms, etc., to have a fuwuyuan (service person) who cleans out your room. (Depending on who you are and where, they might also check out your e-mail and root through your stuff, to make sure you aren't stealing any of those good ol' state secrets :P .) If you're speaking mostly Chinese in your day-to-day life, you don't think of them as "the maid", you think of them as "the fuwuyuan", so it might not even cross your mind to call them anything else. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 17:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I wrote this before, but the conversation moved on and it didn't fit in my reply anymore so I'm posting it here instead: even though "ayi" has a pretty wide meaning in Chinese, when it's used as an English word it almost always means "maid". 221.122.110.21 (talk) 18:00, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

When you put it that way, it makes sense. It might fall more into the realm of a local word being more precise or commonly used locally, than the Chinese word. That seems to relate to a phenomenon which I've observed frequently with my foreign-born colleagues - mixing their native language and English when discussing project work. I asked about that, and they said that they tend to retain their own verbs and use the English nouns. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 17:13, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I often do the same when working in the US with a Chinese colleague who speaks English--even if we both know the Chinese word, sometimes it's easier to substitute, especially on the word that is the focus of the sentence. "我还需要一些native speakers", "试验后我们要做一格ANOVA", "如果这样的话 被试们会觉得这些句子很weird", etc. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 17:27, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I've come across the first two cases and I think in those cases it is a mixture of convenience and context. We used quite a few Swiss-German words, but almost exclusively in the context of babies/young children because we picked them up from my brother's local daycare. Since everything at the daycare happened in Swiss-German (or High German in conversations with us), it seems perfectly natural that we used Swiss-German words at home as well. --Tango (talk) 17:29, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

As an American living in Germany, I'm interested in this too. There are definitely certain words that English-speakers who live in Germany long-term say in German rather than in English. One example from the OP's third category is Handy, used as a noun to mean cell phone/mobile phone. We English speakers in Germany are far more likely to say "Give me a call on my handy" than "Give me a call on my cell (phone)" or "...on my mobile (phone)", and when I'm back in the States I have to constantly remind myself not to say it there. This may be because cell phones have only relatively recently become ubiquitous (and were therefore not part of the active vocabulary of those of us who have been in Germany for more than 10 years or so when we arrived in Germany), or it may be a compromise between the American term "cell (phone)" and the British term "mobile (phone)": by using the German word, we can avoid pushing an Americanism on our British friends and they can avoid pushing a Briticism on us. However, I believe it is relatively rare that there's a specific vocabulary item that is consistently more likely to be spoken in German than in English, the way "Handy" is; more often, cases from the OP's category 3 are just an isolated word that happened to come into the speaker's mind faster than its English equivalent (for example, I might say on one occasion "Let's take the Fahrstuhl" instead of "elevator/lift", but that doesn't mean I would regularly do so, much less that all the other English speakers would; rather, on that one occasion, Fahrstuhl simply came to my lips faster than elevator did, and on other occasions elevator would come first). I don't know if there have been any studies done on the phenomenon, though. It's the sort of thing that would be extremely difficult to analyze scientifically. +Angr 17:40, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks to everyone for replying so fast (and adding even more replies when I was writing this)! I'm not convinced that it's a result of thinking in Chinese - many of the people who have ayis aren't fluent in Chinese at all, people mostly pick up the word from other expats. I think perhaps the answer is something like Baseball Bugs first said - even though from a technical point of view a maid and an ayi are basically the same thing, the cultural meaning is different. A maid is someone only rich people can afford; an ayi is someone you or your friends employ. In Angr's case, a cellphone was something only rich people had when he/she left the US, but everyone in Germany has a handy. Perhaps it's not so strange to have a new loanword for a new situation you've only ever encountered abroad? 221.122.110.21 (talk) 17:58, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

It's an awful habit, but I code-switch all the time, depending upon 1. the country I'm in; 2. the company I'm keeping; and 3. whether I can be bothered or not to find the precise terms to keep a conversation entirely in one language. Often it is more convenient to use the local word, as it might have a more precise local meaning in a given context. If I'm with fellow multi-linguists, and I can express something better in another language, then I will switch to that language for that word or phrase. It drives people absolutely nuts, can seem incredibly pretentious and is frowned upon by some of my family and friends who are either purists or monolingual, but I'm sorry, sometimes it's just the best way to express my thought process and it can be tiresome to have to translate something into an unsatisfactory version. Though I have been known to thwack people with a wet kipper if they invent words in a language, such as "nous devons calendariser les dépenses".-- Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 20:43, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Yep, same here...I once had a girlfriend who was trilingual in the same three languages that I speak, so I would mix and match all three of them in the same sentence without caring, and she always got mad even though she could understand every word of it. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 20:46, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Huh, none of my English-speaking friends in Germany minds in the least about people doing this. I just have to remember not to toss in occasional German words when I'm, say, talking to my mother on the phone. The only time I've heard someone object to code-switching is when they witnessed an English-speaking mother codeswitching when speaking to her young child (e.g. "Help me look for a Parkplatz, honey" instead of "parking place"), because of the risk that the child (who was growing up bilingual) would get confused about which German words he could use when speaking English to monolinguals (e.g. kindergarten) and which ones he couldn't (e.g. Parkplatz). +Angr 21:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

For me it was also less of an issue (except with my parents, both multilingual but entrenched purists) when I lived in Germany, but more so when I lived in Geneva, Paris or Narbonne. Now that I'm in Rabat it's a very common phenomenon, with phrases constructed from Modern Standard Arabic, Moroccan Arabic, French and smatterings of English just for the heck of it. -- Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) (talk) 21:42, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I think that must be why (at least before international television and recorded music became so prevalent) Britons are so often thrown, though only mildly so, by colloquial American. I know my family was when we stayed in New England in the mid-1950's when I was six. because so many words had non-British sources, such as "stoop" and "cookie" (both from the Dutch). And each wave of immigrants brought new words into American speech that didn't enter British speech. The opposite effect is that there are good English words or usages from the 17th century, like "fall" and "gotten", which are still part of normal American speech but have become archaic in Britain. ¶ That's entirely skipping over the fact (covered by the original enquirer's first point) that pioneers and settlers would use whatever local term (often Amerindian, Spanish or French-Canadian) was handiest to describe things that didn't already have an English name because they were uncommon or unknown in England. Just as Australians and New Zealanders use all those Aboriginal and Maori derived words like kangaroo. —— Shakescene (talk) 22:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

It has nothing to do with being fluent in the local language, as when I was in Japan for ten years it was not only I who did it, but also plenty other 'gaijin' who'd lived there for a while (short while - long while - didn't matter). We all had to call the 'kanojos' (girlfriends) on our 'keitais' (mobile phones) because some 'yopparai ojisan' (drunken old man) had kept us in the 'izakaya' (pub) way past the last 'densha' (train) and we only realized when we got to the 'eki' (station), and only had 'san-zen-en' (3,000 yen) left which wasn't enough for a taxi back to the 'apaato' (flat) so we'd be staying in a 'kapuseru' (capsule hotel) - and this was how we were explaining it to fellow native English speakers. It just became a normal way for us to talk - so much so that, when I meet old mates from Japan back here in England we tend to switch back into that way of speaking, which infuriates anyone we're with. One colleague once said something quite interesting to me, though. She said that these words have inserted themselves into our 'gaijin dialect' so comfortably, that we even start to abbreviate some words (e.g. 'shink' for 'shinkansen' (bullet train)) and verbify some nouns (e.g. "I'll be 'shinking' up to Tokyo at the weekend"). I'm quite interested in the topic, too, so I would be interested if there has been any research done on this. --KageTora - SPQW - (影虎) (talk) 23:25, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I know that the US military in Germany frequently uses mox nix, an Americanization of macht's nichts, it doesn't matter. It's probably not something they would use in any other part of the world, unless they were speaking to other military members who have been in Germany. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 00:21, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

October 4

Kanji Pernounciation

I was looking at http://www.learn-japanese.info/firstgradekanji.html to learn some Japanese kanji. I am confused as to why there are so many different ways to pronounce each kanji. Are the ones listed in all capitals the most common ones? Which ones should I study? Am I missing something here or are there really that many ways to say each kanji? Yakeyglee (talk) 04:45, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Read kanji. It will tell you all you need to know. kwami (talk) 04:53, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

A question about some interrogative words in English

Look at the following:

• WHERE ? THERE !
• WHEREFORE ? THEREFORE !
• WHENCE ? THENCE !
• WHITHER ? THITHER !
• WHEN ? THEN !
• WHAT ? THAT !

Here's the simple rule: take one of the (six) interrogative words (mentioned above), replace "W" by "T", and get an answer to the question. Let's elaborate on that:

• WHERE? = which place ? THERE ! = that place !
• WHEREFORE ? = which reason ? THEREFORE ! = that reason !
• WHENCE ? = which source (point of departure) ? THENCE ! = that source (point of departure) !
• WHITHER ? = which destination ? THITHER ! = that destination !
• WHEN ? = which time ? THEN ! = that time !
• WHAT ? = which thing ? THAT ! = that thing !

Another rule is the following: take one of the first four interrogative words (mentioned above), remove the "W", and get a "closer" answer to the question. Let's elaborate on that:

• WHERE ? = which place ? HERE ! = this place !
• WHEREFORE ? = which reason ? HEREFORE ! = this reason !
• WHENCE ? = which source ((point of departure) ? HENCE ! = this source (point of departure) !
• WHITHER ? = which destination ? HITHER ! = this destination !

How about the two last interrogative words: "WHEN" and "WHAT"? And how about other interrogative words, e.g. WHO, WHOSE, WHY? Let's elaborate on that:

1. WHAT: If we remove the "W" from "WHAT", we get the word "HAT", being an answer - in a related (West Germanic) language, Dutch ("het"): it! May Old English and Dutch have shared the word "HAT" (or "HET") as a possible answer (="it!") to the english question "WHAT"?
2. WHEN: If we remove the "W" from "WHEN", we get the word "HEN". May Old English, or another related (West Germanic) language, have had the word "HEN" as a possible answer (="now!") to the english question "WHEN"?
3. WHO: If we remove the "W" from "WHO", we get the word "HO", which is very similar to "HE". May Old English, or another related (West Germanic) language, have had the word "HO" instead of "HE", or have had the word: "WHE" instead of "WHO"? And how about replacing "W" by "T"?
4. WHOSE: If we remove the "W" from "WHOSE", we get the word "HOSE", which is similar to "HIS". May Old English, or another related (West Germanic) language, have had the word "HOSE" instead of "HIS", or have had the word: "WHIS" instead of "WHOSE"? And how about replacing "W" by "T"?
5. WHY: If we remove the "W" from "WHY", we get the word "HY". May Old English, or another related (West Germanic) language, have had the word "HY" as a possible answer to the english question "WHY"? And how about replacing "W" by "T"?

HOOTmag (talk) 19:20, 4 October 2009 (UTC)