Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/July 2006

Humanities Science Mathematics Computing/IT Language Miscellaneous Archives

The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. Whilst you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions at one of the pages linked to above. This will insure that your question is answered more quickly.

< June Language desk archive August >

July 1

Byzantium verses Byzantine and el verses El

Is this correct:

Byzantium General

Later the Byzantium’s

Byzantine mosaic or Byzantium mosaic

Byzantine Empress or Byzantium Empress

The Byzantine historian Euthycius or ...you get the idea.

At this time the Byzantium’s were at war

Is this just preference. The other question is: Which of these are correct?

Tell el-Amarneh letters or Tell El-Amarneh letters

Malek el-Khamil or Malek El-Khamil

On February 18, 1229, el-Khamil signed or On February 18, 1229, El-Khamil signed

ruler of Damascus El Malik El Muathim Isa or something else?

One more thing and thanks for your help:

Is this correct:

the city’s inhabitants

1) I have never heard of Byzantium until your post. Compare google's "Byzantine Art" with "Byzantium Art". 2) Same goes for 'el'. Google has many more hits for a lower case 'el', than 'El'. 3)"the city’s inhabitants" is correct if you are refering to the multiple inhabitants of a singular city. Hope this helps.--Andrew c 00:56, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Byzantine is the adjective relating to Byzantium, so, yes, "Byzantine general". However, "byzantine" is also used as a generic adjective, a little bit like "baroque". Think of "el" as Arabic "the" -- capitalize it only in titles if at all ("Charles the Great"). 00:59, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Byzantine is also a noun meaning "inhabitant of Byzantium". So:

• Byzantine General
• Later the Byzantines
• Byzantine mosaic
• Byzantine Empress (= Empress of Byzantium)
• The Byzantine historian Euthycius
• At this time the Byzantines were at war
• Byzantium versus Byzantine :)

· rodii · 01:29, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

I believe "Beastorn" is an alternative name for Byzantine. I've only ever come across it once, but it was a highly reputable source. Can anyone confirm this as a legitimate word? JackofOz 04:22, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

?!?!? Google thinks I want "eastern" but gives me "beastporn". What the heck is "beastorn"? · rodii · 04:45, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

That is not an alternative word for "Byzantine"...perhaps Barry Jones thought "Byzantine", changed his mind to say "Eastern", and came out with that? Adam Bishop 15:11, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Was Barry Jones drinking heavily when he told you this? dab (ᛏ) 18:23, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

That, I could not say. He didn't tell me personally, we've never met. I have occasionally seen him on Melbourne trams, but felt unworthy to touch the hem of his garment let alone approach his person. I saw the word in his "Barry Jones' Dictionary of World Biography" (not sure of the edition) - although I must say that this book contained an appalling number of errors, so many that I once sat down and started compiling a list of comments and questions to send to him, but the task was so daunting I just gave up in the end. A very strange departure from his usual erudition. In that light, "beastorn" looks like just another misprint, since it is unknown to Google and people like Michael Quinion. And yet, when I first read it, it rang a mournful and melancholy bell in my psyche. It was like deja vu all over again. Barry, if you're reading this, please come on down and put my mind at rest. JackofOz 07:27, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Noun for Byzantium

What is the noun meaning "citizens of Byzantium".

See above. By the way, you can sign your posts by adding four tildes (~~~~) at the end. You don't have to start a new section every time, either--just keep responding to the earlier ones. · rodii · 01:30, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Argentine vs Argentinian

At one time, the normal term used to describe someone or something was "Argentine". The, it seems the word "Argentinian" took over. Now there semms to be a swing back towards "Argentine". Is there an actual difference in meaning/nuance between the two (like with Scottish, Scot, Scotch)? or is it a personal choice thing? Grutness...wha? 03:48, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Kinda related info: The country used to be known as "The" Argentine, much like "The" Ukraine or "The" Gambia, although these are now out of favour too.  SLUMGUM  yap  stalk  04:02, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

(after edit conflict) In some toffee-nosed circles Argentina, Lebanon, Ukraine and Sudan are still sometimes called "The Argentine", "The Lebanon", "The Ukraine" and "The Sudan". In that sense, Argentine is used as a noun (even though it is an abbreviation of The Argentine Republic, where it is an adjective). Argentinian would normally be applied to citizens of that country. You could still call such a person "an Argentine", but calling a group of them "three Argentines" doesn't sound right. I think only "three Argentinians" would do there. In flowery prose, you could get away with calling your South American journey as "my Argentine escapade". It would definitely be incorrect to refer to these little buggers as Argentinian ants. (PS. "The Gambia" is the correct name for that country.) JackofOz 04:18, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

I still say "the Ukraine" and (sometimes) "the Sudan." There are a number of "the" placenames that aren't countries but that do seem to be proper nouns: the Levant, the Maghreb, the Riviera, the Peloponnese. I always hear "the Argentine" as in that set for some reason.

To confuse things further, there's also Argentinean, which looks just wrong to me, but has over three million google hits. Che Guevara is listed in the categories Spanish-Argentines and Category:Irish Argentineans. Henry^Flower 09:59, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

When Ukraine became independent the new authorities made a big official fuss internationally, insisting that the name of the country be "Ukraine" not "the Ukraine", saying that "the" was mostly used in English for regions not countries and that continuing use of the term "the Ukraine" was therefore a complete disgrace, even an unwitting continuation of Russian/Soviet anti-Ukrainian propaganda, equivalent to denying the legitimacy of Ukraine's status as a nation. Linguistically, the argument didnt hold much water but most Western media did as asked anyway. Jameswilson 22:26, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

As pointed out above, the opposite is true with The Gambia - the "The" was added by the nation a few years after independence. Grutness...wha? 02:48, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Forewarn?

I heard this as a verb twice on the news last night. Is it even a word? It does not appear in the Wicktionary. If "warn" means to give cautionary advice before something happens, then "forewarn" seems to be redundant. If it is indeed a word, does it mean something different from "warn"? Thanks for your help.66.213.33.2 13:51, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it's a word: [1]. If it's not on wiktionary, that says more about wiktionary than about the word. As for the difference in meaning, it emphasises the 'in advance'. Henry^Flower 13:56, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

But isn't a warning always in advance? So again I ask: Isn't this word redundant? 66.213.33.2 14:27, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

I think you're making the mistake of assuming that language is a matter of transferring information in discrete packets; it isn't. We very often use bits of language which repeat and reinforce other bits; this kind of emphasis is a perfectly correct function of language. Indicating emphasis is not redundant. Henry^Flower 15:11, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Take the french oujourd 'oui (please correct my spelling, I don't know french) which literally means 'on the day of the day of this day' but is used as 'today'. Also, have you never heard the phrase 'forewarned is forearmed'? —Daniel (‽) 16:49, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

The word is spelled aujourd'hui and etymologically originally meant "on the day of today", but I suspect it's no longer felt to be morphologically complex by French speakers. User:Angr 17:04, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

The OED, by the way, records its use since the 14th century. Henry^Flower 17:02, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

The "hui" part is from "hodie" in Latin, which went through exactly the same process - it was originally "hoc die", "on this day", but then became one word meaning "today." So there is even more redundancy in aujourd'hui :) Adam Bishop 17:21, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

"Forewarn" conveys something different to me than simply "warn". If I warn you that something (bad) would happen, and it does happen, then I would say you were forewarned. But if I warn you about the disaster, and no disaster happens, then you were "warned" (wrongly as it turned out), but you were not "forewarned". Forewarned seems to imply correct warning, a judgement which can only be made "after the event". So that I would not say: "I forewarn you that in this country, driving at 100mph will lose you your license", I would say "I warn you that in this country, etc...". Later, you having ignored my warning, and complaining to me about your loss of license, I can say: "Ah but you were forewarned." Possibly a stronger way of saying: "Ah, you were warned"? With a bit of moral censure implied? Another instance would be barricading your doors and windows before a storm. If the storm does appear, you were forewarned, and did the right thing. In this case some sort of morally correct action. If the storm does not appear, you were "retrospectively" wasting your time with the planks and nails, although your response was appropriate to the warning. If later asked about why you did this you could say "I was warned", but you could not say "I was forewarned". It would sound strange to me to say that you were forewarned about something which has not yet materialised, or never does. Anyone else read it this way? --Seejyb 21:33, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Interesting point. As regards the past, I tend to agree. But I can imagine it being used to talk about the present and future where it only implies the reasonableness of the warning, not that the warned event will actually happen: if you are planning to do something dangerous, I might think it my duty to forewarn you of the dangers. Henry^Flower 06:23, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

I would say no. A warning isn't always in advance. You can be warned of a danger that's right in front of you right now, but that you're not seeing ("Watch that last step, it's a lulu!"). --Tkynerd 17:30, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

letter/email endings

list of sophisticated endings .e.g. "yours, most sincerely" or "in anticipation of your valued response".

nominal phrase. user - datestamp.

• Such endings are not sophisticated, merely good manners. Or are good manners now sophisticated? However, neither looks quite right to this UK based English speaker; they look like unsuccessful attempts to jazz up the traditional formulae; if you are going to use a closing formula, it should probably be traditional to convey the politeness. If you want really traditional consider: "I am, sir, your most humble and obedient servant." Notinasnaid 17:43, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Plurals

Would a decimal number be counted as plural? Examples: 0.5, 2.5, etc...

Ops. I forgot to sign my question! --Yanwen 18:21, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

In English, all numbers of things are plural, except one, and possibly zero (none). It depends on the way you say it, though, because "0.5 inches" has a plural ending, but "half an inch" doesn't, because it's really "half of an inch". Is that what you were asking? —Keenan Pepper 18:56, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm just elaborating on what Keenan Pepper said. Like he said, it depends. I don't know about others but I usually say "point five" for .5 or "one half." Alternatively, you could say "5 tenths" which I have seen is preferred by math teachers. schyler 19:00, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I think math teachers would prefer "one half". Mo-Al

"Plural" is a misnomer. It should be "nonsingular". --Ptcamn 06:50, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

With SI units, it's always singular, irrespective of the value; 0 cm, 1 cm, 2 cm, 2,5 cm. It's all 'centimetre'. Nice and simple. DirkvdM 13:50, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

That doesn't sound right, Dirk. You might write "2 cm" but you would still say "two centimetres", not "two centimetre". JackofOz 07:11, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I would. Though I can imagine others using plural because it somehow 'feels' more correct. But it isn't. A cm isn't a physical thing. But then I now realise that in English I would probably use plural. Thinking about it too much I'm not sure, though. DirkvdM 18:54, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Not sure where your thinking is at with this, Dirk. Singularity/plurality is a grammatical distinction, nothing to do with whether the noun is concrete or abstract. One talks of one philosophy, but many philosophies. If the number is greater than 1, the noun is plural - end of story. I think you're getting confused with the abbreviation "cm", which is not usually pluralised. But even so, the "cm" in "2 cm" still stands for the plural word "centimetres", not the singular word "centimetre". JackofOz 02:02, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Right, 'physical' wasn't the right word. I can't really generalise this, although I feel strongly about the logic of it. It's about them being units of measurement. How about Hz? You don't pronounce 15 Hz as '15 Hertzes'. Then again that may be because it ends in a 'z'. Oddly, using singular for '15 degrees' doesn't feel right, but that would then have to be a linguistic illogicality I grew used to I guess. I can't find the right explanation for this, but somehow a philosophy is more 'tangible' than a cm. DirkvdM 19:16, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

You're right about "15 Hertz". I think that's one of the very few exceptions to the general rule. Another one, Australian farmers talk about "15 head of cattle". But you would pluralise the noun in "15 volts", "15 amps", "15 metres", "15 hectares", "15 farads", and just about everything else. I can only assume that your propensity to say "15 centimetre" stems from English not being your mother tongue. JackofOz 23:07, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Right, it's definitely a linguistic thing because all of those you mention would be singular in Dutch (although the use of plural wouldn't be frowned on too much). Still, I can't shake the feeling that singular makes more sense in general. But I can't think of a good reasoning, so I'll leave it at this. DirkvdM 17:41, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

There are also exceptions where centimetre appears as singular. For example, when you say "this is a 30 centimetre ruler". However, after rephrasing the sentence slightly the plural becomes correct; "this ruler is 30 centimetres long". I think exceptions are in fact quite common with units, for example you might say "a nine inch nail" or "that man is 6 foot 2" where the proper plural is inches and feet respectively. Road Wizard 19:06, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Note that a 30 centimetre ruler is part of an entire class of exceptions: quantities used as adjectives. A two litre bottle has a capacity of two litres, a ten minute wait takes ten minutes and a two hundred and forty volt power supply provides two hundred and forty volts. --Weeble 20:48, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

This would also be a good place to use a hyphen, as in a 2-liter (I'm American) bottle. --WhiteDragon 17:26, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I doubt it has anything at all to do with SI units vs. Imperial units, and all to do with what particular language you're speaking (and even what dialect of what language). For example, in North American English, one expresses the number 2,000,000 as "two million", whereas in French, the same number is expressed as deux millions. Loomis 02:14, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

translation from English to Yiddish

I would like to know what the English phrase "trust me" means in Yiddish. Thank You for helping me search this. Amy

I don't think trust me means anything in Yiddish. =P (I know, obviously the question is supposed to be "how do you say trust me in Yiddish".) —Keenan Pepper 18:53, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

I have been told that there is some sort of translation for the phrase "trust me" in the Jewish language. I am looking for the translation and the meaning of the translation. If anyone can help me that would be great. Thank you - Amy

You specifically mean Yiddish? In Hebrew, you'd say "taamin li" ("believe for me"). Not sure about Yiddish. --216.86.101.169 22:31, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

My best guess for Yiddish is getroy mir. User:Angr 23:05, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

"How does an agent say, 'Fuck you?'" "Trust me." --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 23:08, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

thank you very much for your help. - Amy

Couldn't you say "btach oti" in Hebrew? Mo-Al 17:26, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Different from................ ?

BBC4, Tuesday 27th June at 8.30 in the evening. (Programme - 'Never Mind the Full Stops.) The chairman, Julian Fellows, said that the expression 'Different THAN' was incorrect and that it should be 'Different TO'. I was always taught that the phrase should be 'Different FROM' As Julian Fellows is so pedantic, could you please advise which is correct? Many thanks. (The delay in contacting you was because my computer was 'down'!)

"Correct" depends who you ask, though "different from" will never get you in trouble. Usage note from Merriam-Webster's 11th Collegiate dictionary: "Numerous commentators have condemned different than in spite of its use since the 17th century by many of the best-known names in English literature. It is nevertheless standard and is even recommended in many handbooks when followed by a clause, because insisting on from in such instances often produces clumsy or wordy formulations. Different from, the generally safe choice, is more common especially when it is followed by a noun or pronoun." They certainly don't suggest "different to", Mr. Fellows notwithstanding. - Nunh-huh 19:05, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

And the moral of the story is: never trust game shows about punctuation which feature pompous ignoramuses. Henry^Flower 19:08, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

ignorami. 82.131.188.85 21:27, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

I considered that gag, but decided it was beneath even me. Henry^Flower 21:32, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

What I've heard (don't remember where though) is that "different than" is colloquial American English, "different to" is colloquial British English, and "different from" is "prescriptively correct" on both sides of the herring pond. User:Angr 23:04, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

That's exactly the same here. "Different from" is the correct term. Consider the similar term differs saying "X differs to Y" or "X differs than Y" sounds silly. A similar rule applies with compare, which is "with" rather than "to" (you can't say "in comparison to X"). Grutness...wha? 02:51, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Although in the US, I remember being taught that "compare with" and "compare to" had different meanings. One refers to pointing out similarities between things, while the other refers to pointing out differences between things. I'll be hanged if I can remember which was supposed to be which right now, though. And in the US, you can cheerfully say "in comparison to" and no one will bat an eye. --Tkynerd 17:25, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

According to Fowler's Modern English Usage, "compare, in the sense suggest or state a similarity is regularly followed by to, not with; in the sense examine or set forth the details of a supposed similarity or estimate its degree, it is regularly followed by with, not to. He compared me to Demosthenes means that he suggested that I was comparable to him or put me in the same class; He compared me with Demosthenes means that he instituted a detailed comparison or pointed out where & how far I resembled or failed to resemble him." And you can't find a more pedantic prescriptivist than Fowler, so it must be right. User:Angr 17:36, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

And while I've got my Fowler's open (and since I can quote as much of at as I like as it fell into public domain two years ago), here's what he says about "different to" vs. "different from" (not being American he doesn't even consider "different than"): "That d[ifferent] can only be followed by from & not by to is a SUPERSTITION. Not only is to 'found in writers of all ages' (OED); the principle on which it is rejected (You do not say differ to; therefore you cannot say d[ifferent] to) involves a hasty & ill-defined generalization. [...] The fact is that the objections to d[ifferent] to, like those to AVERSE to, SYMPATHY for, & COMPARE to, are mere pedantries. This does not imply that d[ifferent] from is wrong; on the contrary, it is 'now usual' (OED); but it is only so owing to the dead set made against d[ifferent] to by mistaken critics." User:Angr 17:47, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Lepto

What does the greek 'lepto' mean - I've read thin, small, long and thin, and some reference to nuts, does 'leaf like' have anything to do with it? (no redirects please)HappyVR 20:33, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

At least insofar as the etymology of "leptin" is concerned, my dictionary translates Greek "leptos" (presumably "λεπτός") as "slender". - Nunh-huh 21:03, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

No redirect lepton from λεπτός, small, thin, delicate --Seejyb 22:04, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Does that mean 'small and thin and delicate'?HappyVR 22:06, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Good point. It seems to be "or", not "and". The way it is used as a prefix in terms indicates that it is meant "relative to the normal" size, thickness or gross-ness, not as such indicating any specific shape. One has to refer to the person who coined the (modern) word to find what "flavour" of lepto was meant. Refs (via Perseus) from classic lit : 1. peeled, husked (of grain) 2. fine, small; light (of soil), 3. thin, fine, delicate (mostly of garments and the like); (of ships) to have the bows thin and weak 4. (of the human figure, mostly in bad sense) thin, lean, ; slender, tapered (opp. of pachus) (of the fingers of a statue) 5. (of space) strait, narrow, in a thin line, 6. (generally) small, weak, impotent, faint; (of a child's ear) tiny; "small" used with "cattle" means sheep and goats; small craft; small headlands; 7. light (weight), slight, light (breezes), (on) slight (turns of fortune) 8. small (of size or quantity), (pluck into) small (pieces) 9. (of liquids) thin; light (wine) (also of food) 10. (consisting of) fine (parts) 11. (metaph.), subtle, refined, ; also "in detail"; also "minor" (e.g. of poems of Virgil) 12. (rarely, of the voice) fine, delicate, (of sound) (of smell) 13. (of persons) the poor; (fig.) poorly, meanly. Take your pick. --Seejyb 14:54, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. The opposite of 'gross' then - opposite of mega perhaps?HappyVR 15:08, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

July 2

Romania

How to say how are you?

"Ce mai faceti?", I think (possibly with a squiggly accent under the t) Grutness...wha? 02:56, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

the name of the continents prior to the term america. north and south

i would like to know what term or terms were previously applied (by natives) to the land masses now called north america and south america.

some have suggested to me that there may have not been any such names, however i suspect that there were,

possibly that information has been suppressed. if anyone knows the answer to this inquiry i am grateful. --65.8.174.177 06:33, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Each people would have had various names for the somewhat nearby geographical areas of particular interest to them, but to have a name for a continent as such, you have to have a conception of a large overall landmass distinct from other large overall landmasses, and I would rather tend to doubt that any one people had the necessary wide-area geographic awareness to have true continent names.

For that matter, the ancient Greeks didn't have continent names until relatively late -- the word "Asia" originally meant Anatolia (i.e. "Asia minor"), while "Libya" and "Africa" were both originally names of relatively small areas in central coastal north Africa, and "Europe" was apparently a name somewhat artificially dragged in from mythology to form a contrast with "Asia" and "Africa"/"Libya". AnonMoos 10:27, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Africa was a Latin name, Libya a Greek name, though the regions they denoted might have been somewhat different. I believe Libya corresponded roughly the coast of modern Libya as well as western Egypt (beyond the area flooded by the Nile), while Africa, at least in the Roman Empire, corresponded more to modern Tunisia and Algeria. User:Angr 10:57, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

I mentioned "Africa" because a lot of people wouldn't know that the ancient Greeks used "Libya" as a continent name. And yes, all these terms originally referred to particular local areas, rather than continents as such -- the continental meanings only came in with expanded geographic knowledge. AnonMoos 07:47, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

---

as to the first entry above. it would seem to me that even though the native americans (euro term) were not known for traveling the oceans, that they had a concept of the lands that stretched to the four points of the compass beyond what land they actually knew of or occupied. furthermore, when the natives learned learned of other land masses (upon the arrival of explorers in 900 ad and after), how did they perceive and name this continent upon which they lived, as distinguished from the other areas overseas? as groups of people with the tendency to give names to everything natural, it would be odd if native americans did not name the area beyond their own. they probably considered their own land as that area allowed to them by their god(s). it is claimed that the north american continent was perhaps settled by asians as long ago as 27K years. it would seem strange that the land went without a place name until america was applied in the past 500 years. incidentally, there are several versions of the source of the terms for europe and asia in wikipedia. as for africa and asia, those again appear to be euro terms for non euro areas. were there indigenous terms used by the locals on those continents?? surely, not every major geographical area is named from euro name givers. within 'america' we have illinois, michigan, minnesota, massachusetts, delaware, dakotas, mississippi, iowa, and others, i am sure, that are non euro terms for moderate expanses of land. does anyone have native american knowledge of possible terms or names for all the land beyond the area of a tribe or 'nation'??

You have to perform a little Gedankenexperiment (as Einstein would have called it), and put yourself in the position of any one people. Each people would have had names for where they lived, and the areas that they knew -- but the areas that they directly knew would not have extended all that far by our standards. Sometimes little cultural tidbits, or small artefacts, could be transmitted over surprisingly long distances -- but it seems doubtful whether accurate geographical knowledge really spread over the thousands of miles which would have been necessary for one people to know about two continents simultaneously (and without knowing about two continents, there's no necessity to have continent names in the first place...). AnonMoos 07:47, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

thanks. regarding gedankenexperiment. i guess what would suffice is if anyone has any information for what the natives called all the lands that extended beyond their own. and as i mentioned, once the euros were in what we call north america the notion of other lands beyond this land would have been understood by the natives. does anyone know what they called the expanse of land that included their own and the land beyond their own. many tribes were nomadic and would have provided an understanding of reach of the land. thanks for any help that provides a native term for the continents or land expanse on the continents.

"Illinois, michigan, minnesota, massachusetts, delaware, dakotas, mississippi, iowa" are mostly mangled names of local groups of people applied by "Euros" to areas of land. They are not what the locals called the areas themselves. Rmhermen 20:19, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, "Mississippi" was a Native American name for the river that is also called "Mississippi" in European languages. Its application to the state is only by extension, so it isn't really a good example here. I have never heard before that it applied to a group of people. --Tkynerd 04:28, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

How to write in Dates

Is this correct. Should I not use the comma after the date? These are introductory sentences.

Malik (400-455 B.C.), rebuilt part of the castle, as well as the walls of Lancad. or

Graham (773-789 B.C.) did a lot of work on Lancad.

Also when do I stop using B.C. or A.D. in my wrtiting after every date?

AD precedes the date, BC follows the date. Always use BC; only use AD when necessary to avoid confusion.

Graham (789–773 BC) did a lot of work on Lancad. —Wayward ^Talk 13:57, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

What if the title of my section is: Hittite Rule (525-333 BC) Would I still have to use BC in the dates I mention under this section?

Just a random PC note, it's a little better to make BC->BCE (Before Common Era) and AD->CE (Common era). Yanksox 15:59, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

It depends where you are. BCE/CE is often viewed as an Americanism. Here in the UK BC/AD are still far more commonly used, and most people would not understand BCE/CE. -- Arwel (talk) 18:02, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

How do I refernece the works of Josephus in the text or endnote, all of them? I'm not talking about reffering to his whole book only a refernce to a section in it.

Is this correct: Ant. of the Jews 14.4.2-4, or what about this: Wars of the Jews 2,15,8.

Lastly is it correct to put ....datinng to the 4th century BC. Is the th supposed to be smaller? What about rd, like in 3rd.

Thanks for your help, I have another question. Instead of saying ....in about 220 the soldires. Should I put .... in c. 220 the soldiers.

The first time a work appears in the text, I would write Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 14.4.2–4. After that I would use an abbreviation, Josephus, Ant. 14.4.2–4 (Jewish Wars, abbreviation J.W.). In the bibliography at the end of your work, you may want to cite the complete work including translator, for example, Josephus. Translated by H. St. J. Thackeray et al. 10 vols. Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1926–65. 4th century BC, 1st century BC, 2nd century, etc. I wouldn’t use abbreviations such as circa in the main text. —Wayward ^Talk 17:19, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

As for your original question, take out the parentheses (and everything they contain) and see what's left. Neither of your example sentences should have the comma after the parentheses, because you would write them without the comma if the dates were left out:

Malik rebuilt part of the castle, as well as the walls of Lancad. Graham did a lot of work on Lancad.

On the other hand, if you were going to, say, use an appositive, you would need a comma. For example, you would use a comma after "Malik" in this sentence:

Malik, a mighty warrior, rebuilt part of the castle.

Therefore, you would need the comma after the parentheses containing the dates.

Malik (400–455 B.C.), a mighty warrior, rebuilt part of the castle.

I hope this explanation makes sense. —Bkell (talk) 01:49, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

speaking truth to power

I am looking for the meaning AND the origin of the term "speaking truth to power".

(e-mail removed to prevent spam)

Final kaf

What causes a final kaf (not chaf) to appear (as in yechuneka), and does it still appear in modern Hebrew? Mo-Al 16:04, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Your question is asked in a slightly confusing way, since you mean Kaf ך which is the final letter in a word (not the final sound in a word), yet you're not referring to the sofit visual variation כ / ך (which is what is ordinarily meant by "Final Kaf"), but instead to whether Kaf which is the last letter in the word has a Dagesh diacritic or not.

What produces Kaf-dagesh as the last letter of a word in Biblical Hebrew are the "energic" forms of the pronominal suffixes (with a original additional [n] sound, which sometimes shows up as such, and sometimes disappears while doubling the following consonant sound, so producing dagesh in the orthography), and also shortened forms of verbs which have word-final consonant clusters, where the second consonant of the cluster happens to be Kaf.

Neither "energic" pronominal suffixes, nor verb-shortening which produces word-final consonant clusters, are part of modern Israeli Hebrew grammar, but that doesn't exclude the possibility that there might be spellings with final letter Kaf pronounced as [k] for other reasons... AnonMoos 17:26, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

To translate that into English, a "Kaf Sofit", is used whenever the "Kaf" is the last letter in the word. But I think you may have some problems in your assumptions.

First, in these matters, I don't know of any difference between ancient Hebrew and modern Hebrew. Also, the letter "Kaf" and "Chaf" is actually the same letter, depending on the vowel signs.

Since the last consinent "yechuneka" is a "kaf", it would appear that a "kaf sofit" would be in order, with an "a" vowel accounted for with "nekudim" or "vowel signs". Loomis 00:29, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Dude, of course it has a visual kaf sofit (which was not actually the main issue under discussion), but the real question is why it has a dagesh (which means that in Biblical Hebrew it would have been pronounced as a phonologically doubled [kk] consonant, like Italian -cc-, which is why it escaped the historical sound change of "spirantization" or fricativation after a vowel). Believe me, modern Israeli Hebrew has a rather limited use of pronominal suffixes in the first place, and most definitely does NOT continue the sporadic alternative Biblical Hebrew "energic" forms of the suffixes! P.S. It's spelled Nikudim (or even better, Niqqudim). AnonMoos

Okay, when I say final kaf, I mean as opposed to final chaf. I know that they are really the same letter, but I think it should be obvious what my question was supposed to be. Mo-Al 01:59, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

July 3

Sentence re-writing

I do not think these sentences sound good, can someone offer help and suggestions in writing? Do I need to work on word order?

After Artaxerxes I (Longimanus), was Xerxes II who ruled in 424. From 424 to 336, five more Persian Kings ruled over Judah. One of them, Artaxerxes III burned Jerusalem in 350 B.C. The Jews rebelled against him in 348 B.C. and some were deported to Hyrcania. The last Persian King was Darius III (Codomannus) he ruled from 336-360.

In 50 B.C., the Senate, led by Pompey, ordered Caesar to return to Rome from Gaul, where he was fighting in the Gallic Wars, and disband his army because his term as Proconsul had finished.

While Caesar was in Egypt fighting the Ptolemaic forces, Antipater of Idumea, with the High Priest, Hyrcanus II’s blessing, had led 3000 Jewish troops to Egypt to help Julius Caesar.

In 50 B.C., Ceasar's term as Proconsul had run out, and he was ordered to return to Rome from Gaul. His army was forced to halt combat in the Gallic Wars and disband.

Antipater of Idumea sent 3,000 Jewish troops to Egypt to aid Caesar in fighting the Ptolmaic forces. (these may not be perfect, but it's an improvement) Mo-Al 03:46, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

The reign of Artaxerxes I (Longimanus) was followed by that of Xerxes II, who ruled during 424. Five more Persian kings ruled over Judah between 424 BC and 336 BC. Notable among these was Artaxerxes III, who burned Jerusalem in 350 B.C. A Jewish rebellion against Artaxerxes III in 348 B.C. led to the deportation of some Jews to Hyrcania. The last Persian King was Darius III (Codomannus), who ruled from 360 BC to 336 BC. (as above - not be perfect, but an improvement). Grutness...wha? 07:54, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Plural of Greek name

Quick: Does Herostratus pluralize as "Herostratuses," "Herostrati" or "Herostratæ?" _SeahenNeonMerlin 01:01, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

In English, Herostratuses, in Latin, probably Herostrati. In Greek, his name was probably Herostratos, with plural Herostratoi. —Keenan Pepper 01:34, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Editing American Sentences

Dear Wikipedia Volunteer,

First of all, thank you for taking this on. I appreciate Wikipedia.

I see the entry on American Sentences is on wikified. Being a form that was used by Allen Ginsberg, with little known writing about it, it is a difficult one to make a legitimte entry. I'd like for the page to be perfect, but would need some help doing that. Can you offer suggestions?

Thank you,

--Splabman 01:03, 3 July 2006 (UTC)Paul Nelson (Splabman)

P.S> The citation needed is:

• I don't know where that last bit was headed, but the article in question is American Sentences. · rodii · 03:37, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Teaching how to read the word "to"

Assuming the most common American sounds of "o" are (1) as the "o" in 'most" and (2) as the "o" in "dot".

How do most reading teachers at the kindergarten level teach children how to say the word represented by the letters "to"?

If the alphabetic principle is observed -- the teacher must say the letter "o" stands for some sound.

Does the teacher say the "o" stands for the long /u/ speech-sound -- or

Does the teacher say the "o" stands for the speech-sound /uh/, because almost everyone uses that pronunciation?

Either way does not carry over to other usual sounds of the letter "o".

I am writing a teaching program and am stumped by this simple question.

Teaching the word as a sight word seems to avoid the question. Is that the only logical solution? Martirc 05:39, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I remember learning that "to", "too", and "two" were pronounced the same, and we should not ask why :) You probably shouldn't focus on the exceptions to the rules first - teach the general rules and they can figure out the exceptions later. Kindergarten-age children don't need to learn a language the same way adults would. I don't recall my kindergarten teachers dwelling on prepositions anyway, it was always nouns and colours and shapes and numbers and that sort of thing. Adam Bishop 05:52, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I remember learning that "to", "too", and "two" were pronounced the same, and we should not ask why This just illustrates the problems with English pronunciation. In no other language do you have to wait for the fifth letter to know how to start pronouncing a word (see "chord" and "chore"). Why couldn't the world's de facto lingua franca have been any other language? JIP | Talk 08:22, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

If learners have been taught to pronounce words letter by letter, I'd say their teachers are more of a problem than the language they're learning. (Incidentally, in Chinese you have to know not only the whole character, but often the whole of the following character to know the pronunciation). Henry^Flower 08:26, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Many languages are pronounced pretty much letter-by-letter. Finnish has so close to 1-to-1 correspondence between written letters and spoken phonemes that I once had trouble finding violations of it. German comes very near, and Spanish and Italian are not far behind. People have to remember not to view the entire world through the view of the English language. JIP | Talk 09:21, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Differences between languages are not a problem. Expecting other languages to be like your own is a problem. Henry^Flower 13:10, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Still, when one considers pronunciation, there are much more languages pronounced similarly to Finnish, than there are languages pronounced similarly to English. English has the most complicated pronunciation rules I've ever seen, and I speak four languages fluently, and have reasonable knowledge of about half a dozen more. JIP | Talk 15:26, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

This is a problem with any reading program that is built too strictly around phonics. In my opinion, phonics is important, but it is an adjunct to the goal of making sense of written text. In the specific case of to and two, for that matter, these are short common words that are best taught as sight words. It's just easier on human memory. Phonics is best for longer, less common words that a child has to figure out. mnewman

<to> is pronounced IPA /tə/ 'tuh' in <to go> but IPA /tu/ 'too' in <to enquire>. I suppose it's related to the Great Vowel Shift. I'm no expert, but I'd just tell them to sounds a bit like too but written differently, to avoid confusion. --Kjoonlee 08:49, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Heck. Just try "cough, bough and enough". That'll teach em. Literally. --Dweller 15:36, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

What about "though", "through", "hough", "lough", and "hiccough"? —Bkell (talk)

In the school district my two younger siblings are in - "to" and other words are taught to kindergarteners as popcorn words. THat is, important words which are spelled like other words. --Chris S. 20:50, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

It does have real-world consequences. I remember a teacher at a primary school for the children of US serviceman in Spain saying that the typical nine-year-old child (who spoke English at home) had a reading age two years higher in Spanish than English, simply because of the complexity of English spelling. Jameswilson 22:51, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I know that Japanese is just as complex since they won't be functionally literate by the time they graduate highschool, with at 3,000 kanji under their belt. But yet they seem to excel academically. I wonder what's the discrepancy here. --Chris S. 04:51, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Capitalisation review

Hi. I've been reading the capitalisation guidelines, and I think I understand but they are a bit complex in places. Could someone review my work in the shopping cart software article and comment?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.55.210.63 (talk • contribs)

The article looks fine to me now. The best place to ask this sort of question is on the article's talk page or at WP:PR. My rule of thumb is: if in doubt, lower case.--Shantavira 08:39, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Didn't know about peer review, a relative newbie still. Thanks for that pointer and the review.

maestra?

A recognised expert exponent of various arts is quite often called a "Maestro", but surely this is gender-specific... what would the female equivalent be, and is it ever used in English? Grutness...wha? 08:07, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Just because a gender distinction is made in a donor language, does not mean there is any reason it should be made in the recipient language. This is particularly the case in English where the recipient language has no grammatical gender, and seems to be evolving away from sex reference in terms refering to categories of persons. For instance, in English there are fewer and fewer professions and nationalities that have sex-specific terms. Thus terms on the model of Dutchman and Dutchwoman have been disappearing and those on the model of Jewess have become highly stigmatized. Even actress is on the decline. So why would we want to refer to maestras or Latinas for that matter? mnewmanqc(head and only member of Purist Society Against Foreign Inflectional Morfology in English).

Latina and maestra I can sort of almost understand. What cracks me up is "hetera" to mean "heterosexual woman", as if the -o of "hetero" were the Spanish/Italian/Portuguese masculine ending. It especially cracks me up because courtesan-prostitutes in Ancient Greece were called hetaeras. User:Angr 10:19, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

And what about "Anarcha-Feminism"? Ucch. Bhumiya (said/done) 12:11, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Slightly unrelated: I can't stand octopodes, although I like octopusses and octopi make me chuckle. --Kjoonlee 13:01, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

So would a female lesbian (wait ... I mean, a lesbian) be a homa? Proto///type 13:30, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

'Homo' means 'same'. So a homosexual is someone who prefers people of their own sex, be that male or female. 'Homo' in this sense is just a shortening, no need to feminise. And it looks silly anyway. DirkvdM 14:05, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

"Homo" means "same" when it's Greek and "human" when it's Latin. So if one considers the Latin word instead of the Greek one, it would be logical to guess that "homa" was a female human, although it would still be grammatically wrong. JIP | Talk 16:10, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Within Latin, there is no obvious need or use for feminizing the word homo, but if a feminine were to be formed, it would be using the stem homin-, as in "hominina" or "hominissa" or whatever -- definitely not homa... AnonMoos 22:15, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

spelling english names in hebrew

hi,can someone tell me how to spell joshua and jack in hebrew?

1. In Hebrew characters or transliterated into English?
2. As given, or using the Hebrew pronunciations?
3. If the latter, is Jack really "Jacob" or (as in American usage) "John" or some other name, (as Jack is not itself a Hebrew name)?

Sorry, would like to help but need some clarity. --Dweller 11:12, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, go to Joshua and you will find "Yehoshúa, יְהוֹשֻׁע" and if you cannot see the Hebrew characters, you'll need to download and install a Unicode font. As for Jack, you can go to Jacob and find "Ya'akov, יַעֲקֹב". Hope this helps.--Andrew c 14:07, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Yud heh vav shin ayin and Yud ayin kuff vet respectively. Assuming Jack is really Jacob. --Dweller 15:32, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

In English, Jack is a diminutive of John. In Hebrew, the closest thing to John that I know of is "Jonathan", which would be pronounced "Yonatan", or in Hebrew letters: "Yud, Vav, Noon, Taff, Noon." Loomis 00:17, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Hebrew Yonatan (short for Yehonatan) is English "Jonathan". English John is actually Hebrew Yohanan -- you can see the difference in the Hebrew of Jeremiah 40:8, where they're side by side... AnonMoos 07:12, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Hence my requests for clarity, above! Given that the questioner hasn't come back, I guess he's content with one or more of the answers given. --Dweller 19:09, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

pseudo-English?

In Modern Times Chaplin "ad-libs pseudo-French and Italian gibberish", and at The Funniest Joke in the World we find the immortal pseudo-German Wenn ist das Nunstück git und Slotermeyer? Ja! ... Beiherhund das Oder die Flipperwaldt gersput. Are there any examples of pseudo-English in foreign-language films? What might it look like written down? Shantavira 12:47, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

There is a bit of imitation English in Ravel's opera L'enfant et les sortilèges, but I don't have the libretto at hand. "How's your mug?" "Rotten." is all I can remember. There is some nice fake German on the Sprachlernkassette in Top Secret!: "Der Blitz ist in der Flachmatuche. – The pen is on the table.". David Sneek 16:54, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

The Hacker Dictionary entry on Blinkenlichten mentions the Germans' "revenge" by using pseudo-English written by Germans, but I don't remember how it goes. JIP | Talk 17:22, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Pseudo-languages are a strange beast - they actually become harder and harder to speak as you become more proficient in the language itself (I speak French but not German, and find it easy to speak pseudo-German, but very difficult to speak pseudo-French). As to your question, there are two different types of pseudo-language - ones with nonsense-made-up words (as used by the mock-Swedish chef on The Muppets) and ones with real words in a nonsensical order. For the latter, there are plenty of examples printed on Japanese clothing. In Japan, the look of English words is "cool", but the actual meaning is irrelevant, so you often see t-shirts emblazoned with slogans like "Hand baker is my tree monkey!" (that is one I actually saw a photo of a while back). As for the first type, I don't know of any examples offhand, though no doubt they exist. Grutness...wha? 14:16, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

You may want to read Pseudo-English. smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 17:38, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

ß in german texts

Hello, sorry for my bad english. I am correcting some articles with german contents and german titles. Some german words (after the german reform of right writing) are wrongly written with ss, p.e. Strasse. It should be correct: Straße. What is usual in english? Do you use an ß in german texts, or not? When do you use ß? Thank you for your answer. User:Bera (My login is in his moment hacked)--89.53.245.159 14:05, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

It is definately common in english to substitute 'ss' for 'ß' (as we don't use that letter). Also older computers (made for english) didn't support 'ß' so, 'ss' was used instead. The same problem applied to other european languages, with english speakers using 'e' instead of 'é' in French, and so on. So the problem is not entirely ignorance. As far as I know correct use of accented and other letters is encouraged.HappyVR 14:26, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

So thank you for this information.--89.53.245.159 14:30, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

In addition, certain varieties of German (such as that used in Switzerland) do not use the 'ß' character, always replacing it with 'ss'. ß states that "this is officially sanctioned by the Duden, the regulatory institution of German orthography, which states in §25 E₂: In der Schweiz kann man immer ss schreiben (‘In Switzerland, you can always write ss’)".Ironfrost 14:42, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Dude! DirkvdM 07:29, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

The way I've heard, even in German, ß is a redundant letter. ß can always be replaced by ss, but not always the other way around. There is no capital form of ß, ß may not start a word, and ß is incorrect if the two s's belong to different syllables. So basically it's entirely possible to write grammatically correct German without ever using ß. It's mainly just around for hysterical raisins. JIP | Talk 15:22, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Wasn't the ß removed under modern German spelling? Emmett5 15:43, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

(Conflict) So, JIP, that´s wrong what you have heard. We make a very clear distinction between long or short vocals, so par example: Maße (engl. measure) and Masse (engl. mass), in Switzerland it is usual to write both with ss, the meaning comes with the context. Germany has had the spelling reform, in which this is regulated now. Straße has a long spoken vocal, so it has to be written with ß, although many people accommodate to the english use because of the more ande more global thinking, and write Strasse. You can see this also in many citys where many tourists come to. But good spelling in an pretentious german article belongs to the use of some ß. I`m sorry ;) --Bera 15:47, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Emmett, the German spelling reform of 1996 reduced the circumstances under which ß is used, but didn't remove it entirely. Before, ß was always used after long vowels and diphthongs, and was used after short vowels at the end of a word or when a consonant followed (daß, du mußt); ss was used after short vowels when followed by vowel (e.g. Wasser). Now, ß is used only after long vowels and diphthong, and ss is always used after short vowels (Wasser, dass, du musst). User:Angr 15:58, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, Angr, that was the clear explanation I wanted to give, too. You were faster than I. --Bera 21:46, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Take care when changing things in articles that you are not changing a German word that has been adopted into English. In such a case the use of "ss" would be part of the adopted name. Also, it would be bad to change an article's title to contain ß unless you added a redirect from the "ss" form so it could still be found, and I think the other way round would be better. As this is an English language encyclopedia, things are written in English language forms except when directly quoting something that is a foreign language. I don't pretend to define the context of "quote" here. Notice, for example that we have an article on München called Munich, because that is the English language name, just as we have an article on Beijing rather than 北京. Notinasnaid 08:34, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

On the other hand, make sure you aren't inventing English names for things that don't have English names. München has an English name, namely Munich. (北京 is irrelevant because it isn't the Roman alphabet anyway, and Wikipedia articles always use the Roman alphabet in their titles.) However, many places in Germany have no English name, and so the German name has to be used; in some cases the German name will have the letter ß and spelling it with ss would be a misspelling. User:Angr 09:08, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

When I learned German at school, we were always told that �ß represented the 'ss' sound. I later learned from various guide books (e.g. Rough Guide to Berlin) that the way it is pronounced varies from place to place and that in Berlin it is pronounced 'tz'. This sounded reasonable enough, and when I went to Berlin, I noticed that on some street signs the ß in the work straße was written as a corruption of t and z in old gothic script. The letter is still used in a number of German language newspapers, but where it does occur, is written in the more user friendly ß form. It would seem to come down to a matter of preference, in the same what that you may correctly spell 'role' as 'rôle' in English --russ 23:19, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

using of apostrophs

Hello, could you please help a german native speaker and tell me, when the apostroph in english is used, par example the economy's demand or German states' privilege. Is it usually what germans call Genitiv or are there other possibilities, too? Thank you very much. --Bera 15:27, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

The latter. There's an excellent article at Apostrophe. (Incidentally, I've now used two apostrophes in this answer without any genitives.) --Dweller 15:30, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, I didn`t (there it is ...) think about the apostrophe, when something is omitted. But I´ll have a look to the article! --Bera 15:51, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Here is a cartoon that is popular in some circles which describes the basic rules for use of the apostrophe in English. --LarryMac 13:42, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Parts of Speech

Is there a formal linguistic term for colloquial interjections made mid-sentence? For instance, "How the devil are you?" or "What the hell do you think you're doing?" Any idea if there is a formal linguistic or grammatical term for these? Thanks, --TeaDrinker 20:14, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Interjection! Emmett5 20:19, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, --TeaDrinker 20:46, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

• Meaningless intensives?--Patchouli 23:42, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I had also considered calling them Expletive attributives, although I can't say I have ever encountered the term before reading the Wikipedia article. Thanks for the pointer, --TeaDrinker 00:15, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Help with Future Subjunctive

Let us say that I am a student giving a philosophy lecture now; I wish to state to my listeners that I may contradict myself in the future as I learn more facts and ideas. This could happen in two years from now because my outlook will have changed.

What is the best way to articulate that in two years I will know more and come to different conclusions using future subjunctive? Inasmuch as there will be differing answers, I ask that every respondent enclose its sentence in quotation marks.Patchouli 23:19, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

"I may contradict myself in these lectures in the future as I learn more facts and ideas which may change my outlook." Use of the modifier may is usually sufficient for the future subjunctive. Emmett5 03:15, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

• "If I were to know now what I will have known in two years from now, then my analysis would change." I hope that this is grammatically correct; also, notice my use of the future perfect tense.--Patchouli 05:10, 4 July 2006 (UTC) (I imitated Subjunctive mood#Future_subjunctive.)

It's extremely dubious whether English has a "future subjunctive" in any very meaningful sense (though it does have modal auxiliaries which can be combined in various ways). AnonMoos 07:03, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Patchouli- your is sentence grammatically correct, but very awkward. Like AnonMoos says, English doesn't exactly have a future subjunctive. Emmett5 15:53, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

What was that about awkwardness, Emmett? (Your is sentence grammatically correct)  :--) JackofOz 05:42, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Tutsalaffa

--70.39.104.131 23:21, 3 July 2006 (UTC)what is the meaning of tutsalaffa? some one ask me did i know the meaning of the previous mentioned word. i'm not sure what language it is and i definetly don't what it means. can you please help?

Gwendolyn Pinckney

Are you sure of the spelling? ISTR that Tusalafa is a Samoan word (though I don't know the meaning offhand)... what context is this is, do you have any clues about the language at all? Grutness...wha? 02:16, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

July 4

Alphabetizing names in Portuguese

In the course of general cleanup I noticed that many of the people in Category:Portuguese footballers and Category:Brazilian footballers are alphabetized by (what looks like) first name instead of last (e.g. Carlos Alberto, Carlos Manuel, Gonçalves Isabelinha, Júlio César Soares Espíndola, and lots more), and the cats are quite a mess as a result. While some are categorized by their popular name, others are not, and I wanted to know if there are any special rules on this in Portuguese. Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people) doesn't mention any. Ziggurat 00:05, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

The problem is not special rules for alphabetization, I suspect, but the way footballers, especially the Brazilian ones, are named. They are often known only by their first name(s), only by their last name(s), or by a nickname. Carlos Alberto's full name is Carlos Alberto Torres, but nobody calls him that. Gonçalves Isabelinha is the last name of Joaquim Duarte Gonçalves Isabelinha. Júlio César Soares Espíndola is commonly known by his first names, Júlio César, but the article is under his full name, probably because there are several other football players called Júlio César. It seems to me, therefore, that all the examples you give are correctly categorized - though, yes, it does make the category page look ugly... David Sneek 05:50, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Groovy, thanks very much. I think I'll leave well enough alone, and sort some categories elsewhere on WP :) Ziggurat 22:35, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

German and English

I was playing the game Call of Duty 2 and while in Soviet campaign, I came across a wall with writing on it. One phrase was in Russian and the other was in German, which seemed like a "come-back' to the Russian phrase. Russian: "YAИUA ЭABOПCKAЯ." I don't know if the "П" is the right letter. It looked more like a tophat, but I can't find a letter that looks like that in Russian Alphabet. Then the German: "EINER SPINNT IMMER!" If some one could help translate those, that'd be great. Thanks. schyler 00:09, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps the letter was "Д"? That might fit the top-hat description. It's the cyrillic letter "D". It could also have been "Л," the cyrillic "L". I don't know any russian or german though.--The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 00:18, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

It may be that it's the handwriting and that is the letter. It looked like an underlined "П" but it is entirely possible it is just a "Д" written with poor handwriting. schyler 01:30, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Zavodskaya is "factory". I'm not sure what the first word is; it looks like "УДИЦА", but that's not a word. "Einer spinnt immer" -> "one is always spinning"? EdC 02:02, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

"Spinnt" is also German slang for "is crazy". JIP | Talk 04:27, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

The Russian is most likely "УЛИЦА ЗАВОДСКАЯ" (ulitsa zavodskaya), meaning Factory Street (or Factory Road). Tesseran 04:48, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

The German one roughly as There is always one who's crazy. Lectonar 07:28, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Stadia/Stadiums

Which is the plural of Stadium? Philc _T^E_C^I 00:54, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Stadia or Stadiums. Either are okay.  SLUMGUM  yap  stalk  00:57, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, cheers. Nice and quick and simple!! Philc _T^E_C^I 00:59, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

All the cool people say stadia tho. (All the cool people spell tho like that, too.) —Keenan Pepper 01:09, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I'd say the plural depends on which meaning of stadium you're using. Stadium in the sense of sports venue has the plural stadiums. Stadium in the sense of an ancient unit of length equal to about 190 meters has the plural stadia. (Antenna is another word that has different plurals depending on its meaning.) User:Angr 08:05, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I meant in terms of the sports venue. Philc _T^E_C^I 21:33, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Then I would stick to stadiums unless you want to sound like a pretentious git. User:Angr 12:22, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I think I have to disagree with Angr on this one; Wiktionary, the Concise Oxford English Dictionary and Dictionary.com all list both words as the valid plural of the sports venue. Road Wizard 17:42, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Chinese synonyms

I notice a bot just updated the Chinese link for Hydrogen peroxide from 过氧化氢 to 双氧水. These look very different to me, but Google translates the first as hydrogen peroxide and the second as hydrogen peroxide solution (which is all the more confusing because the second Chinese phrase is shorter). Could someone give me a breakdown of what these characters mean? —Keenan Pepper 03:11, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

First one literally means "crossing oxygens, combined with hydrogen", and the second one means "double oxygen water" (which indicates a solution). Both are used but I believe the first one is more scientific. On another note, shizhao looks like a user, not a bot. --ColourBurst 07:01, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I was talking about this change, made by Eskimbot. Thanks for the explanation though! —Keenan Pepper 01:38, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

I think Eskimbot did that change because in Chinese wikipedia 过氧化氢 is just a redirect to 双氧水, so it's just fixing unnecessary redirecting. In my opinion 过氧化氢 should be the main entry for Hydrogen peroxide, and 双氧水 should redirect to it (if nobody bothers to write about the solution). But that's just my opinion, and I am not a contributor to Chinese wikipedia. --Ming Hua 04:01, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

I believe Google is correct. The first term is very academic and is seldom used outside of scientific context, while the second term is used in daily life. As for the meaning of the characters, the character-by-character literal translation of the two words are "over oxygen (-ize) hydrogen" and "double oxygen water". --Ming Hua 06:17, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

It seem like the first refers to the compound H2O2 - as in bond length of.. , structure of.., etc whereas the second refers to a solution of H2O2. So the correct title for a chinese version of the Hydrogen peroxide page would be "crossing oxygens, combined with hydrogen" I guess. If you went to a shop for some disifenctant solution I guess the second would be waht you would ask for ("double oxygen water").(Chemist's answer)HappyVR 18:07, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Info

Where can you find info on what aspects all languages share (i.e. how many vowel sounds ust a language have, do all languages have velar sounds, etc. [not restricted necessarily to phonetics])? Mo-Al 04:07, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Linguistic universal might be a good place to start. Thylacoleo 06:57, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Chinese Language

Why has Chinese phonology been so different, it changed so much, but its syntax hasn't?

68.148.165.213 05:04, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Care to clarity if you're asking for the differences/changed from when (Qin Dynasty (秦), Han Dynasty (漢朝), Qing Dynasty (清朝) or whenever) to when (present)? In any case, I believe your statement regarding spoken and written Chinese language is unture, if substantial length of time is involved. --Chan Tai Man 10:08, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your reply. Cantonese, Mandarin, Hakka, & Toin Shan are mutally UNintelligeable, PHONOLOGICALLY & PHONETICLY, but Written Cantonese, Written Mandarin, Written Hakka, & Written Toin Shan are mutally intelligable. This is an anamoly in langauge. This is not found in any other language, & knowing this would determine if Cantonese, mandarin, Hakka, & Toin Shan are different languages or different dialects. Thanks.

68.148.165.213 06:06, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, several Romance languages are (substantially) mutually intelligible in written form, but not orally. The same goes for the Nordic languages, and I suspect many other groups too. Henry^Flower 09:46, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

To a significant extent, people who write Cantonese do so with a syntax more like Mandarin than when they speak. However, if you translated French word for word into Spanish, the result would be readable, if syntactically imperfect, Spanish. The many variants of Chinese work similarly, since the characters are broadly the same it is possible to see written Cantonese and read it as a somewhat oddly structured Mandarin; or alternatively to write Cantonese in a somewhat formal register that strongly resembles Mandarin usage. Furthermore, people who are literate in Chinese generally have at least some formal training in Mandarin, making it hard to find a literate Cantonese speaker who is completely without Mandarin knowledge.

Also, viewed in that fashion, Chinese is much less unique. Using cognate strategies, many Slavic, Germanic and Romance languages are broadly mutually intelligible in print. This strategy is used, for example, to construct artificial languages with high levels of comprehension for people with no explicit training in them, like Interlingua and Slovio. --Diderot 11:56, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your reply Diderot, but I dont' understand what you mean by '...Chinese is much less unique...'. It's either a language, or a group of dialects, or via extention, a language family:S.

68.148.165.213 12:46, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Not at all. You can choose to view it as a a group of dialects or as a group of languages, but the choice is up to you- neither perspective is right or wrong, they're just different. Same with Romance, Nordic and Slavic languages. Henry^Flower 12:59, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

I meant that this situation - where languages (or dialects, however you want to call it) that really are quite different can still share a written form - is not that unusual. Old Church Slavonic worked that way for a long time, as did Latin in the early Middle Ages.

Just for the record, & to validate myself, so I don't look like I don't know my shit, you are wrong. I have taken Linguistics courses, hell, I'm majoring in it. The fact of the matter is that language is defined by mutual intelligiblity.

68.148.165.213 08:47, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

It's just not that simple. Mutual intelligibility is a matter of degree, not an either/or issue. Have a look at our article. Henry^Flower 09:05, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I have studied only casually both Mandarin and Cantonese, and I noticed that each of them uses different characters in certain instances. For example I know in Cantonese they don't use 不 but 唔 to express negation. Would Mandarin speakers understand this? I know there are many more examples. --Chris S. 00:47, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

If they knew that character could have that meaning, yes. "唔" has the Mandarin pronunciation "wú", the same as "無"/"无" which is also used to indicate negation in many compounds: "无用" (useless), "无礼" (rude = without manners), etc. Consider the Scots sentence: "He is nae come." Read it out loud, and you can figure out that "nae" means "not" and that this sentence means "He didn't come." It's a bit like that to read non-standard Chinese. However, it seems to me that a lot of Cantonese speakers write "不" in place of "唔" anyway, just as most Scots speakers would write "He didn't come." --Diderot 13:40, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Idiot box

Does anyone know the origin of this term for television? I know the reasoning behind the term, I'm wanting to know how long the term has been around, possibly the first time it was used.

A Toronto television columnist renamed his daily column "Idiot box", referencing the fact we redirect from the term to the article "Television". He says he doesn't know the history of the term, I thought we could get more free publicity if we could tell him where it came from. -- Zanimum 12:35, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

The OED attests it back to 1959, in Peter Bull's book I Know the Face, But..., although that doesn't preclude its having been used earlier. --Ptcamn 12:48, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

My sister once said that the "idiot box" should really be the name for the little square on some envelopes that says "Place stamp here. The Post Office will not deliver mail without postage." User:Angr 13:31, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I imagine that goes back to the not-very-long-ago time when the PO would indeed deliver such envelopes, with a "Postage due" indication of some sort. Kinda like a collect call. The US stopped using them in August, 1986. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 14:00, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

The OED seems to be right. Today they published a followup based on a comment from the Canadian Oxford Dictionary, concurring. Thanks anyway, Ptcamn! -- Zanimum 17:18, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

The origin of the word television: this is pretty easy to conclude from the German word for television (Fernseher) which literally means "to look from a distance". Same with television "vision from a distance". - Kevin 18:43, 22 February 2009

• But does anyone know the origin of the term "patronising language used by arts-snobs"? --Dweller 15:10, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Tutsalaffa again

I asked a question about a word "tutsalaffa", this is how i recieved the word, "tuts-alaf-fa", maybe this will help a little.

gwendolyn pinckney

If your question didn't get answered, it's most likely because no one has an answer for it (yet). Maybe you could tell us a little about the context in which you "received" the word? · rodii · 14:46, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

There was sort of an answer. I suppose you can't find the posting again. Just scroll up 8 threads, to just above the 'July 4' header. Hopefully you'll check back before another thread is started below this one, or else you'll miss this one too, :) DirkvdM 14:50, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

If you google "tusalava" you'll find some things. Maybe that's it. · rodii · 14:52, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Can you say "a pest of [animals]"?

Hi!

I made a bet and wonder if you can say "A pest of [...]", for example "A pest of racoons", to name a big amount of racoons that's bad for the environnement.

I know you can say that in New Zealand and Australia, but is it official, academic english? My dictionaries aren't really clear about it.

Thanks for your help! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.48.121.212 (talk • contribs) 16:15, 4 July 2006

I live in Australia, but "a pest of [...]" sounds weird to me, and google searches for "a pest of [...]", using several different values for [...], get hardly anything (There's a few hits for "a pest of sheep", but that refers to pests on sheep, not sheep that are pests). However, one attestation for "a pest of rabbits" with that meaning happens to be in a book on Project Gutenberg from 1913. So maybe it's archaic. --Ptcamn 16:26, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Try "a swarm of ..." or "a plague of ...." _SeahenNeonMerlin 21:37, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I live in New Zealand, and I can't say I've heard of 'pest' used as a collective noun either. The OED offers no suggestions, so I'm going to guess that it's' not something in current usage. Ziggurat 22:34, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Make that two Kiwis who have never heard of this. Grutness...wha? 01:29, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

and three Australasians. JackofOz 01:50, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

As Merlin says, "a plague of..." is what you want. Jameswilson 23:03, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Spanish translation

The word in Spanish for the English...love —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.15.234.143 (talk • contribs) 16:16, 4 July 2006

Amor. You can read more here. Jacek Kendysz 16:22, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

By the way Amor was chosen most beautiful word in Spanish by the Spanish Internet users (see more here). --RiseRover|^talk 17:19, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Guttural consonants

What sounds are guttural consonants in English? The article does not provide any examples. _SeahenNeonMerlin 21:29, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

English doesn't have any that are used as actual consonants. Adam Bishop 21:51, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

There's a velar fricative in several Scots words which have been imported into English - loch, dreich, etc. Henry^Flower 22:07, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

The "H" sound is the closest you'll get in general American English. It's commonly called a voiceless glottal fricative, though it's not really. "K" and "G" sounds are arguably guttural, being velar consonants. Ultimately, as the guttural consonant article points out, it's all rather subjective. "Guttural" just means "sounding rough and from deep in the throat to my ears." --George 22:46, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

No wonder there aren't enough people who know the IPA. _SeahenNeonMerlin 23:44, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

"Gutteral" is a somewhat vague term...it's not used very often.--The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 01:02, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

It's used quite a bit in the linguistic study of Semitic languages... AnonMoos 01:34, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

There's actually a very good reason why "gutteral" isn't used very often. (Hint: "We are all in the guttur, but some of us are looking at the stars.") "--) JackofOz 05:36, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

July 5

Pronounciations of "International"

How would the Australian-English and Hiberno-Enlgish pronounciations of the word "international" be written in IPA?--The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 00:56, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

As a side note, we already have ɪntəˈnæʃənəɫ for RP and ɪɾ̃ɚˈnæʃɨnəɫ for GA.--The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 01:00, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

In this particular case, the Australian English transcription will be exactly the same as the RP, although there's some minor phonetic differences that aren't transcribed. --Ptcamn 06:47, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm American, and would pronounce it something like "Ĭn-ər-nă'-shə-nəl" in regular speech and "Ĭn-tĕr-nă'-shĭ-nəl" in careful speech (sorry, not an expert in IPA). From my understanding, the IPA sound "ɾ" is like a Spanish "r." I can't imagine someone using that in the word "international." -- Mwalcoff 00:43, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

The "ɾ" with a "~" over it means it is an "n" pronounced with your tongue in the position of a spanish "r."--The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 01:24, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Got to love the IPA -- so intuitive. -- Mwalcoff 02:54, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

OK....at least can someone give me the irish pronounciation of "international," then? I'd like to show three distinct varieties of the word's pronounciation.--The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 02:27, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Skol.--Anchoress 02:38, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Very yes-or-no question

Is "very yes" a grammatically valid construct? _SeahenNeonMerlin 02:09, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

No. No one would ever say that in English. It just doesn't make sense. You might say "definitely!" or something, but not "very yes". Mo-Al 02:12, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

We've already answered your question. See [2] --ColourBurst 03:00, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

There's no two ways about it

I'm wondering if this is the standard version of this phrase. Do some folks say "There are no two ways about it"? The latter is grammatically correct, but the former seems to be the idiomatic version used in Australia.

I'm also interested in other examples of standard idiomatic expressions that don't follow normal rules of grammar. JackofOz 05:31, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Using "There's" instead of "There are" isn't limited to idiomatic expressions. It's very widespread in colloquial speech.

Whether it's grammatically correct or not depends on whose standard of correctness you're using. --Ptcamn 06:44, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Names for numbers

Why do most folks tend to say "oh" when they really mean "zero", but don't replace "one" with "el"? Is it simply because "one point oh five" is easier to say than "one point zero five"? Does this happen in other languages? JackofOz 07:52, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

For me it depends - 'oh' can sound like 'eight' so if I'm reading a phone number (for eg) out to somebody I'll always say 'zero', but when there's no need for clear distinction (or the distinction is already clear) I'll say 'oh'. As to why we don't use 'el', I have no idea. Natgoo 09:35, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

It's because "one" has always been a number word in the English language, but "zero" as a specific numerical concept was only introduced in the middle ages, and has received a variety of names, such as "zero", "cipher", "nought", "oh", etc. The introduction of the concept of zero among English-speakers was associated with the introduction of the written Arabic-Indic digit symbol for zero -- but the concept of one was not in any way dependent on writing. AnonMoos 12:54, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Was "oh" always an acceptable word for zero after the concept arrived, or was it a later confusion with the letter O? JackofOz 13:19, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I think you're making it too complicated, AnonMoos. "Zero" is two syllables, but "oh", like most digits, is only one. When you're reading a number digit by digit, you don't want to break your chanting rhythm. Compare how "seven" gets reduced to one-and-a-half syllables in the same contexts. Meanwhile, "one" doesn't get read as "el" because there is no need to reduce it. The pronunciation of 0 as "oh" may have gotten its start because of typographic similarity, but it's now just a part of the oral language: I likely heard radio traffic reports mention the "I-four-oh-five interchange" before I learned to read numbers, and so when I did learn to read, it was just one of those things I learned to do. Compare how you learn to pronounce "the" short before consonants ("the stove") and long before vowels ("the oven"), or how you learn to say "Wrongo!" to a subordinate but "This turns out not to be the case" to a superior. It's just one of many context-conditioned optimizations. --eritain 08:37, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

I would expect to hear "oh" for 0 only when it is plain from the context that 0 is intended, such as in a telephone number. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 16:26, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

You also hear it in baseball statistics (a batting average of "three-oh-one", "oh for four" in at-bats in a game, etc), and the 400-series highways in Ontario (greater than 400, they are "four-oh-one", "four-oh-two", etc), and many many other things. Adam Bishop 21:49, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Also, grade point averages.. four point oh. --Chris S. 23:31, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

...and Highway one-oh-one. --hydnjo talk 00:09, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

six-oh-four Greenbriar Court, Apartment three-oh-two, Santa Maria, CA nine-three-four-oh-five Tesseran 05:13, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Don't forget double-oh-seven. --Kjoonlee 10:16, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

The symbol for one 1 is different and has long been different from that for L. The fact that the miniscule l looks the same in some fonts and that for 1 (when written by hand) is not enough for the two to merge cognitively. mnewmanqc

Eritain, yours is the best answer I've heard yet. (Do they really still have "superiors" and "subordinates" in your part of the world?) JackofOz 11:44, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• A lot of people need to pick up an arithmetic texbook that shows how to read decimal numerals.

Also, 0 is "zero" and nothing else. 505 is "five hundred five." However, serial numbers, numbers in bases other than 10, account numbers, and the like are supposed to be read one digit at a time. However, I don't like to seize people by the collar to make them understand this.--Patchouli 12:23, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

etymology of "tare weight"

Does anyone know the origin of the expression "tare weight"? Specifically, I'm trying to determine how the word "tare" became a component of the expression.

It's ultimately from Arabic ṭarḥ, meaning "subtraction". That is, it's the weight which is subtracted from the gross weight to get the net weight. --Ptcamn 09:17, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Trying to put my pathetic half-knowledge of the Arabic alphabet to use, I believe that word would be written طرح. Tesseran 06:14, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Transcibing a Malayalam sound

I'd like to know what the IPA symbol is for a sound in Malayalam represented by the Samvruthokaram. By this, I mean the very last "vowel" (it's not formally counted as a vowel although I think it is a vowel sound) of the words മാവു് or അതു്. --Grammatical error 15:12, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I've never heard it pronounced, and I don't know how to read Malayalam script. However, if it's an epenthetic vowel I bet it's close to schwa. --Kjoonlee 09:26, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

It is an epenthetic vowel but it's rather different from a schwa - it's traditionally been thought of as a "half-u" and I think it is sort of between a short /u/ (which is a completely different phoneme in Mayalalam - there are actually minimal pairs that distinguish it from the samvruthokaram) and a schwa (which is also either an individual phoneme or an allophone of short /ä/). The ISO 15919 transliteration is ŭ, if that helps. --Grammatical error 19:23, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

If it's an epenthetic vowel that's close to /u/ but isn't a schwa, maybe it's /ɯ/, the close back unrounded vowel? Or maybe the close back compressed vowel? I can't be certain without first-hand knowledge. FYI, there are sound samples included in the articles. --Kjoonlee 12:33, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

After listening to some sound samples, it appears to me that the samvruthokaram is something like the close central unrounded vowel ɨ as none of the other vowels sound anything like it. However, I'm still hesitant to put it on the Malayalam language page as there is no way to verify this and it is highly likely to be wrong. --Grammatical error 16:11, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

French Surnames

Many French surnames end with "ault" i.e. Arsenault, Beriault, etc. What does this suffix represent? Thanks for your time, Ash Edwards, Kingston, ON, Canada

• According to this site they're usually diminutives from other names, eg Bériault comes from Bérier, Raguenault from Raguin, Pagenault from Payen, etc. In other cases the suffix comes from Germanic "wald" or "waldan" (who rules or governs), like Raffault. And for those ending in -bault the Germanic origin would be "bald" (bold).--RiseRover|^talk 19:09, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, RiseRover. However, the site you cite is unilingual francophone. Any similar anglophone sites?

Real words

Are any of the following real words: Telharsic, Harfatum, Septomin. I can't find any mention of them in a short dictionary, but they do get many Google hits, although mostly in the form "Mathematical Anti-Telharsic Harfatum Septomin". smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 19:07, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Given that the phrase "Maths stands for Mathematical Anti Telharsic Harfatum Septomin" is a quote from a BBC comedy series called Look Around You, the three words are almost certainly made up. Road Wizard 19:19, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Content from other versions of Wikipedia?

I was starting to work on a page about the town of Tende in France, but then found it is largely done in the French version of Wikipedia already. Is is appropriate to translate/borrow wholesale from this other version, or would that be duplicating existing Wikipedia content. If I should go ahead and translate, then to reference I would make the French Wikipedia an 'external' link, correct?

--tirussell

It's entirely appropriate- get to work! If the French article cites its sources, it would be nice to mention those sources as well as the fact that you've translated from the other article. Henry^Flower 19:49, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but please mention at the bottom where the article is translated from. To not include this would violate the GFDL.--Pharos 20:25, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Is this true? I wasn't aware that a mention within the article was needed. I usually just put a note in the edit summary, do I need to do more? --Cam 05:50, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Also see the following:

• Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/fr
• Wikipedia:French Collaboration Project
• Wikipedia:Translation into English/French
• Wikipedia:Featured articles in other languages#French

When your translation is finished, you can add it to the list at Wikipedia:Translation into English/French#Recently completed translations. --Mathew5000 03:02, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Very interesting, I was wondering about all of that too for Dutch-French-English. And what about the pictures? For me, the lack of pictures in Dutch articles is by itself a reason to read the English instead, how about their copyright? Evilbu 15:19, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

July 6

grammar problem...I really need help!!!

Hi,

I was wondering if a phrase "to live healthy ever after" is grammatically correct. I really need help. I found that people use the phrase "to live healthy", but I couldn't find whether the whole phrase "to live healthy ever after" would have no grammatical errors. Thank you. --210.123.18.235 01:14, 6 July 2006 (UTC)Anna

Healthy is an adjective, and so, technically, to adverbify it you would say "To live healthily ever after". However, "live healthy ever after" could be grammatically correct if (you) is the assumed object of the sentence, in which case healthy would be the adjective describing (you). User:Zoe|^(talk) 01:23, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

It sounds really weird though. Maybe you could use it, but you probably shouldn't. Mo-Al 01:41, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Not sure that "you" could be the object in any sentence containing the verb "live". I can live my life, but it's not possible to "live you". However, "you" might be the subject of the sentence. The main problem with this sentence is that, as Zoe points out, healthy is an adjective where an adverb is required. "Healthily" is grammatically correct, but somewhat unidiomatic - we say "live happily ever after", but I've never heard "live healthily ever after". Three alternative suggestions:

• "To be healthy ever after"
• "To live in a healthy way forever"
• "To live a healthy life". JackofOz 02:26, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'm thinking of "live" as a pseudo-command. User:Zoe|^(talk) 02:37, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I was about to suggest some alternatives like above. At present, the original "to live healthy ever after" may cause confusion. --Proficient 09:39, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Technically, it should be "healthily ever after" since the adverb (as "happily" is also the adverbial form) is required in this construction. It may sound strange or "unnecessary" to the everyday native English speaker, but that is the correct construction! --67.103.119.250 19:45, 7 July 2006 (UTC) Francine

Pronounciation of English

Is there anywhere where regional pronounciations of English are compared, or where it is described how to pronounce words in English in that dialect? Mo-Al 01:39, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Regional accents of English speakers was hard to find? —Keenan Pepper 01:52, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

WP:DBAD was hard to find? --Nelson Ricardo 05:35, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

The third paragraph of WP:DBAD#Fundamentals seems to have been... Grutness...wha? 07:40, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, but I'm not an admin., so I can be one if I want. --Nelson Ricardo 09:35, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

That's horrible. Please be nice. --Kjoonlee 09:42, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

What's not nice about pointing out that admins. shouldn't get snippy at people asking questions on a page designed for people to ask questions? The article does not exactly have a title that trips off the tongue (through no fault of its own). --Nelson Ricardo 11:07, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

My apologies if I'm rash, but to me your post sounded as if you said, "I don't have any responsibilities so I can be an irresponsible dick." --Kjoonlee 11:27, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

No apologies needed. I am generally a very nice person, but I can be a huge dick when it's called for. --Nelson Ricardo 11:37, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

It was uncalled for. --Kjoonlee 12:05, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Do be nice. --Kjoonlee 12:05, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

And "tone" from an admin. is also uncalled for when somebody is simply trying to find some info. --Nelson Ricardo 20:29, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

/shrug. I don't find anything wrong with "Regional accents of English speakers was hard to find?" regardless of whether it came from an admin or not. --Kjoonlee 02:25, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Whoa, sorry to provoke such strong feelings. I was really interested in whether it was hard to find, because if so I could try to make it easier to find with redirects or whatnot. Sorry if I was snippy. —Keenan Pepper 16:15, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Websites with slow spoken Korean

Hi, I'm learning Korean and I was wondering if anyone knows of a website (or any other place) that would have slowly spoken Korean. I've tried popular news websites such as DongA.com and NHK's Korean news radio (both have news scripts/articles with recordings) but they are both spoken rather quickly - so quickly that I can't even distingish when one word ends and another starts.

Thanks in advance, Alex Ng 05:42, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

http://rki.kbs.co.kr/learn_korean/lessons/e_index.htm --Kjoonlee 09:14, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank again, Kjoon! This site is very helpful. Alex Ng 21:58, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Caron

There is an ongoing dispute on the talk page of this article. It has been suggested that editors with interest in linguistics would provide better insight into the problem. Would any of you mind voting on that page? 85.70.5.66 19:11, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Am I interested in linguistics? Not sure. But I am always willing to add an ill-informed comment. I hope rather than "voting" you mean "contributing information which may help lead us to a consensus", since voting is evil. Notinasnaid 09:20, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

This user has been spamming everyone who identifies as a linguist asking them to chime in on an argument that has nothing to do with linguistics. User:Angr 09:46, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

July 7

Licence/ License

Hi there Could anyone tell me the difference between a licence and a license? Is it the difference between English and American spelling or is there some fundamental difference of meaning? Are the terms and spelling interchangeable? Thanks! --Rosie.

According to the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, available several places online, "licence" is a "chiefly British" "variant of license." So just a spelling difference. --George 02:47, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

The above is not quite correct. In the UK licence is the noun, and license is the verb, always. Though often confused, they are not interchangeable. This follows the same pattern as device/devise, advice/advise, practice/practise, i.e. noun/verb. Perhaps someone else can explain the US spelling variants.--Shantavira 06:12, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

The Compact Oxford English Dictionary disagrees with you there. It gives licence and license as valid alternatives for both the noun and the verb. Road Wizard 06:45, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

The valid alternative of license being a noun and verb is the American version, I believe - in the "licence" entry, the COD says "(US license)". However, the alternative of "licence" given on the entry for the verb appears to be just wrong.--Grammatical error 06:52, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it can be described as "wrong", as before reading this thread I never knew that license was the grammatically correct form of the verb. I have never even see the word "license" used except in American contexts. A dictionary does not just list what is grammatically correct, but also what is in common usage. Once a variant spelling of a word enters into common usage, however incorrectly used when compared to formal grammar rules, it too becomes a correct and recognised alternative. This is an example of how languages evolve over time. Road Wizard 07:01, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

The difference between "license" and "licence" is a matter of spelling, not grammar. While prescriptively imposing grammar on people is both offensive and pointless, prescriptively imposing spelling is not only acceptable but obligatory, because spelling (unlike grammar) doesn't develop organically on its own but is by definition imposed from a language-external source (dictionaries, public schools, etc.). So if British dictionaries, schoolteachers, style guides, etc., say that licence is the way to spell the noun and license is the way to spell the verb, then it's so. (But if they tell you not to split infinitives or not to end your sentences with prepositions, you're welcome to laugh in their faces.) User:Angr 08:22, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, poor choice of wording on my part. However my point is still valid. Licence as a verb is in common usage as an alternative to license, at least in my part of the UK. To your other point, the development of spellings is an organic process, with new spellings for words popping up on a daily basis, though this is reined in somewhat by dictionaries, which provide a clear set of recognised spellings. Most new spellings are classified as mistakes and disappear as quickly as they come. On the other hand though, once a variant spelling reaches a certain level of usage, dictionaries will begin to adopt it as a valid alternative. Road Wizard 17:35, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

"Practice" follows the same pattern; "practice" is a noun while "practise" is a verb. One way to remember that is, the word "noun" precedes the word "verb" alphabetically, just like "licence" and "practice" precede "license" and "practise" alphabetically.--Mathew5000 08:49, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

At the risk of complicating the issue (and we're talking British English once again), Collins Concise and Burchfield's Modern English Usage both seem to disagree with that oddity in the COD. The OED states The spelling license, though still often met with, has no justification in the case of the n. In the case of the vb., on the other hand, although the spelling licence is etymologically unobjectionable, license is supported by the analogy of the rule universally adopted in the similar pairs of related words, practice n., practise vb., prophecy n., prophesy vb. (The rule seems to have arisen from imitation of the spelling of pairs like advice n., advise vb., which expresses a phonetic distinction of historical origin.) A slight argument for preferring the s form in the vb. may be found in the existence of the derivatives licensable and licensure (U.S.) which could not conveniently be spelt otherwise. Johnson and Todd give only the form license both for the n. and the vb., but the spelling of their quots. conforms, with one exception, to the rule above referred to, which is recognized by Smart (1836), and seems to represent the now prevailing usage. Late 19th-c. Dicts., however, almost universally have license both for n. and vb., either without alternative or in the first place.]--Shantavira 09:56, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

It is not just the COED that recognises licence as a valid alternative for the verb. If you check the definition at Dictionary.com you will notice all three dictionaries it quotes give licence as both a noun and a verb for British usage. Road Wizard 17:35, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I probably should have gone there first, but users at Wiktionary already had a discussion about whether licence is a valid spelling for the verb form. The user in support of the licence as a verb spelling provided 3 references of the usage, however there are many more that can be found simply by carrying out a Google search for "we licence", "shall licence", "will licence" or "won't licence". Road Wizard 18:15, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Latin Ablative

In Newman's autobiography, Apologia pro Vita Sua, I presume the words Vita Sua are in the ablative. Please correct me if I am wrong. Now, could some kind person please tell me what is the ablative of the word opusThank you in advance!--PeadarMaguidhir 06:15, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Opere. Abl. plural: operibus. David Sneek 06:35, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

opus is a neutral noun, third declension it's stem is oper

Now you just have to follow the rules of [declension], compare with nomen, nomine, nominibus

Evilbu 15:17, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Microsoft

Did the capitalization of the first letter in a cell start because of Microsoft [maybe namely, Microsoft Word]? Thanks. 68.148.165.213 07:29, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I think the answer is no, but without knowing what kind of cell you have in mind to it is difficult to understand what you mean. The first letter of a sentence or a proper noun is capitalized, but there is no such requirement in any kind of cell that I can think of.--Shantavira 10:12, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Do you by any chance mean a cell in Microsoft Excel? If so, the first letter in a cell (if you enter text) is not capitalised. --Richardrj 14:48, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

In prison you have to write your first letter in upper case? Not sure how that's connected to Microsoft Word, but that nasty man Bill Gates must indeed be responsible for such a heinous action. --Dweller 15:07, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Spanish to English

What is the English word for "diédrico"?

If it means the same in Portuguese (which is highly probable), the word is dihedral. Afonso Silva 14:23, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Etymologically speaking (and my Spanish etymology is rather rusty so correct me if I am incorrect), it refers to "cutting" or "that which is sharp." This could be related to the dihedral of the above post. --67.103.119.250 19:51, 7 July 2006 (UTC) Francine

consonant

hi could u help me by explaining what is a consonant.thank you.--203.194.97.65 14:03, 7 July 2006 (UTC)arun mascarenhas

This is an encyclopedia. Search for it. See our excellent article on consonant. Basically, it's a letter that is not a vowel.--Shantavira 14:12, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Strictly speaking, there are languages that don't use letters. All spoken languages have vowels and consonants, so a consonant doesn't have to be a "letter." --Kjoonlee 02:19, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

in English it is any letter other than a, e, i, o, u, or y. Further, y is a consonent when pronounced as in "yay" instead of as at the end of "happy". (This is stupid rule, since an English R should be a vowel too, since you can say rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr and it's between the u of turd and the e of red. Whatever) also, the consonant article starts off at the deep end, in such cases we should point the guy at the simple english wikipedia article too. 82.131.184.144 22:24, 7 July 2006 (UTC).

"R" is a sonorant. Vowels are sonorants too, but that doesn't make R a vowel. --Kjoonlee 02:19, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Portuguese communist youth organizations

I have a doubt. The present translation for "União dos Jovens Comunistas" is Young Communist League (I think it should at least be "Communist Youth League) and the translation for "União dos Estudantes Comunistas" is Communist Students League. Although the Portuguese word "União" means "Union" in English, but the word "Union" is related with trade unions, however, my dictionary also translates "Union" as "League". What should I use? Mário 14:21, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

For an encyclopedia, I would use the translation that has appeared in English media and not a lesser-used translation. FWIW, I also noticed that the "league" in League of Nations is translated into Romance languages, except in Romanian, as société/sociedade/sociedad/società/societat/etc. --Chris S. 22:34, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

They are former organizations, they merged in 1979, perhaps I'll not find media about them, that's my problem. But thanks anyway! Mário 09:25, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Of course the literal translation is "Union of the Young Communists", and since I am only a beginning student of Portuguese I can't say whether "União dos Jovens Comunistas" has any additional connotations in Portugual. I do think that "Union of (the) Young Communists" does not connote (to me) any relation to a trade union, but something like "Young Communist Union" such do connote a relation to a trade union. I'd imagine that one could keep the present title but add a beginning sentence explaining the literal translation and the problem with using it alone.--69.171.123.148 15:43, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

adjectives that end in 'ly'

The question a few threads up about the phrase "to live healthy ever after" made me think about adjectives that end in the letters 'ly', such as lovely and comely. Now, normally an adverb is formed by adding 'ly' to an adjective. But what if you wanted to convert one of these adjectives to an adverb? e.g. would it be appropriate to say "he kissed her lovely"? Lovelyly (or lovelily) wouldn't work, I'm sure. Maybe you would just have to change the sentence to read "he kissed her in a lovely way." --Richardrj 14:53, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I first encountered this problem when I moved to Texas in 1977. At the time there were road signs that could be opened and closed: when opened in the winter, they warned of ice on the roads; when closed in the summer, they said, "DRIVE FRIENDLY". This modification of a verb with an adjective instead of an adverb annoyed my father extremely, but he did admit that there was no really adequate way to say it. The adjective friendly simply can't form an -ly adverb: *friendlily doesn't exist. The only way to express the sentiment would be "DRIVE IN A FRIENDLY MANNER" which is too long for half of a folded-up road sign, sounds terribly un-Texan, and simply lacks the zip of "DRIVE FRIENDLY". User:Angr 15:18, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Friendlily doesn't exist? Maybe you should tell the guys who write the American Heritage Dictionary, and the Merriam-Webster guys seem to be getting this one wrong as well. (Wiktionary has it too.) — Haeleth Talk 13:51, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Incidentally, Merriam-Webster has lovelily as an adverbial form of lovely, too - I haven't checked the others. So you can use that, too. Though in the case of "he kissed her", I'd have expected "lovingly"... — Haeleth Talk 13:51, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, AH and MW notwithstanding, DRIVE FRIENDLILY would make me wince even more than DRIVE FRIENDLY does. And there's a difference between a loving kiss and a lovely kiss. I think the latter was intended. User:Angr 13:58, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, indeed it was. --Richardrj 14:01, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Eritrean Language

hi As we know Eritrea is a small nation which is located in East Africa. There are nine(9) languages in that country which are spoken by its people. The languages are Tigrigna, Arabic, Tigre, Saho, Kunama,Hidareb(Bedawet), Nara, Bilen and Afar. I want to know the meaning of " How are you?" by these all languages?

Try this page, and look up the languages. Unfortunately the phrases are all in the Roman alphabet, so this will be quite useless, unless you just want to know how to say them. - THE GREAT GAVINI {T-C} 16:47, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Damnit, and I knew it in Tigrinya, too! Curse you Gavini!!! — ዮም | (Yom) | Talk • contribs • Ethiopia 22:07, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Language similarities

Am I the only person who thinks that the Persian language sounds a lot like Italian? Other than the fact that they're both Indo-european, is there anything else that would make them sound so similar?--The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 18:06, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

That's a first. To me it sounds like some kind of Slavic language or something. After looking at the Persian article, they do have a number of phonemes in common, which is probably why the languages sound alike to you. I don't hear the resemblance - because Persian words tend to end in consonants while Italian prefers vowels. --Chris S. 22:28, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

latin/south/central america...and gays

hi, i´m in brazil at the mo (yay!) and just wanted a few things clarified as no one here really seems to know. i´ve always assumed that (in the english language)latin america meant central america (mexico, panama etc) + south america. is this true or are latin and south synonyms in this, context (eg, portuguese is the most spoken language in south america). also, does anyone know the portuguese (br) for gay? obviously the international"gay" is used but is there a more used local variant? something analogous to pédé in french? thanks! 201.32.177.211 18:49, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

In answer to your first point, our article Latin America has a map showing the limits of the region. I can't answer your second point though as I don't speak Portuguese. Road Wizard 18:53, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Latin America is the part of america where romance languages are spoken, mostly Portuguese and Spanish, that includes South America too, exlcuding Surinam and Guyana, at least that is what I allways heard here in Portugal. About the other question, you can use homossexual, or if you want slang terms, you may use paneleiro, maricas, rabeta. However, in Brazil, the terms may change and I think the most common there is veado, but don't forget that attacking someone with basis on its sexuality is not a good thing to do, wherever you are.

Well, not to read too much into the question, but somehow I suspect the questioner isn't interested in attacking anyone, but rather in finding other like-minded men... User:Angr 20:21, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

User:Angr, are you a man

the like minded men sentiment was closer to the mark (only for fashion tips, i promise). thanks for the answers though. 201.9.82.170 23:09, 7 July 2006 (UTC) (different number but i am the same person, honest)

anyone know why it did that? put me in a yellow box?

If you start a line with a space character, it's interpreted as preformatted text and gets stuck in a box. Remove the space, and the box disappears. - Nunh-huh 00:26, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

To add to that, you can test before posting: Apart from unintended formatting, I find that I pick up many spelling errors only after using the "Show preview" button. --Seejyb 13:35, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

If you're interested, take a look at Term for gay in different languages. It will probably have everything you need. —Daniel (‽) 11:23, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Genders for new words

When languages with grammatical gender create new words or names, which gender do they choose for the new word/name? I'm especially wondering about German, but perspective about any language would be interesting. PeepP 22:31, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't know an adequate amount of German to answer this, but it seems to me that in French and Spanish, words are usually assigned the masculine gender. Like in Spanish, Cristina Saralegui's talkshow is called El Show de Cristina. But sometimes, for one reason or another, some words may be assigned the feminine. An example of which is in this paper which talks about how gender is assigned to English loanwords among some Spanish speakers here in America. --Chris S. 22:46, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

See [3]. --Ptcamn 23:35, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

If there is a German synonym or at least a word that has a similar meening to the new word the gender of the old German word will be used. (das Treffen, Treffen=meeting, das Meeting) (die The official gender is decided by the "Duden" whose editors adapt to the common opinion. Of course there are a lot of exeptions. (die Verabredung, Verabredung=date, das Date)

It's often unclear. E.g., (E-)Mail is used with both the feminine and the neutral article (although the latter sounds wrong to my ears). It's probably by analogy to die Post in the former case.

I just had a look through a list of neologisms (here), and most often the gender of "English" neologisms seems to be determined by the gender of the corresponding (i.e. translated) German word. In compounds, the head determines the gender of the whole thing, regardless if it's English, partly English or German.

I didn't find and couldn't think of any entirely "new" neologisms. There are, however, genericized trademarks that could be classified as neologisms. All bets are off here. Nutella, for example, is used with all three articles, although people who don't use die are savage heathens. --Rueckk 15:09, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't know about German, but in Russian it is usually based on how the words sounds. If it sounds masculine (e.g. ends in a consonant) it would be masculine, if it ends in -a, it would be feminine, and probably neuter otherwise. --Ornil 21:48, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Words spelled the same frontward or backward...

I don't wish to edit, but I need an answer to the following question:

What is such a word, like deed, eye, pop and so on, called?

These are words that are spelled the same regardless whether they are spelled frontwards or backwards.

They are, I believe, a specific category of word, similar to, but not particularly like words that are spelled the same, but have different meanings depending how they are used, or are pronounced differently depending upon the context in which they are used (re: read, pronounced reed or red depending on verb-tense)

My email is [email address removed]

Thank you.

Richard F. Kobel —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.245.129.10 (talk • contribs) 23:37, 7 July 2006

These words are Palindromes. John254 23:47, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you John254. rfk--23:52, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

What is this, the third time this question has been asked this week? It should be added to the FAQ. User:Angr 12:26, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

July 8

Jedi in Classical Latin/ Classical Greek.

I am curious how other people would translate the phrase 'Jedi Knight' into the those two classical languages. Would it be something like 'Equites Iedae'? 'Equites Jidai' (to reflect the Japanese origin of the word) or something else? thanks

Duomillia 01:02, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Depends what kind of knight you want...eques (a guy in ancient Rome wealthy enough to own a horse and serve in the Senate) or miles (a soldier, but also a knight as opposed to a foot soldier in medieval Latin) would work. But what does it even mean in English? Is Jedi some sort of adjective? Is it "knights of the Jedi", where Jedi is a noun of some sort? Does this even have an answer? Adam Bishop 04:50, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually "eques" was the Roman rank between ordinary citizen and senator. In the Republican period, it originally meant someone wealthy enough to own a horse and so serve as part of the cavalry in the Roman citizen army -- but by the Empire period, it was basically just a rather vague honorific which could be bestowed on someone without making them a senator, or giving them any specific political or governmental position.

However, in the middle ages, "Eques" was the Latin word commonly used to translate the words for "knight" in various European languages.

Similarly, there's a disparity between Classical Latin and Medieval Latin in transcribing a "j" sound (dž). Classical Latin didn't have any voiced affricate "dž" sound like English or Japanese "j", and also didn't have any easy way of transcribing this sound from foreign languages ("Dziedae" would probably be the closest you could get, but that looks very un-Latin). However, in the medieval English and French pronunciation of Latin, written "J" or consonantal "I" was pronounced [dž], so you could just use Jedae / Iedae if you're willing to accept medieval practices (instead of being purely Classical). AnonMoos 20:39, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

"Miles" is the usual medieval opposite of "pedes", not "eques". In vernacular languages their word for knight came from the vulgar Latin word for horse, caballus. Adam Bishop 21:07, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Does the "umlaut" exist in English?

Reading English, I've occasionally seen the use of the "umlaut", as in the word "naïve". Is this a true English usage or is it simply a reproduction of uses of the umlaut in foreign languages. Does the umlaut exist in English? Loomis 01:02, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

If by 'exist in English' you mean 'is used in English' yes, but it's use is slowing disapearing. There used to be an umlaut over words like cooperate on the second o, basically when ever you need to identify a vowel beside another vowel that needs to be pronounced separately (ie not a diphthong).

Duomillia 01:06, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Careful when using the word umlaut - since it means something specific with regards to German. Another name is diaeresis, see Umlaut (diacritic). --Chris S. 01:44, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Right, in English words like "naïve" it is not an umlaut but a diaeresis. The magazine The New Yorker is famous for using diaeresis in words like reënter and coöperate. --Mathew5000 02:51, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

If there are two vowels in a row, but they are seperate syllables, then the second has a diaeresis. For example, re-examine may be written reëxamine, since each "e" is a seperate syllable. It's used in naïve because the "a" and "i" are seperate syllables.--The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 03:12, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

This is why you'll sometimes see (particularly in older texts) the word "coördinate". Grutness...wha? 07:33, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

By the way it's pronounced die-EAR-a-sis, please don't say die-a-REE-sis! :-) --Cam 04:47, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

The surname Bronte was sometimes seen spelled with a diaeresis over the e, presumably to stop linguistically challenged Englishpersons from pronouncing it as "Bront". JackofOz 03:59, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

The Economist Style Guide says "On words now accepted as English, use accents only when they make a crucial difference to pronunciation: cliché, soupçon, façade, café, communiqué, exposé (but chateau, decor, elite, feted, naive).

If you use one accent (except the tilde—strictly, a diacritical sign), use all: émigré, mêlée, protégé, résumé.

Put the accents and cedillas on French names and words, umlauts on German ones, accents and tildes on Spanish ones, and accents, cedillas and tildes on Portuguese ones: Françoise de Panafieu, Wolfgang Schäuble, Federico Peña. Leave the accents off other foreign names."--69.171.123.148 15:51, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

In asking the question, I was only really concerned with those "umlauts" that are used in the diacritic sense, as French is the only language other than English that I have any real proficiency in. I was therefore only referring to the "umlaut" as used in French, while it slipped my mind that it's used in German in an entirely different manner. It also slipped my mind that the "umlaut" (though I doubt they refer to it as such, so I'll just call it the "two dots") is even used in Russian, as in the letter "ë", pronounced "yo". Thanks for all the responses! Loomis 19:36, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

there is, of course, actual umlaut in English. For example when you say Wednesday (not Wodnesday). dab (ᛏ) 08:32, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand that last post. Yes, the Wednes in Wednesday is derived from the Norse god Oden or Woden. And, like almost every word, its spelling and pronunciation "evolved" to the way we spell it and say it today. I'm just not clear where any "umlaut" is being used. Loomis 01:17, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Translation from Commons

Can anyone help me translate this text from the image Image:Arowanakartecele4.jpg on the Commons?

Verbreitungskarte Fotografiert von Marcel Burkhard alias cele4

Thanks in advance. --Ginkgo100 ^{talk · contribs} 03:18, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Distribution map photographed by Marcel Burkhard alias cele4. --Chris S. 03:52, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! If the map was photographed, I wonder if the copyright was worked out properly? --Ginkgo100 ^{talk · contribs} 20:46, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Playing post office

Just what does it mean, "Playing post office", also a game called "pillow", and what are "pigs-in-clover? These phrases are found on pages 38 and 39 of the book "Is Sex Necessary?", by James Thurber and E.B. White, published 1929 Harper and Brothers.--70.23.11.212 03:34, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

"Post office" is apparently a kind of kissing game that was played at parties. All the boys would go into another room and girls would go into that room individually and get kissed by each of the boys. Then they would switch sides and each boy would go into a room full of girls and get kissed by each of them.

The expression "pigs in clover" means "very contented," from the notion that pigs like eating clover. "Pigs in Clover" was also one of those handheld marble games where you had to get marbles through a maze into holes. --Cam 05:05, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I did a "search inside" at Amazon to read the pigs-in-clover passage, and it looks like he must have been referring the marble game I mentioned, pictured on this page. --Cam 05:17, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Name for mind-numbing introductory sentences

Sometimes, in the flow of a narrative (particularly on television) there will be a sentence which - by itself - is so mindnumbingly obvious that you would wonder at the writer's intelligence. these sentences, however, are vitally important in the flow of a narrative, in that they will introduce a new section. An example would be a TV programme I've just seen about tennis players which dealt with current top players, then said: "Some tennis players have been in the game longer than most", before going on to talk about people like Agassi. The sentence by itself, though, is almost at the point of being a tautology. My question is, is there an actual technical term for these bland yet important "link sentences"? Grutness...wha? 07:50, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

It's called a "link". Though the phrase above also appears to be a Colemanball. --Shantavira 09:23, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Heh - thanks for that link! What with him and Murray Walker (and Keith Quinn here in New Zealand), there'll always be comedy in sport. Grutness...wha? 02:03, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

What is the meaning of the phrase "to balls up"? I'm not familiar with this phrase in my dialect of English. --Ginkgo100 ^{talk · contribs} 21:03, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Weirdly, a "balls-up" is identical with a "cock-up" - it means a mistake, usually an embarrassing one, and often in the form of making a seemingly easy situation far more complicated. In the case of Colemanballs, it simply refers to a very public gaffe. Grutness...wha? 07:44, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I have an example. The founder of a company I worked for had a newspaper interview where he actually said "Companies which design a product before constructing it have a substantial advantage over those which don't". LOL StuRat 20:28, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

On TV, I've heard it called a "segway". This seems to refer to anything (especially something completely unneccessary) that helps transition into a new topic. Black Carrot 18:15, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Um, that's segue. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 20:47, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Esperanto dipthongs

I've studied Esperanto to an intermediate level, but I've never found any clarification about the obsure "ij" ([4]) and "oŭ" ([5]) dipthongs. Everything I have read suggests that these are phonotactically precarious, but I've never seen any documentation specifying how to pronounce them, or the rules about their usage.

Does anybody have insight on this? --Pifactorial 06:42, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

The diphthong oŭ would be pronounced similarly to the english vowel in 'no' 'go' 'blow' etc; as opposed to 'o' in Esperanto which is like the 'o' in French or Spanish. But realistically oŭ is so rare in Esperanto (and ij even rarer) that it doesn't matter too much if you just pronounce them the same as o and i. Duomillia 15:22, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

In the Plena Ilustrita Vortaro (2002) the only word in which "ij" appears just before a consonant is Kijlo (the German city Kiel). The only words in which "oŭ" appears just before a consonant are poŭpo (a synonym of pobo = poop deck) and toŭfuo (tofu). --Cam 16:47, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Is "ij" the same as "ий" in Russian? (Not that I know how to pronounce that, either :P) --Pifactorial 02:22, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Would it be pronounced [iː]? Mo-Al 07:37, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, it shows up literally as [ij] everywhere I see, but I think that would be functionally almost identical to [iː]. Man, I want to study phonetics so badly. --Pifactorial 08:28, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, since [j] is palatal, I guess it would be like pronouncing a long i with the back of your tongue lifted. Probably wouldn't sound any different to an untrained ear. --Pifactorial 08:36, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

July 9

The movie was a bomb

Just about any discussion on the differences between American and British English says that "bomb" means "failure" in American English, but "success" in British English. Is a bomb really a success in the U.K., or is this in the same category as the conception that the Eskimos have 72 words for snow? Bruised

It's a success in American English too, if it's definite - "a bomb" is bad, "the bomb" is good. More or less. (Although "a bomb" is far more mainstream slang than "the bomb".) Adam Bishop 05:55, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Sort of like the words 'bad' and 'evil' can be used to mean 'good'? Is there a word for that? It's not irony, though the same concept. DirkvdM 06:22, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

In British English, if you said "the movie went like a bomb" or "the movie will go down a bomb", then that would be praising the movie as a success. However, the American usage has gained some acceptance in the UK over time, so you may also hear that "the movie bombed out", which suggests failure. Road Wizard 11:05, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

On a related note, I've always been puzzled by "it went down like a lead balloon", since a lead balloon would surely go down very well. Henry^Flower 11:16, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

A lead balloon (or led zeppelin, a connected phrase) would indeed go down well, but the comparison here is with things that fly. Flying is the analogy for being successful, so going down is an analogy for failure, and a lead balloon represents rapid and/or catastrophic failure. Notinasnaid 11:22, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, I've always heard the saying as "it went over like a lead balloon". User:Angr 12:18, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

A variety of terms can mean a world of difference depending on an article. Compare:

• This car is shit! Bad.
• This car is the shit! Good.

They both have completely opposite meanings, and the only difference is the word "the."--The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 15:29, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I think that's mainly a North American usage. Slang seems to have been a lot more precise before there was the hip hop culture. _SeahenNeonMerlin 06:52, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

As far as "lead balloon/led zeppelin" is concerned, lead balloon is far older. Acording to popular legend Keith Moon, on hearing that Jimmy Page was forming a band, said that "it will go down like the world's biggest lead balloon - a lead zeppelin, in fact". Page liked the phrase and used it. As for "bomb's, there has long been the English meaning of an old car which does not work properly being an "old bomb", as well. Grutness...wha? 07:50, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Is the following sentence grammatically correct?

   "John filed the article without reading it."

Context: I am told by a linguist friend:

    "Which article did John file without reading?"
  is OK, but 
    * "Which article did John file without reading it?"
   is ungrammatical.

I am not a native speaker of English, so I would appreciate comments from native speakers. Is there any logical explanation for the ungrammaticality of the above sentence?

Thanks Vineet Chaitanya

Seems fine. Maybe, if it fits into the context, you should use

"John proceeded to file the article without reading it."

--Killfest2 11:17, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree with your linguist friend. *Which article did John file without reading it? is ungrammatical for the same reason that *What did you eat it? is ungrammatical. --Kjoonlee 13:16, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

According to http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/198311--.htm

"Which article did you file without reading it?"

is grammatical! --User:Vineet.Chaitanya

Then I disagree with Chomsky! It's ungrammatical for me, and that's what my grammatical intuition tells me. --Kjoonlee 13:41, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I am not sure whether it breaches any rules, but the inclusion of "it" makes the sentence sound a little stilted to me. It could be a valid sentence structure, but it is very unusual to encounter it in spoken English (unless there are a few dialects that favour that form). Road Wizard 13:48, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

The object of "reading" has already been supplied, i.e. "which article", so it is wrong to provide another object, in this case "it", even though it refers to the same object.--Shantavira 14:53, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

"John filed the article without having read it."? Philc _T^E_C^I 15:25, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Your linguist friend was correct, it wasn't right, but I don't know which rules it violates, I just know it sounds horrible. StuRat 15:56, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Neither do I, but I suspect there is the implication of "Which" as meaning "Which one is it?", in which case, the "it" is already implied and is therefore unnecessary. Grutness...wha? 07:59, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

The more I look at it, the more I think that it isn't wrong. 'It' can be used because 'reading' could have some object other than 'which article' (or no object); using the pronoun clarifies this ambiguity. Henry^Flower 09:08, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

how about a context where it does not refer to the article? "a big red warning flashed on the screen. But John filed the article without reading it." The sentence even if grammatical would be nonsensical, because you cannot read an article while reading it. The filing takes about 5 seconds. The reading, you would assume, at least a couple of minutes. Therefore you would need to say "having read it" unless John is an extreme speed-reader :) dab (ᛏ) 09:42, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Nonsense. 'It' refers to the article, but if 'it' is not there, the object of 'reading' might not be the article- it could be a guide on how to file articles, or some such. (And "I crossed the street without looking" means the same as "I crossed the street without having looked"; the only difference is that the former is natural English.) Henry^Flower 09:51, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I understood that you (naturally) took 'it' to refer to 'the article'; I was pointing out that there may conceivably be a context where it doesn't, making the sentence grammatical. That's hardly 'nonsense'. And no, you may actually cross a street while looking, while it is much more difficult to file an article while reading it, so your analogy is a little bit inexact. dab (ᛏ) 11:14, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes you can cross a street while looking, but you can equally cross a street after looking (or after not looking); describing the latter, the two sentences mean the same thing. Henry^Flower 11:18, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Chomsky's core assumption that "there are things no amount of learning will teach you" is simply wrong, and it appears that by now he stops at nothing to save appearances (not surprising, considering the 40 years people wasted with this idea of his). The sentence is ungrammatical, as Shantavira points out above. Of course it may still be "performed" in real life, because, let's face it, native speakers say lots of ungrammatical things, all day long. Which doesn't just make them grammatical, only after a 'mistake' becomes acceptable and is being said consciously can you say it has been admitted into grammaticality. dab (ᛏ) 08:30, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Does not the following notice support the grammaticality of the sentence under consideration? "CAUTION: DO NOT SIGN THIS DOCUMENT WITHOUT READING IT IN ITS ENTIRETY AND CAREFULLY." Vineet Chaitanya

it doesn't, because the sentence under consideration has which. But it does make the point that anteriority is not always pedantically expressed ("do not sign without reading" vs. "do not sign without having read"; I would of course be hard put to argue that the signing is to be done at the same time as the reading). dab (ᛏ) 14:04, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

The first sentence at the very beginning of this topic doesn't have 'which'. Would you consider it grammatical? --Vineet Chaitanya

Yes, certainly. --Kjoonlee 06:25, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Merely containing "which" does not make the "it" ungrammatical; compare "He filed which article without reading it?" for a counterexample... — Haeleth Talk 14:00, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Will it make any difference to grammaticality judgement if "Which" is replaced by "What"? I have the following sentence in mind:

   "What article did John file without reading it?"
    I also take this opportunity to thank all the respondents.

--Vineet Chaitanya

Daemon - the etymology and usage.

Hey Folk,

There is an error in the word usage in the section "demon" where the words Daemon and Djinn are used as "other examples". I wasn't able to edit this as it is erronious information. The words Djinn and Daemon are not the same as demon... I am sending this into you folk as essentially it is a language problem.

Personally I find the use of the word Daemon in place of Demon a sign of complete ignorance on behalf of the author. Either that or an act of disrespect for the actual meaning of the word.

Regards,

Grant

I have edited the formatting of your question slightly, as it wasn't word-wrapping properly.

The articles I think you are referring to are Demon and Daemon (mythology). I think the problem you have identified arises because the word daemon has two different meanings, the first a mythological being in ancient Greek belief, and the other an archaic spelling of demon. [6], [7] Perhaps the solution to the problem would be to make it slightly more clear on the demon article that daemon has two meanings? I am not overly familiar with the term djinn, so I will let someone else answer that part of your question. Road Wizard 14:14, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

A djinn, or genie, is a specific mythological being, like the one that comes out of Aladdin's lamp. Note that daemon has a meaning in computer systems, as well; it's a process that runs in the background to do "housekeeping" tasks for the operating system. StuRat 15:47, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

And daimon, so spelled, is more appropriately associated with a demiurgos than with a demon. - Nunh-huh 07:42, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

looking for a word

Looking for a word that means something similar to "to think it necessary". Thanks, -Kyle

I cannot think of or find such a word. I would just qualify a word such as require or necessitate. (eg. "His habits necessitated his eating breakfast before lunch") --Oldak Quill 15:00, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

In certain contexts you could use the word "prerequisite":

"Do you think it's necessary to take Algebra before Calculus ?"

"Yes, it's a prerequisite." StuRat 15:39, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

"Require" would do, or "need." SlimVirgin ^(talk) 17:56, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Is there another language you have in mind that has one word meaning "to think it necessary"? If so, what language and what is the word? Also, it would be helpful to give an example sentence in which you could use that word. My hunch is that "require" does not meet your needs. For example if I say "I require food," that means "Food is necessary", not "I think food is necessary". --Mathew5000 23:46, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Maybe what you are looking for is something like to depend or to rely. E.g. "He is depending on warm weather tomorrow for a successful party." That means, roughly, "He thinks warm weather tomorrow will be necessary for a successful party." --Mathew5000 07:09, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

depending on how strongly you think something is necessary, maybe you could simply "call for" it (think it necessary), and similarly advocate or prescribe it?

This calls for immediate action: "This means immediate action is necessary!" He called for immediate action: "She thought immediate action was necessary!"

Consider "insist on".

82.131.188.248 15:11, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

the "Keryo" in "Keryo-Pente"

What does the "Keryo" in "Keryo-Pente" (the name of a variant of the game Pente) mean?

July 10

Learning Latin

ive gone as far as going to "list of latin phrases" and memorizing words and phrases. ive done pretty well, its been about 2-3 days and ive memorized about 30-40 words. the thing is, i dont know how to use the words in proper grammar. is there a good site that teaches everything about learning the latin language? gratias =) -PitchBlack

[8] --Ptcamn 13:57, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Try [9] . Junesun 17:00, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Consonant letters used for vowel sounds

Does anyone know of a language conventionally written in the Latin alphabet in which a vowel sound is represented by some letter other than the traditional vowel letters a e i o u y or some letter developed from these (e.g. œ æ ø ə, vowel letters modified by diacritics and the like)? The only examples I can think of are (1) Welsh, where w represents /u/, and (2) the conventional transliteration of the Cherokee syllabary, where v represents [ə̃] (but this doesn't really count because Cherokee is usually written in the syllabary, and the v is just used in transliterations). User:Angr 13:51, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

well, Slavic languages where syllabic r is spelled simply r? dab (ᛏ) 13:58, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I thought about that, but a syllabic consonant isn't the same thing as a vowel. User:Angr 14:06, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Other Amerind langs besides Cherokee are (perhaps rather have been?) written with v as a vowel. Would they count?

I'm not sure, but I wouldn't be surprised if Polish's ł (normally [w]) is [u] in some situations. --Ptcamn 14:00, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Do you know of a specific Amerind language that uses v as a vowel? I thought Mohawk did, but when I looked into it a bit deeper, I couldn't confirm it. Polish could work if we can confirm the environments in which ł is [u]. User:Angr 14:06, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Creek/Muskogee is one. --Ptcamn 14:47, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! It's very frustrating, though, that the sounds described in the Orthography section of that article are not the same as those described in the Phonology section. The Orthography section says that v is a schwa sound, but the Phonology section doesn't indicate that schwa even exists in Creek. User:Angr 15:15, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Hebrew has a phenomenon called Mater lectionis where something similar happens. Mo-Al 15:18, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

How about Latin itself, which used "v" represent "u"? --Chris S. 22:14, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

And I to represent y, right? Mo-Al 22:15, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

But at the time v and u were considered variants of the one letter. It would have, at the time, been considered to be a vowel that is sometimes also a semivowel, rather than a consonant than also represents a vowel.

If you do choose to count it, though, it's not just Latin - every language written in the Latin alphabet used v for u until a few centuries ago, even English. --Ptcamn 23:54, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

How to edit a title?

The title/name "RAMTV" (pronounced: ram:t:v:) has to be in capitals, because its an acronym of names, like e.g. "MVRDV". so it doesnt make sense to write "Ramtv" as Wikipedia automatically "corrects". How can i capitalize it? Can anybody do it for me? thanks

--Robsed 14:08, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

You need to move the page. Click the 'move' tab at the top of the article page. By the way, this type of question would have been better asked at the help desk. --Richardrj 14:37, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

sorry, if i click 'move'it says that i am not logged in although i am. could it be because my account is new? could you do it please? --Robsed 15:18, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, new users can't move pages. - Mgm|^(talk) 20:03, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

You appear to have written an article about a company you work for. This is discouraged at Wikipedia. Also the company appears not to be notable.--Shantavira 15:29, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Eritrean Language

hi Before 2 days i have asked the following question:- As we know Eritrea is a small nation which is located in East Africa. There are nine(9) languages in that country which are spoken by its people. The languages are Tigrigna, Arabic, Tigre, Saho, Kunama,Hidareb(Bedawet), Nara, Bilen and Afar. I want to know the meaning of " How are you?" by these all languages? And i get an answer from you. How ever from the lists of languages you gave me,i get only the answers of Tigrigna, Arabic and Bilen. By thanking for the answers you already gave me, i am also asking you to give me the answers for the rest 6 languages.

Literally, in Arabic it's "Kayf enta," which is fine but there are other ways that are more common, I think. Tigrinya was in the link earlier. Tigre is similar to Tigrinya. Literally, "how are you" (not how do you go, or how was the day, or something like that with equivalent real meaning but different literal meaning) is something like "kem enta" or "kemey enta." Not sure, though. — ዮም | (Yom) | Talk • contribs • Ethiopia 22:30, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

German Propaganda

Im playing a World War 2 style video game and theres German messages spray painted everywhere. One in particular stands out: Einer Spinnt Immer! I tried an online translater but I couldnt get any results... Thanks a lot!!

Maybe it's not really German. I don't speak German though, so don't take my word for it. Mo-Al 18:43, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

This has already been answered above (see here). The last answer (There is always one who is crazy) is correct. --Rueckk 18:52, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Euphemisms

What are the current politically-correct terms for describing cripples and retarded people? --67.185.172.158 18:40, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

• They're not only politically correct, but non-derogatory as well, which is always a good thing. I would say: disabled for the first, mentally handicapped for the second. - Mgm|^(talk) 19:55, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Might want to specify physically disabled for the first one. Reminds me of the time on Family Guy when Joe says "Peter, I'm not retarded, I'm handicapped." and Peter says "Well now you're just splitting hairs.". —Keenan Pepper 22:51, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Why not either physically and mentally handicapped or physically and mentally disabled? Or would that be too logical for a natural language? :) DirkvdM 06:39, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

The questioner asked for politically correct terms, not natural language.  :-) --LarryMac 14:11, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

• Yes, that works for me. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:00, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't agree that "mentally handicapped" is the best term. The Wikipedia article handicapped notes correctly that the term can be pejorative. In any event it strikes the ear as out-of-date and slightly ignorant. Better adjectival phrases are "developmentally disabled" and "mentally disabled" (see Developmental disability). Contrary to the heading of this section of the page, these phrases are not euphemisms. Rather, these terms constitute accurate, neutral, understandable terminology. --Mathew5000 02:41, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I've heard people say they prefer "differently abled" rather than "disabled". The former suggests they have some abilities if not the ones they might prefer, whereas the latter can suggest they have no abilities at all. I can see the logic, but I really think this is taking literal interpetation of language and PCness to a new extreme ("developmentally differently abled" - what a mouthful). JackofOz 02:48, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

The term "differently abled" is a euphemism; in my view it is not clear and not necessarily accurate. --Mathew5000 03:21, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Mentally challenged is another euphemism. I agree that 'Developmentally disabled' is both accurate and neutral.--Anchoress 04:11, 12 July 2006 (UTC) ADDED: I've also heard 'cognitively impaired'.--Anchoress 04:12, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

The best way to avoid travelling too far on the euphemism treadmill is to refuse to step on it at all. Notinasnaid 12:15, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Diminutive form of "Hare"

I have a tiny question. Is there any diminutive form of "hare" in English (like зайчик is diminutive form of заяц in Russian), i.e. what is the word for little hare, for unmatured hare? ellol 21:28, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I believe it is kit or kitten, the same as a cat. --Ptcamn 22:02, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

After a bit of looking around I've found the term leveret, but that's a bit obscure and I wouldn't expect the average person to know it. --Ptcamn 22:08, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Really? We were taught about leverets in primary school. Admittedly that was nearly 40 years ago, but I'd still expect it to be fairly well known in the UK. -- Arwel (talk) 23:22, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Or I could've just looked at the Wikipedia article for hare. Stupid me. >_> --Ptcamn 22:09, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Also consider "bunny" although that's a rabbit, not a hare. If you don't need a very literal form it might work for you. --Ornil 22:11, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you!! ellol 22:26, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, this was an attempt to "render" Russian pen name Holm van Zaichik... But it's already known in English, google finds it... :-( ellol 22:34, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Are you making a wikipedia article for him (or maybe I should say them)? I can't find it if so. --Ornil 20:20, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Really interesting, "great and rich English language" :) ellol 22:35, 10 July 2006 (UTC)*

• "Puss" is a nickname for a hare in hunting lingo,equvalent of "bunny"It got transfered to cats much later and yes ,it is the origen of the rather naughty slang in it's hare form.hotclaws**==(217.39.9.153 07:59, 11 July 2006 (UTC))

July 11

Word Usage

Is is past, or passed?

It stretched horizontally from the Pithom (near the Nile) past Shur.

It's a preposition, so "past". See a dictionary definition - you're looking for Prep. 2 ("Beyond in position; farther than") Ziggurat 03:04, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Em-dash question

Quick: Do I put a comma after Philistines?

Its ancient name — Way of the Philistines was a reference to the route passing through the Philistine Plain.

Also,

descending southeastwardly to the foot of the mountain .... or descending southeast to the foot of the mountain.

You could either have a pair of commas or a pair of em-dashes surrounding Way of the Philistines, or none at all. Having only one of either would not be correct. Having an em-dash with a comma is also not correct. JackofOz 04:54, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

As for the second part, the first is not correct. The second is OK, but sounds a bit slangy to me. I would put "descending in a southeasterly direction". --Richardrj 07:14, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Writing

How does this sound?

It descends southwardly into the city with a slight deflection to the east; ending its course at the Pool of Siloam

Also if you look in most books, there are commas used after the em-dash.

I assume that this is part of the previous question; if so please put it into the text of that question rather than starting a new one. You can do this by clicking on the edit link to the left of the question title. —Daniel (‽) 13:26, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

The word "southwardly" is very old fashioned. The correct word is southwards. The semicolon is incorrect; it should be replaced with a comma. Commas are rarely used in conjunction with em-dashes these days. How old are these "most books" (and in what language)?--Shantavira 13:33, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for you help. Also is this sentence correct? The books are new. I gueess they will start and end, with an em-dash and use a comma after another phrase. So when do you uses a semi-colon?

The former city would principally serve the temple; however, some people lived there as well

Seems to switch tenses. I'd expect "would have principally served". Not really sure what the meaning is. Don't the people serving the temple live in the city? Is the meaning here something like "... was dominated by the temple, and most of the city was given over to providing for the needs of those who worked and visited it. However, not all the city's inhabitants were associated with the temple". Separate sentences convey the meaning more clearly, and the break is too strong for a semi-colon, but if you want to write like Gibbon you could try something like "The city was inhabited largely but not exclusively by those who serviced the temple which dominated it." ("dominating temple" is more succinct but could give the wrong impression). Notinasnaid 14:22, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Have you taken a look at our articles on the semicolon and the dash? They give much more complete explanations than you are likely to get at the reference desk.--Shantavira 16:13, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Class of verbs

I'm writing sentences for a psychological study, and I'm having trouble a certain subset of verbs. What I'd like to know is: do these verbs belong to some specific class, or part of speech, that I could use to refer to them?

Basically, the subset of verbs that I'm interested in are those that could fit within this sentence:

"The box ______ the boy"

For example, verbs I could have include

The box interested the boy, because it was brown
The box pleased the boy, as it was very large
The box irritated the boy, because it was in the way
The box angered the boy
The box puzzled the boy
The box inspired the boy
The box annoyed the boy
etc.

Can anyone help me describe these verbs?

They're all transitive, but that doesn't help because other transitive verbs don't fit ("the box kicked the boy" is no good). They seem to be verbs that explain the effect an inanimate object has on an animate object (obviously they can be used for other things as well, but that's not what I'm interested in).

My main problem is that I need to find verbs that can fit within the sentence, and are also relatavely common in the English language. For some reason, none of the verbs I can find that fit the pattern are as common as verbs such as "work", "write", "accept", "tell", etc. I can only find about 20 or so verbs that fit the pattern, so it would probably help if I had some kind of name for them, or well-understood description.

Thanks for any help or advice. — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 15:17, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

As far as I know, they would all be reflexive in German (Something like the boy interested himself in the box). That might be something to go on. Other than that I can only suggest that it is something to do with passivity (the box made the boy interested). The question certainly interests me, though. —Daniel (‽) 15:40, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Syntactically, I think "transitive" would be the closest you can get. From there you'd have to get into semantics; agents, patients, etc. --Kjoonlee 17:16, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Nobody suspects the stative verb lurking around the edges of verbiness! — Gareth Hughes 17:21, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

In answer to Dbmag (Daniel) above, I don't think any of these verbs would be reflexive in German, at least not in literal translations where "the box" is the subject of the verb. And in answer to Gareth, I don't think they're stative either. They don't really pass the tests of stativeness at stative verb, especially not if you try them out in different sentences with animate subjects. User:Angr 20:06, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Some of them are reflexive in French though, and some of them are deponent in Latin. English doesn't have a "middle voice" but that is kind of what those verbs indicate, isn't it? Adam Bishop 22:37, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, thanks for the replies so far. I didn't get exactly what I was looking for, but this is mostly because I don't know what I'm looking for, which makes it difficult to ask. Dbmag, that comment about who all the sentences could be rearranged to form "the box made the boy interested" is very interesting and helpful. I guess my real problem is this: The form of the sentence is one in which you'd expect the subject to be acting on the object, like "the dog bit the man". However, in this case the subject has no agency, and so isn't doing anything itself. Really, it's the boy that is getting pleased or whatever. I guess this is why Dbmag mention "reflexive" verbs. It seems like only a score or so of common verbs can fill this role. — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 20:27, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

All of these are verbs based on abstract nouns referring to emotional states. Work at it from there - find a list of abstract nouns relating to emotion, then check which ones would have usable verb forms. And - as someone who used to have to write psych experiments - good luck! Grutness...wha? 04:13, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Alentejo Central or Central Alentejo

Should the name of this article — Alentejo Central — be changed to the English version, "Central Alentejo"? Mário 16:31, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

• No. That's not the name of the region, and the English name does not have enough "currency". --Nelson Ricardo 00:02, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

English-Spanish Translation

Hi,

What would be the translation of "More on that story later", in Spanish?

Many Thanks,

Gabriel

"Más sobre esta historia después" is, perhaps, a reasonable translation. I'm just a Portuguese speaker, I never learned Spanish, so, you probably shouldn't trust me very much. Cheers! Mário 19:35, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

"Más, después" is not unreasonable either.

The people on Univision often say "Más en esta historia después," which often followed by 'los comerciales'.

68.52.187.248 07:44, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Timucua language

Are there any websites where I can learn more about the grammar of this language? Also, did it die out in the 1700s or 1800s?

I don't know if it's on any websites, but here is a list of resources related to the language. Apparently, the last member of the tribe died in 1767, and the last known speakers of the language vanished in 1732. [10] --Idont Havaname (Talk) 20:27, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia

A week or two ago I was doing a search on Latin Languages on wikipedia.com. I came across a page that I found very interesting; and I have not been able to find it ever since. The page contained something I found most fascinating: a vertical language "root" tree diagram, showing the "proto" languages for all germanic languages. At the top of the diagram or "map", there were the most basic and ancient languages (including latin I believe), followed in a downward manner, with each sub-group broken apart into language that were closely associated. I was very impressed with the information it provided, especially because it because I had never seen a "language tree" before. I would greatly appreciate your efforts in helping me to find it again. I would appreciate your prompt reply. Thank you.

Jeff Gardner <email address removed to prevent spam>

The closest I could find to what you describe is List of Indo-European languages; there's also a list of Germanic languages which is rather short but has this beautiful external link. If none of these are what you're looking for, you might have a look at Category:Lists of languages -- Ferkelparade π 19:51, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I did a search for indo-european tree on Google images and found this link. I recognize the fourth image which is from the American Hertiage Dictionary; I ran into it when I was in jr. high about 13 years ago and was one of the things that fueled my interest in languages. I believe more recent versions of the American Heritage Dictionary has an improved map tree. --Chris S. 04:51, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Sound good or bad?

Therefore these statues probably are depicting; sometimes a bull (male cow) for the body and other times a lion.

If the question is: does the sentence above seem to be good English, I'd say no. If you are just asking about the semi-colon, that's certainly wrong. Did you read semi-colon? Consider whether your semi-colon usage matches item 1 or 2 under "Language usage". (By the way, if this is continuing a previous discussion, it's generally better to post a reply, rather than a new question, so people have the context. That way, we don't waste your time with repeating the same answers). Notinasnaid 19:39, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Also "(male cow)" is meaningless and should be deleted. Saying a bull is a male cow is like saying a man is a male woman. Also it would best to avoid using both "probably" and "sometimes" in the same sentence. And number needs to match. I would say something like "Therefore the bodies of these statues probably depict either bulls or lions." Of course it all depends on context whether that is what you actually mean to say.--Shantavira 19:52, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Try "Therefore, these statues are thought to depict the bodies of bulls and lions." Or "Therefore, the bodies of these statues are sometimes those of bulls, and sometimes those of lions." You could include 'are thought to be' somewhere. There are lots of possibilities, but your current sentence sounds clumsy. Keep up the work! Skittle 19:56, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Maybe "It is though that the bodies of these statues either depict bulls or lions." Mo-Al 20:00, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Job application letter

A few days ago here on the ref desk someone asked about EasyCruise, so I looked into that and thought I might apply for a job. So I wrote a letter. In which I state that my English is near native. So I want to be very certain I didn't make any mistakes. Could you look it over for me? Here it is:

Hi!

I just learned about your plans to offer budget travel by ship to the Caribbean. As a budget traveller, I had thought about this myself years ago, but lacked the funds and the relevant business experience for it. Now, however, I see a new chance to partake in such an undertaking, through EasyCruise, and I would therefore like to apply for a job on EasyCruiseOne. Since I am not aware of any vacancies, this is an open application and I will start with a listing of properties i think might be of use:

- Languages. As a kid I've been exposed to Dutch (my mother tongue), English and German, so those languages are engraved deeply in my brain. Through my travels I managed to improve my English to a near-native level (and with a Liverpudlian accent, or so I'm told). Later I learned French and Spanish at a reasonable conversation-level plus a smattering of Indonesian.

- Budget travelling experience. And by that I don't mean the budget tourist trail. So I know my way around new cultures (I adapt easily). I am the kind of person who would take a trip on EasyCruiseOne (except that at the moment that would cost me much more than the fare).

- Sailing experience, albeit with sailing boats.

- Likeable character (or so people tell me), it makes me happy to make other people happy.

- Music. I play the piano and the guitar, which might come in handy for entertainment purposes.

- Photography. My last job was as a photographer and my travel photos tend to impress people. You can see some examples at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DirkvdM/Photographs, although I selected those for functional purposes for Wikipedia and are thus not necessarily the best ones. Some nice sailing ship pics there too!

In short, I'm a jack of all trades, and that is also what I was during my last job. Officially I was an assistant to the tech man, helping out with bits and ends, but in reality I spent most of my time doing graphical work, photographing products and making them into posters and such, partly for product presentations at fairs, where I also helped out setting things up and helping potential customers by explaining the products.

My travelling experience includes several trips with Pelni ships in Indonesia and the Golden Plover in Australia. I love being on the water and I have spent hundreds of hours sailing small sailing ships and windsurfers. This is not very relevant to work on a cruise ship, but I imagine there will also be some such activities in the Caribbean, with which I could help out. If you don't already have plans to take windsurfers aboard, I suggest you do (and I'd be happy to set this up).

I'm specialised in 'anything new' and an ideas man, which could come in handy for a novel business like yours.

And if there is anything else you would want me to do - I learn very fast.

I am desperate to find a job, to become self-sufficient. So I'd be quite willing to do the first trip for no pay (well, for food and lodging, I suppose) to prove my worth to you.

I'm not looking for advise on how to write an application letter, but if there are any linguistic errors, please tell me. Thanks! DirkvdM 20:05, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Difficult as it is, I will acquiesce to your wish and not comment on the style. Here are three items of grammar or spelling that stood out to me:

• "I was an assistant to the tech man" -- I don't know what this means. Technical Manager?
• You should not begin a sentence with "And". Just drop it completely and state "If there is anything else [...]"
• The full-stop after self-sufficient in your final sentence should be a comma.

--LarryMac 20:23, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

A windsurfer is a person - the thing he stands on is a windsurfing board. As a kid I've been exposed - judging by your photo you're no longer a kid. ;) "Since I was a kid I've been...". I learned Spanish to a reasonable level. Henry^Flower 20:55, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Make sure you get Internet access on this job, too, so we can hear your theories that the Hawaiian Independence Movement is being brutally suppressed, and therefore the US is exactly the same of North Korea, freedomwise. As for the letter... List your "abilities", not your "properties". I never heard the expression "bits and ends", but maybe it's Britspeak. Is "Liverpudlian" really the correct word ? I suggest a resume in bullet form, not your life story. Don't ever tell anyone you're desperate for a job, that makes them think you've been turned down a lot, which makes them think there is something seriously wrong with you. Your goal should be to keep all the things which are seriously wrong with you (which I can attest to personally) hidden until you get the job. :-) StuRat 00:12, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Liverpudlian is English. Colloquial, but that shouldn't be a problem here. FYI, Hawaii is not in the Caribbean, in case that's what you thought. Other than that, thanks for rooting for me despite everything. I'm surprised you made no remark about me having a likeable character. :) DirkvdM 09:32, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, you certainly are "a character", but why do you assume that I don't know where Hawaii is ? StuRat 23:18, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

You brought up Hawaii and I was just wondering about the relevance. DirkvdM 10:37, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

The relevance was to show what a nut you are, LOL. StuRat 12:34, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

A hard one to crack, though. DirkvdM 06:35, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

It sounds very peculiar to say you have something "engraved deeply in [your] brain". That is not a common idiom in English. Just say you are fluent in those languages. Also as someone pointed out above, only if you are presently a kid would it be grammatically correct to say "As a kid I've been exposed to Dutch". If you are no longer a kid, then the sentence should be either "As a kid I was exposed to Dutch" or "Since I was a kid I've been exposed to Dutch". Incidentally, I wouldn't use the word "kid" in a job application because it is quite informal, almost slang. "Child" is preferable. Also I wouldn't use contractions like "I've"; in a job application or other formal writing I'd say "I have" instead. --Mathew5000 03:06, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I wasn't sure about "engraved deeply in my brain" either, so I googled it and got some results. But that is indeed no guarantee it's proper English. However, It's more than being fluent because I learned those languages at at very young age, so they're "hardwired into my brain". Would that be better English? Googling that gets a lot more results. DirkvdM 09:32, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

In my view you shouldn't mention your brain at all in a job application letter. (Or any other organ for that matter.) I think it's fine to say you are fluent in the language, but if you really don't like that expression, you could say you speak it at near-native level. --Mathew5000 04:53, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I agree with all of the above. I think 'bits and ends' may be a conflation of 'odds and ends' and 'bits and bobs'. But I think even the correct one is too casual, it should be 'helped the __ (whatever his job title was) with a variety of duties' or something. I too will restrain myself from comment on the style since you asked people to, but giving my personal opinion, I think - as an intro to a resume/job app - the letter sucks hairy balls.--Anchoress 03:17, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

of course Liverpudlian is the correct term! i'm finding it hard not to comment on the style too...i would just like to say that a lot of it is too conversational for a formal job application - starting off with 'Hi!' is not going to impress. (oh and also, a lot of people find Liverpudlian accents incredibly annoying, though i don't, being from Merseyside myself). --81.111.23.140 08:41, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I thought the Beatles had made that accent popular. I deliberately gave the letter an informal style because it's that kind of working environment (it's about people having fun, so I should come across as a fun guy) but maybe I should tone that down a bit.

Thanks everyone, I already assumed there would be some mistakes I missed, like the 'as a kid' bit. DirkvdM 09:32, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Don't assume that having a relaxed atmosphere for the passengers implies relaxed management and crew, as well. Some places, like amusement parks, can have extremely hard-assed management and be no fun at all for employees. StuRat 23:24, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I'm quite aware of that and it's probably hard work, but I should come across as fun and keep smiling in spite of everything. Oh, dear, now you've put me off this. :) DirkvdM 17:20, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

The word "desperate" has very negative connotations in English (it may bring thoughts of suicide into people's head, or the phrase "desperate criminal"), and it's unlikely anyone would employ someone who described themselves as desperate. Consider "eager" as a positive alternative. As requested, no further feedback on whether this is an effective application. Notinasnaid 10:14, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

"photographing products and making them into posters" sounds strange, as if you are physically turning the products into pictures. I would say "photographing products and creating posters". Mo-Al 16:06, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I know you don't want any advice on style, but I still think you would be much more likely to be successful if you wrote a concise CV (or "Resume" as I think people call them in the USA) with a brief business-like covering letter such as this one:

Dear Sir,

I would like to apply for a job with EasyCruise, and am willing to do any kind of work. I have a variety of skills and aptitudes that may be of use to you, including having a pleasant and friendly personality.

I can speak fluent English, German, and Dutch, plus conversational French and Spanish and some Indonesian. I can play the guitar and the piano. My previous employment was as a photographer.

My previous sailings have been on Pelni ships in Indonesia and the Golden Plover in Australia. My hobbies are windsurfing and boat sailing.

I enclose my Curriculum Vitae and look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely,

The "Dear Sir" and "Yours sincerely" could be changed if you want to try to write in American English rather than British English. Good luck. --62.253.52.35 00:01, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

XYZ is canon

Hi! There's been a recent discussion on the correct use of the word canon on this board, but somehow I suspect none of us are really linguists. Could someone with some expertise on the subject care to check it out, and comment? Thanks! -- Byakuren 21:26, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Meh. It's grammatically incorrect, but so ubiquitous that IMO it's not worth making a fuss about. Kind of like correcting where people say 'there's' where it should be 'there are'. I can't think of any off the top of my head, but I know there are other examples where this style of grammatical error quirky expression is used. English is a living language, people pitching a fit over it should just chalk it up to linguistic evolution. IMO. Buuuuuut, if there's an edit war over it (I didn't read enough to find out), I'd yield to the grammar nazis grammarians, since it *is* technically wrong.--Anchoress 05:11, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

It's not grammatically incorrect; canon is being used as an adjective, so it's just as correct to say "X is canon" as to say "X is good" or "X is yellow". The only possible argument against this usage is that the adjective "canon" is slang. It ain't got nothing to do with grammar. — Haeleth Talk 12:46, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

July 12

The word Thus

Is is good to start a sentence with the word thus, and if so should a comma follow. Also do semicolon's usually follow the word thus?

It's a conjuction, so no, yes, and no (well, not usually). Mo-Al 01:11, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

It's an adverb, so yes, no and no (well, not usually). —Blotwell 01:21, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Semicolon's [sic] (the apostrophe was intentional) never follow anything (or precede anything for that matter), but semicolons sometimes do. A colon would be more likely to follow thus than a semi-colon. JackofOz 01:28, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I believe thus can be either an adverb or a conjunction; what about "He has a dog, thus he is a pet owner."? Mo-Al 01:34, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Should I put a semicolon after himself?

Later Jason was supplanted for a greater sum by a worse man than himself, Menelaus.

In this case, yes. JackofOz 01:28, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

No, there should not be a semicolon after "himself" in that sentence. The comma is correct, but a colon or an em-dash would be better in my view. The word "himself" there is nonstandard; grammatical purists would say it should be "he". I might recast the sentence as follows:

Later Jason was supplanted, for a greater sum, by an even worse man: Menelaus.

--Mathew5000 03:14, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Oops, my bad. I was reading "semicolon" and thinking "comma". JackofOz 04:49, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

In the senses we're talking about, thus is a conjunctive adverb. It's in the same category as words such as however, therefore, and consequently. There is nothing wrong with starting a sentence with one of these words. When one does start a sentence, it should always be followed by a comma. Here's an example:

• He lives in a mansion. Thus, he is wealthy.

Another acceptable construction follows:

• He lives in a mansion; thus, he is wealthy.

Notice that the comma is still used when thus follows a semicolon. Both these example are grammatically correct. Note, though, that it's better to use the semicolon option to combine two short sentences and the separate-sentences option to avoid one very long sentence. A semicolon never follows thus in this initial position.--El aprendelenguas 22:10, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Meaning Of Letters In Church Building

I recently was at a funeral in a Luthern Church and on the wall there was a carving of a Bible with the letters "V D M A" - - all in capital letters. I asked the Minister what it meant and he said he did not know. Can you tell me what those letters mean, please?

Michael L. Haines

Latin: Verbum Domini Manet in Aeternum, "The Word of the Lord Endures Forever". It's over at List of Latin phrases (P–Z).  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  05:08, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Odd trivia question

I recently came across this trivia question. I'm not sure if it's a well known question or not (sounds like it may be) but I want to have a closer look at this.

Q: Only one of the following sentences cannot be disambiguated to parse as a grammatical, meaningful sentence in English, using standard grammatical rules. Which one is the agrammatical sentence?

• a) Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo.
• b) The horse raced past the barn fell jumped.
• c) The rat the cat the dog chases hunts hides.
• d) The claim the horse he entered was a ringer was false.

The answers claim that b) is wrong, and describes the disambiguated a), c) and d) as such:

• a) Buffalo buffalo buffalo (v) buffalo.
• c) The rat [that] (the cat [that] (the dog chases) hunts) hides.
• d) The claim "the horse he entered was a ringer" was false.

I've got no problem with those answers, though most people will admit that a) is a little bit too sketchy to actually be interesting.

My problem is that if I take b) and attempt to disambiguate it:

• b) The horse raced past the barn, fell, [and] jumped.

I get a sentence that seems just as logically English as the other three. Does anyone not not not disagree with me?  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  05:04, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't not disagree. Unless you're a newspaper headline writer, you need to insert that 'and' for it to make sense. (And if you are a newspaper headline writer, you'd need to take out the articles). Henry^Flower 08:39, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't like how c) is nested, but if you assume the rat hunts for hides, like animal skins, then it makes sense to me. I've seen b) before, we have an article about that sentence somewhere, but I think it usually has one less verb. It doesn't make sense the way it is written now, I don't think. Adam Bishop 05:20, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

C seems fine to me, but I don't understand your interpretation (what's the cat doing if it doesn't hunt the rat?). In the given version, the dog chases the cat, the cat hunts the rat, the rat hides. The only oddity is that it's not clear whether each use of the present tense is meant to indicate habit or current action, but it's still comprehensible. Henry^Flower 08:36, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

OK, how's this for a twisted interpretation? If you use the noun fell, as in a stand of wood that's been chopped down, you could finegle a sentence from b).: The horse, raced past the barn fell, jumped.--Anchoress 07:17, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

If you use the kind of nesting in c), incidentally, you can get away with taking a) to eight "buffalo"s... Shimgray | talk | 08:42, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm an American from upstate New York (not Buffalo!), and sentence (c) is completely ungrammatical to me even under the interpretations above. We can't drop the conjunction "that" after rat in that sentence. If we do it becomes gibberish. I'm really astonished it makes sense to any native English speaker, maybe it's a dialect thing. --Cam 12:15, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

OK, if the cat is named "The Rat" and the dog is named "Chases," you could say: The Rat, the cat the dog Chases hunts, hides. That makes sense to me. --Cam 14:11, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Seriously? How about "The apple I ate was green"? Same structure. Henry^Flower 18:29, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

It isn't a dialect thing. It's a common example of a grammatically correct sentence that normal English speakers have trouble parsing, demonstrating that our use of language is not identical to the set of grammatically correct statements (if that makes sense). 128.197.81.223 15:26, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I can begin to see what you guys are saying. I came up with the sentence "The apple the girl the boy loves ate had a worm in it" which is analogous to (c) I guess. It's just that I rarely, rarely come across such nesting without the use at least one "that". It's so rare that I want to say that it's wrong. If a non-native speaker said that to me, I might tell her it was not a correct sentence, rather than saying it was technically correct but no one talks like that. That's how wrong it feels to me. --Cam 01:47, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

The (object) (subject) (noun) form without any conjunctions is obscure, but works; you might find it more familiar to try working with just a one-clause version to start with, "the mice cats eat". Compare to "whatever cats eat" - we're happy to drop the "it is" from this one, and accept the structure... 09:31, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Picking up on question (a), I've seen this one used before: "The fell fell from the fell fell". That uses four distinct meanings of fell (two nouns, one adjective, one verb), but can have two different meanings: (a) The terrifying animal hide from the barren hillside fell; (b) The animal hide fell from the terrifying barren hillside. The hillside can't really fall from the animal hide, so not all combinations of the nouns, verb and adjective are possible. Though I suppose judicious use of a comma could distinguish them: (a) The fell fell, from the fell fell; (b) The fell, fell from the fell fell. Carcharoth 16:55, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

My personal favourite of these type of things is "The King and and and and and Queen are too far apart.". Imagine that it's being said to someone painting a sign for "The King and Queen" pub. Then add lots of quotation marks and some commas: "The 'King' and 'and', and 'and' and 'Queen', are too far apart.". —Daniel (‽) 20:07, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

So what's the conclusion? Is b) also correct? Just to clarify, I meant "fell" as a verb, forcing it to be a noun wouldn't really be fair. It makes sense to me as a sequenced list of verbs, e.g. The horse raced past the barn, ate an apple, called his mom on the phone, fell, said "Ow!", got up, jumped, and walked away. Obviously removing the last "and" makes the sentence seem awkward, but in classical English such sentences omitting were common, even stylish, as in the latin translation I came, I saw, I conquered, which would require an "and" in modern English.  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  06:32, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not convinced- can you give use a better example? Julius uses three subjects as well as three verbs; "I came, saw, conquered." would be wrong in my book. More fundamentally, I think inserting commas is cheating. Henry^Flower 07:36, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

The story with (b) is that the sentence "The horse raced past the barn fell" (that's one less verb than the sentence you gave) is grammatical, but very hard to parse. It means "The horse (which was raced past the barn) fell". It's a classical example of a garden path sentence. Correspondingly the full sentence (b) can't be parsed in the same way. Which is why it's listed as ungrammatical. I am not sure whether your comma-separated version is valid or not, but I bet your instructor hasn't considered it. --Ornil 20:47, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I have no instructor. I am my own instructor : ). Unfortunately I can't think of any examples that don't explicitly state the subject... although if I modify the sentence a bit I can make it sound correct to me in modern English, "I came, saw, conquered; life was good!"  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  01:45, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Plural of emphatic "it is"

Let's consider the following sentence, where "it is" is used emphatically:

It is [edit: the] investor who decides where to put the money, not the government.

However, I have difficulties making a similar construct when the subject is in plural:

1. It is investors who decide where to put the money, not the government.
2. That are investors who decide where to put the money, not the government.
3. Investors are the ones who decide where to put the money, not the government.

Obviously, rephrase (3) is the best solution. I'm wondering, though, whether 1) and 2) are correct? Both sound square. 1) doesn't sound so odd to me (I'm not a native speaker), but the plural/singular discrepancy bugs me... Duja 11:40, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

According to some analyses, "it" is not used as a pronoun per se, but is part of what's called an "existential construction." In such cases subject-verb agreement would not matter, because "it" is not the subject. I vote for no. 1. --Kjoonlee 11:44, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

It is investor who decides where to put the money, not the government – not correct. "investor" in this case requires an article (the or an). That are investors who decide where to put the money, not the government – not correct. Maybe "there are". I would choose item 1, but if it is valid I would substitute "their money" for "the money" as it maintains more engagement. (Whether this is a valid change depends on the context). Notinasnaid 12:11, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Copypasto for "the" (post-fixed). Duja

In option (2), changing "that are" to "there are" is grammatically correct, but would change the meaning. The initial sentence, plus options (1) and (3) state that in all cases, the investors always decide where to put the money. In (2), changed to "there are", you're saying either (depending on context): that in some cases, the investors decide where to put the money, but not in all cases, or, that a small number of investors decide where to put everybody's money. --ByeByeBaby 01:23, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Problem or no problem, I'm not sure why there's a need for deliberately fussy language. "Investors decide where to put the money, not the government." seems to work admirably. --Dweller 12:30, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but it does not put so strong focus to investors, especially in written sentence.Duja 13:01, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

On reflection, there's an inherent ambiguity in your sentence. It sounds as if the investors are choosing where to put the money, or where to put the government. Which would be nice. So instead, try the unambiguous, "Investors, not the government, decide where to put the money." --Dweller 12:33, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Taking into account what Dweller said, I like this version of option 1:

• It's the investors, not the government, who decide where to put the money.

Option 2 is wrong, and option 3 is to wordy to carry any emphasis. Notice it's instead of it is in my version, which passes the emphasis onto investors.--El aprendelenguas 22:25, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

crossword help

any answers to these clues

the friendly trade union (*m*c*s)

amicus oops, Richardrj beat me to it-- Byakuren 16:45, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

one desiring to resemble someone else (7)

the concordant trade union (6)

saint giving name to "danse"(5)

First one - Amicus. Third one - Unison. Last one - Vitus. Any letters for the second one? --Richardrj 13:33, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Second one is probably "Wannabe". User:Angr 13:45, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

yuor correct it is wannabe

a bit more help please

place for tree cultivation (9(

arboretum Natgoo 13:55, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

highland dance 5 i think it is f*i**

fling. --Richardrj 14:03, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

one who is past it 3-4

has-been --Richardrj 13:55, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

flower used in hanging baskets 7 (Petunia)

having very little width or substace 5,4

paper thin --Richardrj 14:13, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

should be wafer-thin sucessful piece of business(ironical) 3,4

raw deal? --Richardrj 14:25, 12 July 2006 (UTC)Big Deal

i am thankful to all of you 4 helping me

Grammar: Subject/Object Help

In this sentence: Madeline is a better badminton player than me even though she learned the game only a few months ago.

What is the subject/object? If something is wrong with it, how do you correct it? Thanks.

Please do your own homework, but you can use our articles Subject (grammar) and Object (grammar) to help. User:Angr 14:18, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, schools NOT in session-it's the summer. I'm doing some grammar studying on my own, and I got stuck here. I read both the wikipedia articles, and I googled it a lot.

Okay... there are two clauses in the sentence, so we have to take them separately. The first clause is "Madeline is a better badminton play than me". The subject is "Madeline" and there is no object, because "is" is an intransitive verb. The second clause is "even though she learned the game only a few months ago". The subject is "she" and the object is "game". I'd say the sentence is grammatically correct, although some sticklers would prefer "Madeline is a better badminton player than I" (which just sounds pretentious to me). User:Angr 15:29, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

• Are you sure "is" is intransitive, Angr? In the sentence "There's no explanation for this, it just is", it is certainly intransitive. But isn't it transitive when it takes an object. I guess what I mean is that the fact that the object of the verb "to be" has to be nominative rather than the usual accusative doesn't mean there is not an object. That's the way I seem to remember it being taught to me. But I could be wrong. I often am.
• You're right about "than I" being correct in this case (because it's shorthand for "than I am"), but nobody would quibble with "than me" these days. Your theory would mean that "to be" is intransitive but it's ok to treat it as transitive. Is this like a collective blind eye being closed? Wouldn't it make more sense to acknowledge that it has actually now evolved into a transitive verb and should be classified as such? There hardly seems any point in knowing that "than I" is technically more correct than "than me" if one never applies that rule in practice. It might be like saying a pedant would still prefer "thou art" to "you are" - but surely even pedants move on when change is inevitable. I suppose this is in the realm of linguistic speculation and original research rather than prescription, but I'd be interested in your opinion anyway.
• As for being pretentious, that's obviously a matter of opinion. In a particular setting, "than I" might be spoken in a pretentious manner, but not necessarily. Some people choose to maintain the language rules they were given at an early age, and resist change for its own sake. If a person always naturally says "than I" in such a sentence, it would be noticeable if they suddenly switched to "than me". JackofOz 04:18, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm certain that the verb "to be" can be nothing than a transitive verb. Think about it for a second. How would it take an object (either direct or indirect)? See dictionary.com for is, for example (scroll down). It can only be an intransitive or auxilary verb. "Than I" is correct in this case and I would change it if it's for an English class, no matter how bad it sounds (going on sound, personally I'd put the "only" after "she"). "Is" would be capable of being transitive if "than me" were correct, I guess, but since that's not the rule, you can't really say it's anything other than intransitive. In fact, it's practically the definition of intransitive. Angr's also correct on the second clause. — ዮም | (Yom) | Talk • contribs • Ethiopia 01:18, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I think you mean "intransitive" in your first sentence. JackofOz 04:01, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

If "is" is a transitive verb, then I believe it would make it the only transitive verb in the language that has no passive. You can't say **A better badminton player than me was been by Madeline. --Ptcamn 04:13, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

OK, I'm convinced. (Jack, write out 100 times: "To be" is intransitive.).  :--) JackofOz 01:00, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Trying my hand at makin cryptic crosswords

I really enjoy cryptic crosswords, so today I picked a few words at random and tried my hand at making some clues. Question: Can anyone here that does cryptics solve these clues? Are they any good? Any thoughts much appreciated!

Boil center of the feast (4)
Weave cord to fabricate (6)
Later, you and me topless in turf mix-up (6)
Segments of loci tie separate towns (6)
In between two articles about a plot (4)

Thanks! Madd4Max 15:33, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

My guesses: the second one might be "doctor", the fourth one is "cities", fifth is "area". --LarryMac 16:56, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes! Did they seem ok to you? The fourth is probably a bit to easy, but I liked the way the clue sounded. Any thoughts on the first and the third? Madd4Max 17:22, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I think "doctor" is a bit of stretch for "fabricate," but the others were OK. And as for the first and third, I'm, uhhhh, leaving them so somebody else can have some fun. --LarryMac 18:04, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

First is "heat". Third is "future". But I'm not happy with "topless"; usually to me it means removing just a single letter. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 04:30, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

But it is removing only a single letter - the m in me (u and e being needed for turf to make future). These clues are a great start, Madd. Natgoo 09:49, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

So the 'u' is coming from 'you'? If so, I don't like that. --Richardrj 10:05, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

"u" from "you" is OK, I guess -- like with many cryptic clues, I solved this one by working backwards from a possible answer, and read it as (you and me) topless. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 14:09, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank's for all the thoughts! I wasn't so sure about #3, because I didn't know if the u and e were really "in" the mixed-up turf. The surface reading sounded a little better than "Later, both of you in confused fret", which was my other possibility. Thanks all! Madd4Max 19:13, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

soccer term

Why is the field in soccer called a "pitch"?

Re-insertion of a deleted text:

Any answers to this will probably come from people who like the game, so it's not a good idea to start with insulting it by calling it 'soccer'. :) DirkvdM 18:53, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

it's not really a soccer term, the playing areas of Cricket, Field Hockey and many other sports are referred to as 'pitches'. it's like asking why is a duck called a duck? or why is a building called a building? i'm sure the answers lie in the many languages that English is derived from, but then i'm sure it goes further back to the languages that they evolved from, so it's a bit of a hard question to answer really. --81.111.23.140 18:12, 13 July 2006 (UTC) --Alex.dsch 18:13, 13 July 2006 (UTC) (sorry i was logged out originally)

As anon user 81... mentions, "pitch" is the general word for "sports field" in British English. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, it the word was first used in cricket. The dictionary does not explain exactly how that word first came to be used to "playing surface," but the word had long been used to mean "a place where something is pitched." In this case, it's a place where a ball is pitched. -- Mwalcoff 22:55, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm American, so I call it a soccer field, so I was surprised that the commentators on ABC and ESPN called it a pitch. --Nelson Ricardo 23:45, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

They're trying to show their "international" flavor....there are numerous other words used in non-US venues for soccer stuff ( e.g boots (cleats), kit (uniforms), etc) but not heard as often. RLocke 20:51, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Meaning of "river" in ancient times

From the Rio de Janeiro article, it says the people discovering the bay in 1502 named it Rio de Janeiro, "River of January", but the article goes on to say that river does not mean what it does now. It says: At the time, river was the general word for any large body of water. Can anyone explain or elaborate on this? Is it just a Spanish language thing, or a general thing? I've asked at the talk page, and got no response yet. Carcharoth 16:15, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

If anything it would be a Portuguese language thing, not a Spanish language thing. User:Angr 17:54, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Oops. You are quite right. Still, does anyone have an answer to the question? Carcharoth 19:40, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Poking around in the OED, there's a little footnote saying that for 'river', "In some [Middle English] examples the [Old French] sense of 'river-bank' appears to be possible.", where that's OF rivere, riviere, reviere. Riviera in modern Italian apparently means "shore", vs. fiume, river, which might have something to do with it. Shimgray | talk | 09:22, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Hmm. So "Rio de Janeiro" and "Rio de la Plata" might refer to the 'coast (as in riviera) rather than the water? Interesting. Still not quite the "large body of water" thing I was after, but very informative anyway. Many thanks. Carcharoth 09:31, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Difference between types of verbs

This is a continuation of a question I had above, but phrased slightly differently:

What is the difference between the verbs "interested" and "enjoyed"? Specifically, why does the sentence "The box interested the boy" make sense, while the sentence "The box enjoyed the boy" doesn't?

In the class of "interested", other verbs such as "annoyed", "pleased", "amused", "angered" and so on all fit. In the class of "enjoyed", other verbs such as "hated", "liked", "adored", "loathed" and so on don't fit.

Is there a name for the difference between the two types of verbs? Obviously, it has to do with agency/animacy, and whether the effect is on the subject or the object(?), but is there a precise way to describe them? Thanks (again)! — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 16:29, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Additonal note: The difference between the verbs is clearly similar to the difference between the sentences "The boy was pleased" and "The boy was liked". The first indicates the boy's state of mind, the second indicates how the boy was liked by others. — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 16:38, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

From a person who didn't take semantics, but learned syntax from a professor who also taught semantics: again the difference is in each verb's relationship with thematic roles. --Kjoonlee 17:05, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Bangkok Language V.S. Japans Language

Did Bangkok share the same Language with Japan in the 1970's? If no, What are the differences?

Thank you,

Matt

No. In the 1970s, and for hundreds if not thousands of years previously, and still today, the Thai language is spoken in Bangkok and the Japanese language is spoken in Japan. The two are, as far as anyone can tell, completely unrelated to each other, and listing the differences would be a futile effort. User:Angr 18:44, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

what does l'via l'viaquez mnean?

Is that supposed to be Thai or Japanese? Or (more likely) a mistake? DirkvdM 17:35, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

It's also worth pointing out that Bangkokg is a single city whereas Japan is an entire country. Thai and Japanese are very different languages. In fact, Thailand is nowhere near Japan so any language similarity would be very surprising. The example posted is from neither language.

See L'Via L'Viaquez and [11]. --Mathew5000 12:42, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

English Tenses

Hi - are there any English grammar experts out there. There are 13 tenses in the English language and I'm really stuck on a few of them - they seem very confusing. Would anyone know what tenses are in use here, thank you. Cheers, Michael.

1. I wish I had more time to finish this exercise.

2. When you have finished, you can go home.

3. I'm meeting some friends at the pub tonight.

4. We've got the next lesson in the language lab.

5. We're off to the cinema later.

Thanks, Michael--Pishoghue2003 22:56, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi, please read the top of this page, specifically "please do not post entire homework questions and expect us to give you the answers". I apologize if this is not the case, but it certainly seems like a learning activity. Can I suggest that you look up the answers here or here? Ziggurat 23:02, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't know where you learned we had 13 tenses, I don't think it is even possible to have that many in a four-dimensional universe. There might be 13 ways to express an action, but that's not really tense...there are auxiliary verbs and periphrastic expressions that convey tense, which is probably what you are looking for (as that is what your examples have). Adam Bishop 00:26, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Depends on your definition of "tense." Some say there are only 2. Some might say there are more than 19.[12] --Kjoonlee 02:14, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Twelve is probably the most common count. I've never heard thirteen before, and I don't know how you'd get to it. Henry^Flower 08:23, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

July 13

Present day or modern day

Is it present-day, present day or modern day?

They're both in common usage and are similar on the surface. If you're communicating with people who are hanging on every word you may want to be careful because 'modern' generally carries an implication of greater advancement. Whatever dictionary you prefer should reflect that in the second or third definition. -LambaJan 00:30, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I think present day means now, while modern day means now or recently. For example, you would say "there have been X shuttle flights up to the present day" while "modern day aircraft" might include anything built since World War 2. StuRat 01:19, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Also, a good rule of thumb is: join multi-word adjectives with hyphens. Forexample: "state-of-the-art technology, present-day politics." --Kjoonlee 02:04, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

But note "politics in the present day." --Kjoonlee 02:18, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Indeed. All commonly used. --Proficient 03:56, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Where to get help to "englishify" an article

Hello,

i'm a french native speaker and fixed an article, but my english is not 100 pure and correct. I'd like someone to review the article and make it in better english. Where do i ask for that kind of help?

Thanks!

You can tag it with {{cleanup-copyedit}}, or if you'd like I can have a quick look over it right now. Ziggurat 01:34, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Assuming you meant Irène Némirovsky, I've taken the liberty of cleaning it up already. Nice article - it was very interesting to read! Ziggurat 01:50, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you so much !!! Yeah it's my grand mother :) it looks like someone else has edited it more. It's amazing that in less than 1 hour someone like you takes the time to cleanup the article. Thank you !!

You're welcome! It's one of the joys of Wikipedia to see strangers from across the world working together for a good purpose. You may want to consider improving fr:Irène Némirovsky as well. Ziggurat 03:55, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I asked for a fusion on two articles, and i'm not sure how that works... am I supposed to do the fusion myself or is someone doing it for me? I'm waiting. Once this is done i'll link the french articles from the english version. Once the fusion is done I have to add the picture and check the copyright stuff, because it's complicated, although my aunt gave me the authorization to put it on wikipedia. I'm learning but i'm amazed at the community, it's great!!!!

I don't know if they do it differently on the French Wikipedia, but here it's polite to wait for a bit to see if anyone has any objections. And yeah, sometimes people will do it for you, but not always. One quick suggestion: when you make a comment, consider adding a signature at the end of it to identify yourself. The easiest way to do this is just to add ~~~~ to the end of the comment, and it'll be added automatically. Ziggurat 04:21, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes i'm new to this so i'm doing it the polite way and wait for comments. I don't have the "automatisms" of login in and signin but iit will come soon :) Fabwash 04:31, 13 July 2006 (UTC) In any case, thanks much to you and Nuhn-huh for fixing the article. When it comes to family it's an emotional item and I really appreciate your help.

Surnames based on body parts

(This may not be a Language question but I'll try here first). There are English surnames such as Brain(e), Head, Tongue, Cheek, H[e]art, Leg(ge), Tooth, Bottom, Foot, Bone, Kneebone, Finger, Hand, Hair, Kidney, Spine, Neck, Sole, Shin(n), Back ..... (keep adding others if you know of them). How did people ever get named after body parts? JackofOz 06:15, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

One way is if they had a distinctive body part... ask Bertrada, aka "Bertha Broadfoot" and "Bertha of the Big Foot", Charlemagne's mother... - Nunh-huh 06:34, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

OK, I will. Do you happen to know her email address? Or her phone number? JackofOz 06:36, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, she's afraid of stalkers... - Nunh-huh 07:25, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I would never stalk anybody, promise. Particularly a 1000-year old dead queen. JackofOz 07:32, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

<Insert Anne Rice joke here> - Nunh-huh 07:35, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't know about other countries, but many of those names are rare in the UK. And a hart is a deer. People were often named after personal characteristics (see surname), but since this usually requires an adjective plus a noun (eg Lightfoot, Ramsbottom) they would inevitably become truncated with time.--Shantavira 08:20, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

A few of the others aren't really named after body parts. Hart, for instance, is more likely to be connected with deer. Grutness...wha? 08:23, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Bone may well be a derivative of bon, good. A lot of them are pretty obscure (80 Shins in the UK, 116 Necks, only 5 Legs, 361 Kneebones...) which is often a sign of a name that came, as Shantavira commented, from a single founder with an odd name. Shimgray | talk | 09:11, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Bottom could mean the bottom of anything, such as a valley bottom. StuRat 12:27, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Indeed. (Bottom was incidentally River Phoenix's surname at birth.) Others of these could also be geographic as well. Shin could also be of Chinese (and Korean?) origin. User:Angr 14:13, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

And let us not forget Shakespeare's Bottom.... - Nunh-huh 23:08, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

He was exactly the Bottom I was thinking of. JackofOz 23:49, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

China is named for the Chin dynasty. Of course, chin doesn't mean the same thing in Chinese. StuRat 16:04, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Nowadays it's romanized to Qin, not Chin. --ColourBurst 22:20, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I'll remember that when I learn Qinese before going to Qina. :-) StuRat 22:54, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Tony Hancock is worth four points.  SLUMGUM  yap  stalk   15:30, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

How excellent! Thank you. JackofOz 21:36, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

If you're willing to look in other languages, names like Armknecht (literally "arm labour" in German if I remember it correctly) pop up in other languages as well. --ColourBurst 22:20, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Isn't "knecht" more likely to be translated as "workman"? The Swedes have some interesting surnames -- when they were taking surnames, many chose the charges on their arms -- the cyclist Horshuvd, meaning Horse Head, the noble family the Oxenhuvds (sorry if I'm spelling these wrong), Ox head. User:Zoe|^(talk) 02:04, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

They're not that common though. --Proficient 03:57, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Word meaning

Am looking for a word that means,a time or a situation when one nolonger feels the fire of love of romance or rather in love that ever existed in the initial stages of affair or marriage. this is ussually caused by anumber of situations that rises after people stay together like parenting, education and finances.

I don't think you will find a single word, but need a phrase, like "falling out of love". If you need a single word, invent one, like "passion-ebb" or "philopause". StuRat 19:47, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Or seven year itch. --Heron 15:41, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

word meaning

I would like to know the meaning of the words bromwed and bromwel

Do you know what language they are in? --Richardrj 14:02, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Phrases

What is a phrase like this called? " A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush"

A proverb. --Richardrj 14:00, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Two unrelated questions

(1) You can/may vote for whomever you want irks me, but for reasons I can't fully explain. I suppose the conclusion to the phrase is to vote for, but I think with that terminus unstated the sentence is incomplete. My solution would be to say You may vote for whoever it is for whom you want to vote, but that's a little unwieldy; similarly, You may vote for for whomever you want is (or at least sounds to be) manifestly wrong. Is the original grammatically and syntactically correct (or, if not, so much clearer than any technically correct phrasing as to be superior to the latter)?

I like either "You can vote for whomever you want" (meaning it's possible to do so) or "You may vote for whomever you want" (meaning you have permission to do so), depending on the context. If a wife asked her husband who she should vote for, then "may" would be the way to say she has his permission to vote for her choice. Otherwise, "can" would usually make sense. The word "want" is a bit vague, it could either mean "the person you want to vote for" or "the person you want to win", which aren't necessarily the same. For example, people may want one candidate to win, but realize it's hopeless, so vote for someone with a chance of winning. However, I suppose this vagueness doesn't matter in most uses of the sentence. StuRat 19:39, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Your solution may have touched on an issue. Most people would say "whoever" even in accusative position, and when they hear "whomever", it sounds odd even if perfectly correct. This reminds me of the wit who said: "Most people say it's not what you know that counts, but who you know . I disagree. It's not who you know, but whom you know". JackofOz 21:42, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

(2) Often, especially in the context of sports, one uses the construction X joins Y as the only two individuals to have Z (e.g., Kobe Bryant joins Wilt Chamberlain as the only players in NBA history to have scored at least 80 points in a single game). As (1), this phrasing vexes, but once more for inexplicable reasons. I guess I'd say Kobe Bryant becomes, after/alongside Wilt Chamberlain, one of just two players in NBA history to have scored at least 80 points in a single game, but that's a bit wordy and perhaps periphrastic. Is the original alright—if a bit unsettling—or is there some superior alternative I've overlooked? Thanks in advance. 68.254.189.141 16:56, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm leaving the first question untouched. As to the second question, the problem is simply that "join" can't serve the function it's called upon to serve here. "X joins Y as [any plural noun or noun phrase]" simply isn't going to work, because that construction is trying to make both the subject of the sentence (X) and the object (Y) refer to the plural noun or noun phrase later in the sentence (or vice versa), and the subject and object can't both do that. I think something like "Previously, Y was the only person to have Z" (adding, optionally, "now s/he is joined by X") would be better, but maybe that's just me. --Tkynerd 19:16, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

TLC... the ultimate 3 letter word

Is it a coincidence that TLC not only stands for "tender loving care" but also "tastes like chicken" and "thin layer chromatography"? What is the connection?--64.12.116.134 17:42, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Probably just a coincidence. There are plenty of words that start with T, L, or C. Mo-Al 18:22, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

So, in other words, there isn't Too Little Choice in what that abbrev can stand for ? Oh well, I'm gonna go watch The Learning Channel now. StuRat 19:26, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Is this a linguistic version of numerology? Is there a name for that? DirkvdM 06:37, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

There is actually a so-called 'science' of that called something or other beginning with 'l'. It was used by several (well, many, actually) American authors of books about the occult in the 1980s and 1990s, to get lots of gullible people to buy their books, and thus make them lots of money, rather like the Bible Code thing. Good job the USA is surrounded by two oceans, otherwise we'd have loads of people running around judging people by whatever anagrams they could make out of their names! Like, 'Saddam Hussein' becomes "He's a sad nudist", (if you replace the 'm' with a 't').CCLemon 11:51, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

capitalization rules for atomic elements

Are the atomic elements considered proper names and thus need capitalized? An example might be: "The substance was found to contain Tungsten."

I'm pretty sure they don't have to be capitalized. --Pifactorial 18:17, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

You can graduate from pretty sure to absolutely certain. The names of the elements should not be capitalized in English. :-) --Tkynerd 19:11, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Auteur

What is the message intended when using the French term while comunicating in English.

 Yours,Fernando.

"Yours", in this context, is like "Cordialement". --Pifactorial 19:30, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I'd guess it literally means, "I'm at your disposal," but that probably wouldn't translate well. --Pifactorial 19:37, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Good to know. The next time I'm standing at a friend's sink, using their garbage disposal, and they ask me where I am, I will reply "Auteur !". :-) StuRat 19:57, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

*groans* Okay, so I misunderstood the question... And that was a painfully bad pun, anyway. (I think I like you.) --Pifactorial 19:59, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I believe our questioner was asking about the term "auteur" (the "yours" was simply him signing his request.) We do have an article on auteur, which states "The term auteur (French for author) is used to describe film directors (or, more rarely, producers or writers) who are considered to have a distinctive, recognizable vision, either because they repeatedly return to the same subject matter, or habitually address a particular psychological or moral theme, or employ a recurring style, or all of the above." --LarryMac 19:38, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Haha, okay. I thought he was asking, "What is the French term to express the same message as 'Yours, Fernando', when used in English?" Crazy semantics... --Pifactorial 19:42, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Another crazy idiom is "How do you do?" (becoming obsolescent now). "How are you doing?" is more meaningful to me, but it was traditionally considered more casual and therefore less ... proper. (Hmmm. Does becoming obsolescent mean it's obsolescentescent?) JackofOz 21:58, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

In addition to LarryMac's comment above: that's the message usually intended. The message usually received is that the "auteur" is pretentious. — Haeleth Talk 13:01, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

TRANSLATING WORDS

I would like to know how to translate from english to portuguese ?

Learn English, then learn Portuguese. Figure out what you want to say in English. Then say the same thing, but in Portuguese. —Daniel (‽) 19:44, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Or, go here. :P --Pifactorial 19:46, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Bonus: if you know certain languages like French or Spanish already, learning Portugese is much easier! --ColourBurst 22:13, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

And while you're at it, why not learn Esperanto? --Pifactorial 22:53, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

But please don't follow the example of José da Fonseca and Pedro Carolino, who didn't speak English but produced English as She Is Spoke by using a Portuguese to French dictionary, then a French to English dictionary! -- Arwel (talk) 12:19, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

One key element in translation is knowing when you are using an idiom in the original language. I got caught doing this in my porutugese class when I said something to the effect of "she is close to my heart", which (if I remember correctly) does translate into portuguese and retain the significance but it is still important to be aware when you are using idioms to be able to translate meaning across different languages.--69.171.123.148 02:41, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

grammer

Third Person

Not a search engine. Grammar. --LarryMac 19:44, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Third Person

grammer

Please use the little box in the upper left portion of your screen. You might want to type Third person in there. (be sure to leave the "p" as a lower-case letter.) --LarryMac 19:48, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Does one have a question for one to answer, or does one just need to know the proper way to spell "grammar" ? StuRat 19:51, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Organization or organisation

Hello,

English is in practice my second language, I grab every chance I get to improve it. But recently I discovered that I am not quite sure when it comes to this :

let us take a verb ending in -ise.

Like 'organise'.

What it is now :

I organise or I organize? I organised or I organised? An organisation or an organization?

Usually I go to the internet, it quickly gives me a sentence in which it is used, buth both (even wikipedia) cases occur! It seems that the overwhelming access (and possible manipulation) to/of language doesn't eliminate errors, on the contrary it feeds them. So please enlighten me.

Thanks.

Evilbu 20:06, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

AFAIK, "organise" is the British spelling, and "organize" is the American spelling. --Pifactorial 20:08, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Although the Oxford English Dictionary usually prefers -ize. —Wayward ^Talk 20:13, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

The OED is a descriptive rather than prescriptive dictionary of English, it descrives all forms of English and is not limited to British preferences. Try Chambers Dictionary Jooler 21:07, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Chambers lists -ize first, -ise second. —Wayward ^Talk 21:23, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

All I know is that they're both somewhat proper, but "-ize" is more common. --Pifactorial 20:15, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

And that also applies to the verbs I gave? Evilbu 20:21, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I can't address the specific words you've chosen, although a good rule of thumb is that "-ise" is British, "-ize" is American. You might want to look at some of our many articles regarding American and British English differences. (The linked article is just a starting point). --LarryMac 20:26, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the verbs also. It's a little more complicated than American/British, though that is a reasonable generalisation. I like the rule that if the word derives from Greek, it takes a z, and if it derives from Latin is takes an s. Sorts the pedantic gits from the goats perfectly. Henry^Flower 20:31, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Well I basically want it to be correct in some language. So then I can use all things I wrote down?? Evilbu 20:34, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

As Pifactorial said, -ise is British (and Canadian and most other countries) and -ize is American. You see both on Wikipedia because it's an international project. See American and British English spelling differences. —Keenan Pepper 20:44, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I'm pretty sure -ize is far more common in Canada than -ise is. Canadian spelling goes with American spelling some of the time, and this is one of those times. (Do a Google search for site:.ca "organize" and site:.ca "organise" and see what numbers you get. I get 3 million for -ize vs. 790,000 for -ise. Don't check for "organisation" though or the results will be skewed by Canadian sites written in French.) The quick answer to your question is that neither is wrong, but each is likely to rub some people the wrong way. Good luck! User:Angr 20:53, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

The American preference for z is much stronger than the British preference for s. Henry^Flower 20:59, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

That's likely because the Oxford and Cambridge university presses use -ize as well as the Oxford and Chambers dictionaries. In U.S. there is no alternate spelling. —Wayward ^Talk 21:23, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

that makes sense. I usually find myself using British spelling, but still often use -ize (maybe influenced by -izein). I have asked myself whether mixing British spellings with -ize is inconsistent, but if what you say is true, it might be kosher after all. dab (ᛏ) 21:06, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Weird, I didn't know that about Canada. They use -re and -our like the Brits but -ize like us Yankees. Is there some reason for this hodgepodge? —Keenan Pepper 21:06, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't know. If you look through British and American spelling differences you'll find other examples where Canadian spelling generally follows American rather than British usage. I wish back in the early days of Wikipedia (it's too late to change now) the decision had been made to use Canadian spelling consistently on all pages, as Canadian spelling is the best compromise between British and American spelling. The Brits could write favour and centre, while the Americans could write organize and aluminum. User:Angr 21:12, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

That's silly. —Keenan Pepper 21:25, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Doesn't the Globe and Mail use -or? User:Zoe|^(talk) 02:07, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Just wanted to say: Be sure to note that there are words spelled with -ise in American English as well, like advertise. --Tkynerd 21:20, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Also surprise and enterprise. Really, the only words affected by this spelling issue are those that come from Greek verbs ending in -ιζειν, right? —Keenan Pepper 21:25, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

This is a partial list of words that always use ise:

Advertise, advise, arise, apprise, chastise, circumcise, comprise, compromise, demise, despise, devise, disenfranchise, disguise, enfranchise, enterprise, excise, improvise, incise, revise, supervise, surmise, surprise, televise.

If you want a suffix to turn another part of speech into a verb, follow the Greek rule and add -ize. If you want to anglicize or invent a verb whose original already contains -is-, you use -ise. Ostracize had z in the original; maximize doesn't, I think, come from a verb, so add -ize to the stem maxim-; circumcise comes from French which already had s, or Latin which has s in the past participle. —Wayward ^Talk 21:33, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh right, I forgot that -ize is still productive, so you can add it to a Latin word like maximus, or even a proper name like Bowdler to make Bowdlerize. So it's not just Greek. —Keenan Pepper 21:45, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

That list of words that always take -ise is very useful. For the words where -ize is an alternative, I doubt it's a British/American thing any more. You'll see both used here in Australia all the time. My rule of thumb is to be consistent within the same document and don't mix and match them. It may also be governed by the house style of your organisation (or is that organization?). JackofOz 21:52, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

One is British, the other is American. --Proficient 03:57, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Proficient's comment is incorrect. One is a Latin root and the other is Greek. I'm in the UK and I always use -ize. The important thing is to be consistent. See -ize in Wiktionary. Perhaps this needs a Wikipedia article. --Shantavira 06:21, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

On the other hand, I'm also in the UK and always use -ise. -- Arwel (talk) 12:26, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Right, about the use on Wikipedia, the rule is to be consistent. So the first person to write an article basically decides the style. Any following editors will have to stick to that. Although I've come across the argument that an English subject needs to be in English and vice versa. That makes some sense, but I don't think it's a rule. Articles on Dutch subjects are also mostly in English English. DirkvdM 06:50, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Standards of English and whether words are British or American is determined by usage and not by origin. Kenneth Clark's landmark TV series was called Civilisation. Sid Meier's landmark game was called Civilization. Jooler 07:23, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

We've now reached the stage of the discussion where new contributors don't bother to read what's already been said before duplicating earlier comments. :) From here, it only gets worse. Henry^Flower 13:04, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Aramaic in "The Exorcism of Emily Rose"

I searched the web but couldn't find the appropriate script in Aramaic when Emily says: "I am the one who dwelt within Cain, I am the one who dwelt within Nero, I once dwelt within Judas and I was with legion. I am Belial". Also I understood almost nothing from hearing. Could someone provide any info (namely concerning letters and/or transliteration)? Thanks. --Brand спойт 20:56, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Dwell means to live, if that helps. --Proficient 03:58, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

how is that supposed to help? the question is concerning Aramaic, not English. I understand that Brand is looking for the Aramaic text translating the above. dab (ᛏ) 13:21, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

From ear I have been able to break it down into what I think is right 'Ahni hu shashahem betoi Qa-in! Ego sum quisnam habito de Nero! Henoi tesar peroi demen Yudai! Pen en Legion! Une a Belial! And I am Lucifer, the Devil, The Flesh.' Obviously without inflections, but it is almost midnight and I need to sleep.

Past tenses

I've checked but can't seem to find what I'm looking for. What is the following form of the past tense known as: "He has come into the room." (cf. He came into the room) "She has shot him." (cf. She shot him). "We've all fallen down" (cf. We all fell down). This form is becoming increasingly used in conversation (not so much in writing) in Australia when discussing a long-past action. It was traditionally used to announce something that has only just happened. For example, when people tell jokes that contain a narrative, rather than say "He did X, and she replied Y ...", it's "He's done X, and she's replied Y ...". Or when they're discussing some historical event, it's like "Oswald's gone up to the 10th floor of the building, he's opened the window, he's stuck the gun out and he's shot JFK". Fine if it happened yesterday, but it was 42 years ago and it sounds weird to say it that way at such a chronological remove. Is this purely an Australianism, or is it more widespread? Is it simply a reflection of poor education; is it to make an old story sound more immediate; or are we observing a change going on in the way that the past tense is used? JackofOz 00:36, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

That is the perfect tense, and I completely agree with you that it is best used to describe a recently completed action or event. I have never heard it used as you describe in the US. --Tkynerd 00:56, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

On checking, I now see that it's actually the present tense combined with the perfect aspect, which is a pretty odd way to describe a long-past action. That confirms my theory that it's ignorance born of crap education, rather than anything else. JackofOz 01:04, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

You might like to check with an actual linguist who studies these things before jumping to such a conclusion. --Ptcamn 01:41, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Those who follow my contributions here will have noticed that I have a very low opinion of present-day teaching in Australia, particularly of the English language. That is reflected all around us all the time. Discarding the basic building blocks of any subject is not the way to impart a comprehensive understanding of it. I wouldn't expect non-linguists to know about subjunctive moods or perfective aspects, but kids are not even taught about nouns and verbs any more. So I have a propensity to point the finger at our education "experts" when I see the results of this approach in action. However I'm always open to others' viewpoints, so bring 'em on. JackofOz 01:55, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I too think education in language and linguistics is much worse than it should be, but I don't think it's quite that bad. I certainly learnt about nouns and verbs, and I didn't go to school that long ago (I'm 17 and Australian).

But a lack of education does not cause your spoken grammar to unravel. There are still today speakers of languages who have no schools in their community, who are all illiterate, and always have been—their language has never been written in its entire history, except maybe by a visiting anthropologist. But their speech still obeys a set of very complex grammatical rules, and if our anthropologist tried to speak it, the natives would be able to point out when he made a mistake and broke a rule, despite being uneducated.

Our concept of nouns and verbs and tenses exists because long ago Sanskrit, Greek and Roman grammarians noticed that there were certain words that obeyed certain rules (e.g. nouns have cases) and certain words that obeyed different rules (e.g. verbs agree with their subjects). But the uneducated public was already following those rules before the grammarians discovered them. --Ptcamn 02:06, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

No, in the US, we have "she/he goes" instead of "she/he said", or even "she's/he's all"! "She goes, 'whatever!', and he's all, 'as if!'" User:Zoe|^(talk) 02:12, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

That's a verbum dicendi. Bhumiya (said/done) 06:59, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm, like, with you, dude. Like, I hear what you're saying. When I read your post I was, like, cool. (and other such atrocities). JackofOz 04:05, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

If some Bronze Age slacker hadn't mangled Proto-Indo-European, we wouldn't be speaking this wonderful dialect today. Bhumiya (said/done) 06:58, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Italics and Quotes

What is the best way to format this sentence?

Kemal was granted the honorific name Ataturk (meaning “Father of Turks”) by the National Assembly.

Looks fine the way it is to me. Grutness...wha? 03:40, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Italics - it looks fine to me too, although Atatürk usually has a diaeresis over the U. Ziggurat 03:56, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

You've done a solid job as is. --Proficient 03:59, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

That's formatted perfectly- the italics are used correctly. --Evan Carlstrom 06:37, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

It's just that the quotes look so big. When I type double quotes I get " but he uses “ . Where does that come from? A different keyboard that gives different asci codes for double quotes? DirkvdM 06:53, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

It could have been automatically changed if s/he is typing it out in Microsoft Word first or something. Either quote marks are acceptable, according to Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Look of quotation marks and apostrophes. Ziggurat 06:56, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Thats good. -Wser 12:24, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I now notice that in Mozilla it looks better. Konqueror renders them much bigger, a bit ugly, really. DirkvdM 06:33, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

July 14

Jordan

Does the name JORDAN as in Jordan river originated from the hebrew word: JORED (meaning to go down) do to the fact that the river falls or goes down? Emanuel

Yes, this is the case. -Wser 12:19, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

"Jored" would be transcribed in non-Biblical contexts as Yored (יורד), and is the active participle of the basic verb stem of consonantal root y-r-d. However, Jordan in Biblical Hebrew would be "Yarden"; some say that it's not derived from y-r-d. AnonMoos 14:50, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

It would seem so. --Proficient 01:32, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Glottocentrism?

I found the word "glottocentrism" in an article on Wikipedia. It doesn't seem to be a real word, but I know there is one which has the same meaning. What is a word meaning "considering one language to be "correct"", or "focusing one one language". The context was :"As for most South Pacific languages, classical descriptions are generally based on the system used for Indo-European languages, especially concerning grammatical classes. Today linguists try to avoid it, considering it a form of glottocentrism." So, what word should have been used? Mo-Al 18:17, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Glottocentrism has 102 Google hits, mostly from respectable sources, so I'd say it's a reasonable word. 'Linguocentrism' and 'linguacentrism' each have fewer. In that context, however, Eurocentrism would seem to fit. Henry^Flower 18:25, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, glottocentrism is a redlink. Should an article be created for it? I could swear I've heard a better term for it. Mo-Al 18:37, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

the dicdef should be put on wiktionary. in the sense above, glottocentrism appears to be a form of ethnocentrism (meaning, a particular language is put at the center). The term could conceivably also describe the idea of considering linguistic issues as more important than other things (also known as "grammar Nazism", I suppose), or again to the idea that glottogony (FOXP2?) played a crucial role in human evolution. The term, in any case, is well-formed, since Latin centrum was itself a loan from Greek kentron, so the term is from virtual Greek *glotto-kentrismos. dab (ᛏ) 20:08, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

As a postscript, 'linguacentric' has almost 2000 Google hits. Henry^Flower 20:16, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

glottocentrism has only 56 hits if you exclude wikipedia, but glottocentric has another 95. the meaning I predicted above is found:

• the anti-speculative empiricism which Locke initiates tends to open philosophy to glottocentrism (Laurendeau 2000b: 47-52), by restricting the manifestation of general ideas to the sector of language. [13]
• one of the basic tenets of the Course in General Linguistics which contended that linguistics should be a part of semiology. By inverting the relation Barthes started a process which not only paradoxically pulled Saussure in the “glottocentric” camp, [14]

while I am not sure the usage analogous to "ethnocentrism" found on wikipedia is valid. linguacentric appears to keep being spontaneously and informally re-coined, but glottocentric is the more correct term (and clearly appears in more 'learned' contexts in the google results). langmaker.com has linguacentrism listed as a neologism with the meaning required above. dab (ᛏ) 20:20, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

language

please tell me how to write "i believe" in italian letters

"Italian letters" could refer to either the Italian alphabet or to the Italian language. Which do you mean? Mo-Al 18:40, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Italian uses the Latin alphabet just like English, so I assume the question is how to say "I believe" in Italian. Credo is one translation... —Keenan Pepper 18:50, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Ai bilivvi? ;-) --Chris S. 18:59, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Use of the term "municipio" in Mexico related pages

Municipio translates to municipality in English but does not provide the nuance of Mexican use, which uses the name of the main city also as the name of the municipio in more than 90% of the almost 2500 Mexican municipios. A municipio is not exactly a city/county combination but the use of the description city/county helps an English reader understand the municipio term, especially when describing the city itself, and then its surrounding villages and areas.

I´m having a pissing match with another contributor and seek some help in clarifying the term for Wikipedia use.

Be bold. --Proficient 01:33, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

The question is how to translate the term municipio into English. You should probably look what a range of respected international English-language publications use (NYT, BBC, Economist, etc.) when making the decision. Seeing as municipality is something of a false friend, and city/county is clumsy, I'd say to use municipio itself, linking the first usage to Municipio (México) and possibly italicising the term, depending on context (an article on a general topic that references a municipio incidentally should italicise the term, whereas an article on a Mexican topic need not do so). EdC 04:00, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Origin/meaning of a phrase

Hello,

I was interested in the origin/meaning of the phrase "short, sharp, shocked". Your site refers me to the album of the same name by Michelle Shocked(which I own), but on a MUCH older release(Pink Floyd's "Dark Side Of The Moon"), you can clearly hear a gentleman say"I was short, sharp, shocked". I have even asked 2 different musicians from the UK if they could tell me it's meaning. Both told me they hadn't a clue.

Thank you, [e-mail removed]

To give someone a short, sharp, shock is usually to imprison them for a short period of time under a very harsh regime. Young malcontents are the main people it is suggested this should be done to as it scares them out of later crime supposedly. The origin is likely The Mikado by W. S. Gilbert. MeltBanana 21:59, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

To sit in solemn silence in a dull, dark dock,

In a pestilential prison, with a life-long lock,

Awaiting the sensation of a short, sharp shock,

From a cheap and chippy chopper on a big black block![15]

Oh what a waste there is already an article Short, sharp shock MeltBanana 22:06, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

This reminded me of Adam Lindsay Gordon's poem The Swimmer, used in Elgar's Sea Pictures. JackofOz 03:38, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Sayings

What is the origin of the saying "bat out of hell?"

Meat Loaf might have an idea. JackofOz 03:35, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

It was used in The Times on September 23rd, 1940, page 4, by the paper's U.S. correspondent: "The Germans scattered like a bat out of hell." I don't know how one bat can scatter, but that's not the point. This quote antedates Mr Loaf's claim by 37 years. --Heron 20:39, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

The OED takes "like a bat out of hell" back to Dos Passos, in Three Soldiers (1921). Seems to have been military slang of the post-war period (there's a 1925 entry in a dictionary of soldier's slang, too). Shimgray | talk | 20:52, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Call of Duty 2

I was playing Call of Duty 2 (again) and exploring when I went in a German bunker abd came across several German phrases. I was wondering what they meant.

1. "der Gottder Eisenwachsaliess der wollte heine Kuecher,"
2. "Turan zu. Ruhe. Vor (von?) Offnen der scharte Licht an(m?)st," and,
3. "....gegen Engeland."

Thanks. schyler 23:23, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Some spelling errors there. The first one might mean "The god of the 'Iron growth allies' didn't want any cookies". Well, 'Iron growth allies' I made up ... maybe 'allees', meaning 'alley'. "The god of the Iron growth alley didn't want any cookies"? I don't know this game. How weird is it? :) The second one I can't figure out. Might be "Close the doors. Quiet. ..." and then I'm at a loss. The third one is simple: "... against England". DirkvdM 06:48, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

The game is awesome on XBOX Live. The campaign mode is kind of long however. Anyway, they were all in a bunker, so the light was really poor, and to top it off, one of my "comrades" threw a smoke grenade, so it was kind of hard to read. The first one was written on the ceiling above a bunk bed, and for some reason, I really think it's a bible verse. The second was REALLY hard to read. I'm surprised I got that much from it. An the third, I felt kind of stupid putting it here, knowing it was like beat/destroy/defeat England or something like that, but when I put it in a machine traslation I use, I got "against narrow country," so I figured I put it up, butt it turns out it is what I thaught it was. Also, Offnen (in the second one) may have been spelt offten, often, or ofnen and there was also an "!" at the end of that one. Thanks for your help so far. schyler 13:54, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

The second one could be Türen zu. Ruhe. Vor Öffnen der Scharte Licht an (anstellen?), which is an instruction to close the doors, keep silent and turn on the lights (something is missing at the end, so I can't tell for sure) before opening the embrasure. This would arguably make sense in a bunker. The first phrase is incomprehensible and looks like pseudo-German to me. The only lexical words I can make out are God, iron, wanted and Heine (for some reason). --Rueckk 23:08, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

I took 'heine' to really be 'keine', in which case my translation is correct, except for the 'Eisenwachsaliess'. If that starts with a capital 'E' then that makes the 'iron' more plausible. 'wachs' means grow or some derivative, but 'allies', well, that's already English. :) DirkvdM 06:47, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

heine/keine might be a typo, but Kuecher doesn't mean anything. Cakes would be Kuchen, cookies would be Kekse and kitchens would be Küchen. wachs could also mean wax. What also stumps me is the last der. Looks unnecessary to me. In conclusion: I'm still confused. --Rueckk 13:19, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

England in German is also England, so if isn't a mistake, I think it might be a pun - "enge" means "narrow", thus the machine translation of "narrow country". PeepP 09:40, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

July 15

Wikipedia:Reference desk archive/Language/2006 July 15

1. Father Pons' Sanskrit grammar
2. "What are you having?"
3. IPA sign for length
4. what is english eqivient of "Pelingas" a Fish in Crimean language
5. French vowels
6. Leaning languages
7. German question

July 16

Wikipedia:Reference desk archive/Language/2006 July 16

1. Crickets Chirping
2. translation website
3. Band names, sports teams, etc -- plural or singular?

July 17

Wikipedia:Reference desk archive/Language/2006 July 17

1. Felipe, Phillipines and Filipinos
2. Learning a dialect/accent
3. Verb class
4. Psych
5. To introduce someone...
6. Yok in Thai
7. Korean translation for the word name
8. Uranus breaks the "Roman mythical name" tradition?
9. Spanish translation
10. Icelandic þ and ð
11. Aramaic
12. Use of the word "ecology".

July 18

Wikipedia:Reference desk archive/Language/2006 July 18

1. Area between lanes
2. roman numeral conversions
3. Square Meal
4. Accented characters in Windows XP with US keyboard?
5. Mentalis Uber Alles
6. Common English terminology
7. Mohammed and the mountain
8. Spanish-English translation software

July 19

Wikipedia:Reference desk archive/Language/2006 July 19

1. "Take Evasive Action"
2. Changing the lyrics or words to a song but keeping the same melody/rhythm
3. jokes
4. Hebrew reduced vowels
5. Extra-short vowels
6. crossword help
7. Language & Nations: A chicken and the egg question

July 20

Wikipedia:Reference desk archive/Language/2006 July 20

1. The dot on top of an "i"
2. bellum
3. phonetic and pronounciation help needed
4. Translation needed
5. Fiddly
6. British v. American English
7. unity makes strength
8. Summary
9. Staircase Paper cuts
10. bibiography - who authors govt docs
11. 'my-oh jhohn'

July 21

Wikipedia:Reference desk archive/Language/2006 July 21

1. Slang
2. Author as a verb
3. 'ex-' and 'former'
4. 'so that' and 'such that'
5. Sýr - Czech word

July 22

Wikipedia:Reference desk archive/Language/2006 July 22

1. Gender Neutral Language in Wikipedia
2. Swear Word
3. How to start speaking american english
4. Meaning of 'a ja nemam dara' ?
5. English conjugation

July 23

Wikipedia:Reference desk archive/Language/2006 July 23

1. suffix -ness
2. Rutangna - an Ethiopian language?
3. Hapticity
4. any synonyms of "Abner" begins with an "A"?

July 24

Wikipedia:Reference desk archive/Language/2006 July 24

1. El Salvadorian slang
2. Spanish adjectives for the cardinal directions
3. Comedic duo
4. Meanming and origin or the name 'Avigdor'.
5. Languages of Be bold.png
6. stabo and stabila
7. Bidun
8. shot dead

July 25

Wikipedia:Reference desk archive/Language/2006 July 25

1. Sweet Chinese nothings
2. the initals of the title of a book appearing on the bottom of the page
3. Some simple French...
4. German preterite

July 26

Wikipedia:Reference desk archive/Language/2006 July 26

1. Summer Reading Synopses
2. change in attitude and latitude
3. Proto-Indo-European root of "Finn"
4. Number Words
5. Russian for 'Baby'
6. Origin of -s pluralization in English
7. What a Brit means when they describe something as being "American"
8. Confused about consonants at the end of French words
9. Word Translations From English to French & Spanish

July 27

Wikipedia:Reference desk archive/Language/2006 July 27

1. Nichevo
2. crossword help II
3. Language check
4. Basilic
5. Inflection in Indo-European languages

July 28

Wikipedia:Reference desk archive/Language/2006 July 28

1. What is the correct pronunciation of Excel (Microsoft program)?
2. Danish pronunciation of Kierkegaard
3. Beret
4. Songs in orals(speech)
5. IPA for Gilles Villeneuve
6. Languages
7. German u
8. The Lagoon

July 29

Wikipedia:Reference desk archive/Language/2006 July 29

1. correct, legal right, right side
2. Pre-Columbian or pre-Columbian
3. poetry

July 30

Wikipedia:Reference desk archive/Language/2006 July 30

1. Need some help with a Kiaowa name written phoen. in English.
2. latin phrase to english translation
3. meaning of "santana"
4. Japanese for 'Never Forget'
5. What is the plural of the English word "LINT"?
6. Verbosity

July 31

Wikipedia:Reference desk archive/Language/2006 July 31

1. Indexes or Indices?
2. Translation of following text in Chinese, German and Hindi language
3. Hitler vs Stalin, with capes.
4. Grammaticality judgement: "I didn’t expect your mother to like the picture; but I did you."
5. German profanity question
6. etymology of the word for "Asia" in Asian languages
7. Geoffrey Oryema - Makambo