Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 17:31, 28 March 2007

March 22

Funeral Blues by W.H. Auden

I was wondering what the meter is to Auden's "Funeral Blues" and if it changes at all during the poem. I found some sources saying iambic pentameter and others saying trochee. Considering these are opposites, I have little to go on. Thanks Jedi Svinje 02:10, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's accentual verse, not accentual syllabic. So it is neither trochaic or iambic. Accentual verse doesn't count the number of unstressed syllables per line or the number of total syllables. Only the stressed ones matter.

Stop all the clocks

Cut off the telephone

Prevent the dog from barking

with a juicy bone

The lines have 4, 5, 6 and 5 syllables respectively, but in each line only two syllables receive a strong stress.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lasayla 12:32, 22 March 2007 (UTC).

Though I agree that this verse is not intended to be acc. syllabic, I had always heard this read with stresses (perhaps slighter?) on telephone and dog from barking. That, plus a 4/6/7/5 recount, does indeed make the 2nd and 3rd lines sound iambic, so I can see how someone might mistakenly assume it was -- especially given how much iambic pentameter shows up in high school Shakespearean study these days. Jfarber 17:58, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The use of -esque to describe something in popular culture

I was looking for anything that may explain -esque or -ian as describing something in popular culture. I noticed that many times it is used, although I'm not sure what the rule is for using it. The proper usage would be for example Romanesque, but other times it is used for say Fellini-esque in order to describe something that resembles a Fellini film. Also -ian used at the end of a word. Porperly it would be Proustian (as in Marcel Proust), but is also used for example Hitchcockian (director, used to describe something strange). Bascially these endings are put at the end of words for description purposes, but what is the rule for actually using those endings. And why is it such a popular (or lazy?) way to describe something? I hear people constantly adding these endings to words, but was never actually taught these endings in English. Making me wonder if they're just made up words, improper use of the ending or slang, etc. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Iluvelves (talk • contribs) 03:10, 22 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I doubt there is any hard-and-fast rule. It seems to come down to what sounds better, ie. euphony. We hear of certain music being described as "Chopinesque" (not Chopinian), but other music as "Beethovenian" (not Beethovenesque). JackofOz 03:29, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To me -ian seems to suggest a closer adherence to the original than -esque does. Is that just me? --Anonymous, March 22, 2007, 23:10 (UTC).

The Wiktionary pages show a slight distinction between -esque and -ian, with -esque indicating, to my eyes at least, a less direct relation to the root word. Via Bartleby, I found this bit about -esque from The Columbia Guide to Standard American English, "In some uses it may have slightly pejorative overtones, suggesting only 'an imitation of' rather than 'very much like.' " Finally, here is an interesting discussion of "-ish" which might be somewhat relevant. --LarryMac 14:26, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pathological capital letters

Is there a name for the pathological over-use of capital letters such as one might see in the printed handwriting of psychologically unstable people? Thanks. MisterCDE 04:09, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Camel case? Dismas|^(talk) 04:20, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Preteenagerhood? − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 08:35, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

macrographia (WP only has an stub on micrographia)---Sluzzelin talk 21:26, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sluzzelin means micrographia (handwriting). − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 21:31, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

lol, Indeed, thanks for the clarification. (But what an amazing flea! Robert Walser, who suffered from micrographia, would have appreciated this serendipitous pipelink, for sure.) ---Sluzzelin talk 21:39, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

StudlyCaps might do for you, but it's more specific. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.145.145.242 (talk) 21:57, 22 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I don't think macrographia is what I'm after. It's not the size of writing but the use of Capital Letters in the Middle of Sentences and Sometimes for WHOLE Words in a Manner that seems to be patterned after Some OLD VERSION of the Bible. Thanks MisterCDE 22:51, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In older Books Capitals are often seen in the Middle of Sentences; I always assumed that it was patterned after German, where all Nouns are capitalized. Also, it could be for emphasis. But that is standard practise, not psychologically unstable. СПУТНИК^{CCC P} 02:10, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see what you mean. I've noticed that Pattern too, predominantly in Texts from the beginning of the 19th Century and earlier. I've posted an Image of the United States Declaration of Independence to illustrate this (it is easier to see the Capitalization in the Article itself, which has a verbatim Transcription of the Document). Examples can be found in the First Edition of the Quebec Gazette (e.g. "with ſuch Originals, both in Proſe and Verſe as will pleaſe the Fancy, and inſtruct the Judgement") and in this Page from Shakespeare's First Folio (e.g. "Not a Mouſe stirring", "the [Rivals] of my Watch", "the minutes of this Night; / That if [again] this Apparition come", "Such was the very Armour he had on"). How delightfully Splendid it is to Write in this Most Fanciful Manner!. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 03:05, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's common in old texts, but what I'm talking about is modern stuff usually written by uneducated nutters, you know the sort of thing, Hellfire and Damnation will rain down unless the Council fixes the HOLE in the FOOTPATH. MisterCDE 05:37, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Because THE most likely kind OF person TO answer THIS sort OF advertisement HAS less trouble under-STANDING words if they ARE written in BIG letters." Adam Bishop 13:45, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

what does Schweigen-reigen-schöne-schützen-schmützen sauerbraten

In the Producers, the song "Haben Sie Gehort Das Deutsche Band?" has a line: It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that schweigen reigen schönen schützen-schmützen sauerbraten. Is this nonesense or does it have an actual English translation? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.8.154.100 (talk) 05:56, 22 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

The words mean "to be silent - round dance - beautify (or some oblique form of beatiful) - protect - (nonsense) - sour-roast". Try to find your own rhyme or reason to that. — Sebastian 06:16, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) It's basically nonsense, though the individual words have meanings. Schweigen means "to be silent"; Reigen means "round dance"; schönen is an inflected form of schön "beautiful"; schützen means "to protect"; schmützen isn't a real word, but it's close to Schmutz "dirt"; Sauerbraten is known by that name in English too. —An gr 06:17, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing to add, really, to the sum of both answers given above, except, perhaps, that Schützen-Schmützen could also be seen as a Shm-reduplication, and that Schützen, while meaning to protect as a verb, can also mean marksmen or gunners as a noun, and is a common prefix to martial word conglomerates such as Schützengraben or Schützenpanzer, which, of course, makes sense in the The Producers's context. ---Sluzzelin talk 13:40, 22 March 2007 (UTC) Der Rest ist Schweigen-Reigen-schöne...[reply]

It seems to me like a play on the actual title of the song, "It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that swing". ALTON .ıl 20:21, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

translation of french

could you please translate this paragraph for me to french?

Actually, we in the modern world have much more free time than people from centuries past. We live a lot longer, most of us don't work from dawn to dusk or on weekends, and we have lots of modern time-saving conveniences like electric stoves and salad spinners. The reason we're still unhappy is because hobbies aren't enough to fill the soul-crushing despair of humanity.

the average 'free' time in many nations has increased in the past 30 years. This can be down to less housework caused by more efficient products (washing machines/tumble dryer/dishwasher etc.) it can be down to a change in working hours (35 hour working week in France for example) or other factors. To answer part 1 you have to question individual's perception. Some say the 'keeping up with the joneses' is a big cause of unhappiness (or inability to keep up), or some say lack of social-groups (though arguably there are more sub-cultures now than ever before). The obvious advantage of hobbies is that it can lead to friendship (with fellow hobbyists) it can provide you with challenges, successes, keeps you occupied, can help give your life more 'meaning', makes you feel knowledgeable in a specific area and probably a million other psychological theories about why hobbies are good. I tend to think having a 'purpose' makes people happier, and perhaps a hobby can give life a purpose more so than someone without hobbies. I know for one I intensely dislike the idea of retiring and doing nothing at all with my days - maybe in time i'll tire and retirement will seem wonderful?Warriorzsoul 08:30, 22 March 2007 (UTC)warriorzsoul[reply]

My french isn't very good, but I'll have a go: En fait, nous dans le monde moderne avons un temps beaucoup plus libre que des personnes des siècles après. Nous vivons beaucoup plus longtemps, la plupart d'entre nous ne travaille pas de l'aube au crépuscule ou sur des week-ends, et nous avons un bon nombre de convenances éonomiseuses de temps modernes comme les fourneaux et les fileurs électriques de salade. La raison que nous sommes encore malheureux est parce que les passe-temps ne sont pas assez pour remplir désespoir âme-concasseur de l'humanité. Please, please check that before you use it! Think outside the box 12:17, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Though I do not wish to denigrate TOTB's effort, our stated RefDesk policy is that we do not do homework for our querents; I'd suggest this policy would (and should?) include large tasks such as this, which are WAY beyond the scale/scope of even the most generous reference services. On the other hand, if you would like us to help you locate a translation service or translation dictionary, or give you advice about how to determine whether a translation is reliable, we'd be happy to help! Jfarber 12:36, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On the contrary I would say that Warriorzsoul has a wonderful post-modern sense of humour which Jfarber has entirely missed ... - EAH

Complex listening practice

Hello. I've recently been studying a couple languages that are quite phonetically complex, and I'm working hard to perfect my pronunciation and listening. At present, I have encountered some difficulty in recognizing labalized, palatalized, and pharyngealized consonants. I can differentiate easily enough with slow, clearly pronounced speech, but I lack the practice to tell the difference at faster speeds, and I also find it quite difficult to pronounce some consonants in certain combinations (not being accustomed to forced labializing, I often insert unneeded uvular sounds unintentionally for some vowels).

Does anybody know of any online resources that one can use to help practice listening and pronunciation of these (relatively) difficult sounds? I could also use some more practice with aspiration/nonaspiration and ejectives, if you know anything for those too!

I have lots of IPA samples, but they're not really that useful because they're pronunced so slowly and clearly. Are there no drills or anything that could be used for training? I haven't been able to pull anything up through google. 222.158.162.242 15:06, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There exists software for speech therapy, dialect coaching or orthoepy that helps with that. I heard good things about Sona-Speech; another name I could find was "SpeechViewer". Problem is that they seem to be expensive. (I'm particularly annoyed by Sona-Speech's claim to be "low-cost ", while hiding their actual price. I think they're actually very expensive.) See also An Overview of Pronunciation Software. Maybe you could make an appointment with a professional to try their favorite software on you. — Sebastian 19:15, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've been looking for how to learn what a dialect coach does and perfecting an accent or teaching others to perfect an accent, but I've had no luck. What training would they go through to learn that skill and are there books or tools available to learn it? - Taxman ^Talk 21:00, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect all you need is a degree in Linguistics and a reputation as a good accent trainer (the more accents the better). Besides, I'm somewhat of a speech therapist myself (it's part of my job description), and I am also sceptical of such "low-cost" services that are obviously serve a market filled with people with too much money on their hands. Alas, none of the aforesaid products are of much use for the languages I'm tackling (Ubykh and Caucasian languages, among others), but thanks anyway. 222.158.162.242 05:58, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What do you call...

...someone who opposes or abstains from marriage, relationships and sex, because he is skeptical that they will never work out in the end? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 218.186.8.12 (talk) 15:17, 22 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

A realist? --Richardrj ^talk ^email 15:27, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A voluntary pessimistic celibate? A number of reasons for celibacy are given in that article, you could add the one you mentioned. I'm curious: What do you mean by "someone who abstains from sex because he is skeptical that it will never work out in the end"? ---Sluzzelin talk 16:10, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Why bother. The baby is just gonna turn out fugly anyways." 222.158.162.242 16:17, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A hermit, a crab, or both. Clarityfiend 19:48, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A lonely virgin. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 21:33, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An erotophobe? —An gr 00:28, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then there is asceticism, which involves celibacy, but not usually for the reasons you gave. StuRat 01:52, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

House hotclaws**== 09:43, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The MD and diagnostician? ---Sluzzelin talk 09:57, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Need summary from Latin

Need summary translation from ~~Italian~~ Latin Wikipedia. In Vicipaedia of Petrarch's Africa under the section of "Fontes" it is making reference to what appears to be like an article I started of Genealogia deorum gentilium. Can I get a summary interpretation what it is saying? --Doug ^talk 16:23, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is Latin so I am out. Stefán 16:31, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Changing headline accordingly. 惑乱分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * 16:40, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The author of the Petrarch article is examining the sources of his poem. He refers to a passage in Book 3 in which Petrarch describes certain golden or gilded representations of Greek gods (sic: in fact most of the names listed are Roman). He claims that in this catalogue Petrarch is following certain earlier authors, such as Isidore, Fulgentius, possibly Neckam. I'm always harping on about this, but I really think we make ourselves look foolish in writing a Latin Wiki, because we don't have authors whose Latin is up to the task (I'm not claiming that mine is).Maid Marion 17:43, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry about that mistake. I don't know Latin nor Italian (and can't tell one from the other). It all looks Greek to me - maybe it is! The names in that section look alot like the methology "Gods" in my article. Are these mythology "Gods" then Roman? This is related to the Boccaccio (Petrarch's friend) article Genealogia deorum gentilium. I'm looking at Petrarch's epic poem in Book 3 and it appears what you are referring to is on lines 165 to 185 (margin: The pagan gods). Is that correct? --Doug ^talk 18:51, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, the article does not make any reference to Boccaccio or to his Genealogia deorum gentilium. The Roman names of the gods are used simply because it's in Latin - the Romans virtually always use their own Latin equivalents when speaking about the Greek gods. Wareh 19:13, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the original context (of the poem Africa) no mention is made of the "nationality" of the gods. This is in the palace of Syphax in Numidia, and there is no specific reason to think of them as being Greek, except that the Romans simply took a lot of Greek mythology on loan. --Lambiam ^Talk 20:48, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Thanks for this information. Now my understanding is that Syphax was captured or killed at the Battle of Ilipa by Scipio Africanus. --Doug ^talk 20:53, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As you can read in the section Battle of Ilipa#Aftermath, you'll see that Scipio was entertained by Syphax at his court after the battle. Some three years later, Syphax was captured by Massinissa and delivered to Scipio; see the end of the article Syphax. --Lambiam ^Talk 22:39, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks on clearing that up for me. You are absolutely correct, I had it wrong. Appreciate you finding that for me. As usual, you are many times smarter on these items than I am. Perhaps that is why I ask the questions and you answer the questions.--Doug ^talk 12:44, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Silly question #34: Difference between hyper- , super- and ultra-??

Hi all! I'm sorry if this has been asked before, but the only reason I am seriously asking this question is because there seems to be a very concise use of these different prefixes in scientific disciplines as far as I can perceive. So, when would you use hyper and not super? Is hyper really "greater" than super? Is the only difference between ultra and these two the fact that ultra may talk about being beyond limits unlike the others?

(By the way, I based some of these assumptions on what is said on the List of English prefixes, which as you can see was deleted from Wikipedia for reasons I cannot understand. I was fortunately able to find a mirror of sorts here. That page was very useful to me, and I'm very mad because of that. Just a heads-up for ya.) Kreachure 21:42, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was deleted because Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Wiktionary, on the other hand, is one, so you will find the list at wikt:Appendix:English prefixes. —An gr 21:49, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP does have Greek and Latin roots in English, however, listing all three of your prefixes. I'm not very impressed by the single word translations though. ---Sluzzelin talk 21:55, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Check the Appendix you are talking about. Now check the original wiki page. See a difference? That's right: The wikipedia article was actually useful, listing the original meaning of the prefixes, and common uses. The wiktionary page is just a list with absolutely no explanations. That, dear wikipedian, is no transwikification. Check the Differences between encyclopedia and dictionary articles: it's not about a single word, it's a list explaining many prefixes. Anyways, the Greek and Latin roots in English is where it should be moved to if anything, but most of the words there still have no info! That means the original article information is still lost!! As far as my experience goes, Encyclopedias usually list prefixes and suffixes in appendices with adequate explanations, while dictionaries don't. Kreachure 22:25, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. There's still no answer to my questions anywhere... :ñ(

This is my perception: super < hyper < ultra. Super- seems to connotate a weak 'above-norm' condition, as in a Supermassive black hole, which is only slightly (relatively) larger than a normal Black hole. Hyper- is not only more than normal, it is unnatural. Supermassive black holes are not hyper-massive, since they are simply larger than the standard of 'massive', but hyperactive children is a result of some attention disorder or whatnot. Superactive children might be just normal athletes or something. Ultra- seems to indicate the apex of an adjectival intensity, as if no more can be attributed to it, and its basic properties far exceed expectations of the standard. Ultraviolet light is the darkest kind of 'violet' light (of course it has other properties). In latin, Ultra means "beyond". What specific terms were confusing? I know in Pokémon the Normal Potion < Super Potion < Hyper Potion. ALTON .ıl 00:12, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sign your posts, please. ALTON .ıl 00:14, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(If you're referring to me, I did sign all my posts. P.S.'s, as everyone knows, go after the signature.) As far as dictionary definitions go, in general hyper-, super-, and ultra- all mean "above, beyond, excessively". So "beyond" alone wouldn't make ultra unique. Still, I think that in cases such as ultraviolet, it would actually refer to "(being) beyond an established limit". And according to my perception (albeit based on childhood references such as Pokemon as well): Super > Ultra > Hyper. Kreachure 00:52, 23 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

While I have no opinion on the this question nor the fate of the page "List of English prefixes," may I suggest that someone very interested in the subject, contact User:Kyorosuke and request a formal undelete-discussion or whatever the WP term is for it. In essence, try to bring the page back from the dead. Just a thought. --Cody.Pope 05:44, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Skimming this: usefulness is not a valid reason for keeping an article. -Wo o ty Woot? contribs 22:51, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Super and hyper are related words, although the former is Latin and the latter is Greek. The two languages are related, and so are the words. The <y> in hyper was originally pronounced like [u] in very old dialects of Greek, and [h] is in place of what would have otherwise been [s]—the sounds [h] and [s] have a very linked phonological history in Greek. The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 16:16, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think in French an 'hypermarché' is bigger than the normal 'supermarché' (supermarket). Wait a few years they might introduce an 'ultramarché' too and we can compare. Also mega- is used as a similar prefix, but one that is mathematically defined. And über- is becoming common too, where do these fit?

MLA style quotations

I have a question; when writing something in MLA style, how does one formate dialog quotations?--Honeymane_{Heghlu meH QaQ jajvam} 23:16, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming you're using more than three lines of text total (which, I note, MLA style guides discourage) -- the ideal is to make clear both a) who is speaking, and b) to try to preserve the formatting of the original text. this MLA source is one of many sources which shows how to quote dialogue in a play, but sadly not even my handy and well-thumbed MLA guidebook addresses other types of dialogue. Still, we can extrapolate from the general rule set forth therein; the only thing I'd change if your source is not a play is that, since the preservation of the appearance of the original text is tatamount in block quotes (see the ~~ee cumming~~E. E. Cummings example on that same page), I'd not add notation about who is speaking each line if it's not in the original text. Instead, I'd make sure to include that information in the sentence that leads in to the block quote. (for example: "...as in the following passage, where Sam tries to convince Ellen to give the baby up for adoption." The implication is that Sam is the primary agent in the conversation; we would thus assume it is his line of dialog that comes first.) Hope this helps! Jfarber 00:00, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning the rendering "ee cummings" our article E. E. Cummings states: "His publishers and others have sometimes echoed the unconventional capitalization in his poetry by writing his name in lower case and without periods, Cummings himself did not approve of this rendering." --Lambiam ^Talk 07:42, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've corrected the comma splice in the article. JackofOz 09:46, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And I've corrected both the typo-spelling and the preferred capitalization for Cummings. Thanks for noticing it (you're a lamb...) Jfarber 12:30, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ba-a-a-a. :) JackofOz 23:46, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

March 23

Portuguese

I've always assumed -- without much linguistic evidence -- that since the Moorish invasion was less pronounced in Portugal, Portuguese was/is less influenced by Arabic linguistic elements than Spanish. While I know this is a rather complex issue, is my assumption more or less correct? --Cody.Pope 07:54, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Our article Influence of Arabic on other Languages states "Arabic is a major source of vocabulary for [...] Spanish" and "Portuguese acquired about 1000 words from Arabic". The article Arabic influence on the Spanish language gives a number for Spanish: "It is estimated that there are over 4000 Arabic loanwords in the Spanish language", with the caveat that many of these words are regionalisms. --Lambiam ^Talk 09:16, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are many words in Portuguese acquired from Arabic, especially those starting with "al". Spanish seems to have more of these al-words, so maybe yes it might have been more influenced.--Hús ö nd 03:36, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How about aspects of the language other than vocabulary, such as grammar? − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 20:13, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

U'Brien

I recently came across a person on TV whose surname was shown as "U'Brien". At first I assumed it was a typo for O'Brien, but I've since found some examples on Google, so I guess it is a real name. Is it a variant of O'Brien? In all my meanderings among Celtiana, I've never seen this before. JackofOz 09:51, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since google doesn't allow punctuation in its search queries, most of the results you get searching for U'Brien are actually "U. Brien" and "U Brein", and the remainder -- the ones that are actually "U'Brien" are generally easy to pass off as spelling mistakes because most of them are spelled differently in another place on the same page. That's my take at least. 222.158.162.242 10:50, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I find somewhat consistent references to Jane U'Brien: [1]•[2]•[3]. --Lambiam ^Talk 11:02, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) I'm not so sure, 222. Here's a website [4] for a Jane U’Brien, who's unlikely to misspell her own name.

This one [5] has 2 mentions of a Senior Constable Matt U'Brien - and I think that's the same guy I saw on TV.

This one [6] mentions 9 different people with that surname. JackofOz 11:04, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This web page suggests a development Überrhein > Uberhein > Ubrihien > Ubrien > U'Brien. The original bearer of the still obviously German name emigrated from Germany to Australia in 1855, where the name was Celtified. --Lambiam ^Talk 11:23, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

~~(edit conflict) All I can think is that it's an anglicization of Ua Briain, which in Irish is variant of the more common Ó Briain. —An gr 11:25, 23 March 2007 (UTC)~~ I defer to Lambiam's evidence. —An gr 11:35, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think he's on the money, too. So, a German from above the Rhine transmutes into an Australian of apparently Irish ancestry. How wonderful. Thank you, Lambiam. JackofOz 11:43, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Surname#Irish surname prefixes suggests that Uí, as in Uí Néill, "is used in reference to a kin-group or clan". If it is derived from Uí, then U'Brien would be of the O'Brien clan. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 20:01, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yugoslavia: spelling change?

About two years ago, I watched an episode of Unsolved Mysteries. The case featured was a student who killed his teacher, who was from Yugoslavia (the case happened in the late 80's and was filmed in the same time period). The suspect wrote bogus letters to her family in Yugoslavia explaining the crime. The show showed the suspect spelling the name of the country as "Jugoslavia" on the envelope. This leads me to wonder: when the spelling of Yugoslavia change from a "J" to a "Y" in languages besides Serbian, Croatian, and Bosnian (Serbo-Croatian) and Slovenian? - Thanks, Hoshie 11:36, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yugoslavia is the English language spelling. Do you have any evidence former yugoslavians changed their spelling? - Mgm|^(talk) 12:09, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I think in most Slavic languages using the Latin alphabet, "j" is used for the sound [j], as well as in German, Swedish etc... I think it's just as basic as: Languages generally using "j" for [j]: Jugoslavia or similar, Languages generally using "y" for [j]: Yugoslavia or similar. 惑乱分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * 13:46, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

During one of the World Cups in the 80s, I and my friends were always bemused as to why Yugoslavia was suddenly now spelled 'Jugoslavija' (with two 'j's). Mind you, we were even more stumped as to why USSR had suddenly become CCCP, too...CCLemon-ここは寒いぜ！ 22:35, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How's that? On their team shirts? 惑乱分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * 00:51, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. "USSR" = "Union of Soviet Socialist Republics" was the English translation of the country's name. In the original Russian the initials are "SSSR" when written in our alphabet, but look like "CCCP" when written in their Cyrillic alphabet, as it naturally would be on their shirts. --Anonymous, March 24, 2007, 03:08 (UTC).

Actually, The New York Times used "Jugoslavia" until the mid-20s and sporadically until 1960, according to a search of its archives -- Mwalcoff 06:13, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Teal And Cyan

Prompted by the discussion above on "oh noes" and the experssion "tealdeer".

Very often online I see people mixing up Teal and Cyan, most often insisting that the color cyan is called teal, but sometimes mixing both colors up (thinking about it, I think I remember seeing it mostly on the game Warcraft 3). I would be relieved when I finally came across someone who wasnt telling me to "attack teal" when the only teams were red, blue and cyan. (yes, both cyan and a tealy color were used in the game).

Is it something in some education system somewhere? Are people teaching these kids wrong color names!? Has anyone else come across this? Is it widespread? Capuchin 13:58, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, teal is a kind of cyan. 惑乱分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * 14:23, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's a shade of cyan, but cyan is a specific color of equal parts green and blue light. Is teal the same but darker? I'm confused Capuchin 14:42, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

According to their articles, yes. Cyan is hex color 00FFFF, which means equal amounts of green and blue and maximally bright, while teal is hex color 008080, which means equal amounts of green and blue but only 50% bright (halfway between black and white in brightness). —An gr 15:03, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I used to teach a computer class with color coded exercises, and found that many people didn't know the word cyan, so started calling it "light blue", instead. They should all watch Blue's Clues, which features all shades of blue, like periwinkle. StuRat 16:02, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm over it, I'm over him ...

I have a question about the idiom "being over someone/something". For a long time, I alwas understood "I'm over it." as meaning something like "I'm not upset anymore, I've moved on.", closely related to "getting over sth/s'one", I guess. For a number of years now, I've noticed it being used in its opposite meaning too (i.e. "I'm still upset, I haven't moved on"), particularly when applied to people, "I'm over him, for not calling", "Mom is soooo over you" etc. Is this usage mere irony, or can being over actually mean both? (Thanks) ---Sluzzelin talk 13:58, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Probably both, although it's different overs. 惑乱分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * 15:44, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you have the 2nd meaning quite right, it's "our relationship is over". There might also be an implication that they don't think of the other person any more, when they really do. Of course, people often say a relationship is over when they don't really mean it, too. StuRat 15:56, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"I keep your picture upon the wall,
 it hides a nasty stain that's lying there." StuRat 15:56, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Queer

I came across a random article that described Lisa B as a "queer" poet. Am I behind the times or is this word still considered derogatory? Clarityfiend 22:39, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sidetracking again... is there any notability to that article? Mayeb it should be put up for AfD. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 22:58, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It can be, especially if it's being used by someone who isn't LGBT. It's used by some LGBT people as a sort of term of pride and identity, though (see Queer). I wouldn't use it if I were you, though, and especially don't call someone that --Miskwito 23:03, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to know if I should edit it out, but somebody beat me to it. Clarityfiend 23:26, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would have edited it out, too. If the article were in better shape, and Lisa B's self-identification as "Queer" could be cited, we could have left it in; without such clear citation, we cannot tell if the word is being used appropriately, so I think eiting it out OR adding the usual "citation needed" tag could have been appropriate responses by Wikipedia policy. Jfarber 14:10, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Because of the emergence of Queer Theory the term has implications that go beyond mere identification of sexual orientation or functioning as an insult. I agree that self-reference as such is the key. If such can be found, I would say "a self-described queer poet" or "identifies as a queer poet" because of possible misinterpretation and add a link to either queer or queer theory. That said, although I'm no real fan of queer theory, there is something useful about a cover-all term for those of us to who do not conform to what might be called canonical sexual orientations and identities. mnewmanqc 14:39, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If used in neutral third-person writing (as opposed to "you are queer") and if used as an adjective ("X is a queer writer" rather than "X is a famous queer"), I'd never interpret it as pejorative. Who does anymore? Maybe if it's preceded by "goddamn" or "motherfucking", but even then it still wouldn't have anywhere near the force of "faggot" or "fag", which is what all self-respecting homophobes use these days. Nor does it strike me as a naughty or particularly forceful word which "outsiders" have to avoid. It's been used in a neutral manner since the early 90's (or 80's, for all I know) and has lost just about all its derogatory impact by this point. The idea of "queer" as an insult smacks of the 70's and would be an anachronism today. And if we link it to "Queer theory" or "Queer cinema" or whatever, there's no ambiguity at all. One more thing to consider: anyone against whom the term could be used as an insult would understand its modern usage. The only people who would be uncomfortable with this are straight people who think it's still offensive in all contexts. Bhumiya (said/done) 20:41, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Self-respecting homophobes"? I doubt such a thing exists. —An gr 22:13, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why not?

I could have written "up-to-date homophobes" or "modern homophobes", but that would be no less paradoxical. I suppose my point is that homophobes tend to be aware, in the groping, benighted way in which they are aware of such things, that certain words are more offensive than others, and will never employ for the purpose of abuse a word that could accidentally imply a homophilic or neutral sentiment. Hatred forbids that moderation. No genuine homophobe will use "fairy" or "pansy". It carries too great a risk. This is why Fred Phelps uses "fag" instead of "ponce". Bhumiya (said/done) 04:44, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Homer Simpson surely has as much self-respect as any cartoon character, and a decade ago he said of "gay" in Homer Phobia "that's another thing! I resent you people using that word. That's our word for making fun of you! We need it!!"[7]. Notinasnaid 09:06, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think he was actually talking about "queer", which nicely illustrates the point. Even in 1997, Homer Simpson knew that "queer" no longer worked as an anti-gay slur. And by the end of the episode, he had also learned that "fruit" was the preferred nomenclature. Bhumiya (said/done) 10:04, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a deadly tricky kind of area (I speak as a gay man). In a recent incident in England, the police were called in to a school to investigate a video on which 2 or 3 teenagers had chanted the words "Yid Army". It turned out that the teenagers were Tottenham Hotspur supporters and Tottenham Hotspur fans frequently chant "Yid Army" in support of their own side (Tottenham, apparently, being an area with a greater than average Jewish population). On the other hand, the complainant was their own ex-teacher, who happened to be Jewish. Frankly, I don't envy the police ... - EAH (Edward Hansen)

March 24

Easiest language for native English speakers to learn?

Just curious. Thanks.137.99.165.83 07:54, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in the UK at least, French is the most widely taught language in schools, and is even taught at some primary schools. So that probably says something about the ease of learning it. I hear people say that Spanish is relatively easy to pick up, too. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 09:47, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My native is not English but Dutch...but I think French isn't as easy Spanish. Without trying to offend anyone..French is a really hard language when it comes to the difference between how a word is written and how it is pronounced.Evilbu 10:35, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

French also has a number of sounds that can be difficult for English speakers to master. Spanish has fewer such sounds, in my opinion. I don't know, grammar-wise, if any Western Romance language is significantly harder for English speakers than any other. In any case, I'd say Romance languages (especially Western Romance) and Germanic languages (especially Western Germanic, such as German, Dutch, and Frisian--the latter two being closer to English than German is) are the easiest languages for English-speakers to pick up. That's not a fact though, it's my personal impression --Miskwito 10:53, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I found French difficult at school. On the other hand, German was a doddle for me. That may have been something to do with the teaching though - my German teacher was a large-breasted MILF whilst my French teacher was a crap teacher... :) --Kurt Shaped Box 11:06, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notice the questioner didn't ask what the easiest foreign language is, just the easiest language. Obviously the easiest language for native English speakers to learn is English. After that, my money's on Scots. —An gr 11:20, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. Scots lacks everything that makes Spanish, French, and German easy to learn: a well-established teaching standard, a sizable corpus of literature, and abundant tools for second-language learners. Compare this to the infinite opportunities available to a student of Spanish. I'd go as far as to suggest that Scots is one of the most difficult languages for an English-speaker to learn, not only because of the factors I've mentioned, but precisely because of its similarity to English, which makes it difficult to get into the mindset required to learn a foreign language. I imagine Russians would find it similarly difficult to learn Ukrainian. Bhumiya (said/done) 20:14, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Scandinavian languages (Swedish, Danish and Norwegian) also probably are relatively easy... 惑乱分からん * \)/ (\ (< \) (2 /) /)/ * 13:40, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Danish is most definitely not easy, for phonological and orthographic reasons, and Norwegian is confusing because of its competing written standards and their difference the spoken language. Swedish, on the other hand, has a fairly regular grammar, with (if I am not mistaken) much simpler declension and conjugation than German. It is also reasonably phonetic. I think Swedish is the easiest language for an English-speaker to learn in theory. In practice it isn't, because it's not widely taught in English-speaking countries, and there are few tools available to learn it independently. In practical terms, the easiest language for American English-speakers to learn is Spanish. You can walk into any American bookstore and find a huge selection of books, computer programs, and audio lessons teaching Spanish. Bhumiya (said/done) 20:14, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The easiest language to learn may be an English-based creole language, such as Sranan. Creoles tend to have a very simple and regular grammar: no grammatical gender, agreement, cases, conjugations, etcetera. They also tend to have the same word order as English, like SVO. If it is English-based, knowing English helps in learning the vocabulary. For example, Sranan waka = "to walk", agen = "again", fowru = "bird" ("fowl"), krin = "clean". --Lambiam ^Talk 15:08, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just one extra note : if you have to choose between German and Dutch, Dutch is definitely easier than German (about the same structure when it comes to word order, lots of similar words, but less conjugations than in German, less conjugations, and only two genders instead of three). And if Kurt can get that MILF teacher to teach Dutch as well, it will a super-doddle :).Evilbu 16:38, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that Dutch is theoretically easier. But from a practical perspective, it's much harder to find materials about it in English-speaking countries. You're way more likely to find stuff about German. And Dutch classes? Forget about it. Bhumiya (said/done) 20:17, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How about a constructed language, such as Esperanto? — Sebastian 22:44, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the realm of conlans, Ido is a simplified descendant of Esperanto, and allegedly easier to learn. --Lambiam ^Talk 23:19, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure Ido is really simplified from Esperanto, and the fact that some English vocabulary was changed for Romantic vocabulary won't help the English speaker to learn it. More importantly, the same reasons that Bhumiya calls on to make German easier than Dutch work here too. Ido has never had the speaker base of Esperanto, and its highpoint was long pre-Internet. You can find a wealth of language learning material for Esperanto, in book form and online, as well as audio and video (YouTube has an interesting collection of material in Esperanto.) Also, there's a lot more opportunity to speak with Esperanto speakers in real life.--Prosfilaes 15:37, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pig latin if you count it as a language, then by far the easiest. dr.ef.tymac 16:56, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is 2007; I don't think you need to say that a language might be easier to learn than another only because you can "walk into a bookstore" and find a shelf of materials on learning that language. If you want to learn Swedish, just order the materials from the Internet. Or go into a large bookstore in a major city and buy a teach-yourself package, or enroll in a class at a university. The easiest language for a native English speaker to learn is either going to be a constructed language like Esperanto or a natural language that is very similar to English, like Frisian. My guess is that Esperanto would be easier, although it might depend on your specific goal in learning the language. For example, do you want to be able to learn enough to "get by" in that language, or enough to read scholarly books in that language, or to write them? It may well be that one language is easier to learn to read, while another language is easier to learn to speak, while a third is easier to learn to write, and a fourth is easier to learn to hear. For example, I find it difficult to understand spoken French (because there are so few consonants and the words all run together) but easier to read French. For German, my experience is the opposite: somewhat easy to understand when spoken but more difficult when written. It might also be that one language is easier to learn to speak enough to get by (i.e. make yourself understood) while another language would be easier to learn enough to speak grammatically. I've studied Old English (Anglo-Saxon) and found it quite difficult despite the fact that you would think it would be close to modern English. I've also studied Esperanto and found it very easy -- much easier than any other language I've studied. --Mathew5000 22:51, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are several problems with that. The best way to learn a language is still to spend at least months in an environment speaking only that language. As for enrolling in a class at a university, it's 150 miles from my home to the nearest program that teaches Swedish. (Even if I lived in the local metropolis, it'd still be 100 miles.) If I want to learn Finnish, it's just 800 miles. If an American decides to learn Frisian at the local U, they better live in Madison, Wisconsin.[8] A language is not terribly easy to learn alone, and even with the Internet having good teaching material can be hard to get for the more obscure languages.--Prosfilaes 10:21, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, but the question here is "What is the easiest language for native English speakers to learn? Just curious." It isn't really answering this question to say things like "Spanish is easy to learn because there are lots of materials about it in a bookstore, while Dutch is difficult to learn because it is hard to find Dutch-language classes." The question doesn't specify anything about location; it just asks what is easiest for a native-English speaker. Obviously if this native-English speaker happens to reside in Bucharest, then Romanian would be one of the easiest languages to learn, but so what: it isn't answering this question to say "Romanian is easy to learn if you live in Romania", just as it isn't answering the question to say "Spanish is easy to learn if you live in the U.S." or "French is easy to learn if you live in the U.K." --Mathew5000 19:41, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A completely theoretical answer can exclude all such practical details, but I don't think it's not answering the question to point out that practical details matter a lot more than the language. It's like answering the question "What will happen if I let go of this ball?" with "Provided there are no other forces acting on it, it will just hang there." It's true, but it's going to mislead you if you take it for a statement of what happens in the real world.--Prosfilaes 12:36, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Esparanto or Ido, as they have been constructed from the group up to be easy to learn. Esparanto takes about three weeks to learn, which is fairly fast as languages go. 67.177.170.96 02:59, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In terms of a language which one might take for credit, I believe from personal experience that the answer is classical Latin. First, meaning: by far the greater part of English vocabulary is derived (directly or indirectly) from Latin roots. That means one usually has a cognate in English that reflects the meaning of the Latin. Second, orthography: you're dealing with the Roman alphabet and no accent marks. What could be simpler? Third, spelling: the sound-spelling link is straightforward. I have no idea how anyone learns English spelling, as it sometimes has little to nothing to do with its pronunciation. Fourth, pronunciation: each nation pronounces Latin in the way most comfortable for its native speakers; native English-speakers speaking classical Latin may not be understandable to native Russian-speakers speaking classical Latin, but neither of them is "wrong". Fifth, grammar: Latin doesn't believe in irregular anything. Okay, a bit of an exaggeration, but not much of one. One need only compare the number of "irregular" verbs in Latin and in French to understand the importance of this point. Latin was the first foreign language I learned, and definitely the easiest. (Note that I am referring to classical Latin: medieval Latin is another thing altogether.) I've also taken classical Greek, French, and German. Cheers! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.106.121.163 (talk) 17:15, 28 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

proverbs

how can ı find proverbs' meaning?

Selam. I assume you mean English proverbs. There is a list of wikiquote:English proverbs on Wikiquote; for some of these this list also gives the meaning. Other places you can look: The Phrase Finder, List of proverbs at BYU/ELC, GoEnglish list of idioms, UsingEnglish list of idioms. If the proverb is, for example, "A stitch in time saves nine", what you can also do is enter that in the Google search box (with the quotes), together with the word "meaning". There is a good chance that some of the first hits are of pages that explain the meaning of the proverb. Finally, if all else fails, you can ask here. --Lambiam ^Talk 23:55, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Doorless door

It's common, inside houses, for many doorways to lack doors. What word would best describe such a thing? "Doorway" sounds ambiguous, "door" implies a hinged lid. I did a search of "doorless doorway" and found more than a thousand hits, but that's wordier than I'd like. Does anyone know of a special term, perhaps a piece of architectural jargon, for this species of wall-hole? Thanks! Bhumiya (said/done) 19:48, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Opening? --MZMcBride 03:04, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm guessing Bhumiya is referring to the "door frames" without doors, although they're not door frames either. "Threshold" maybe? Xiner (talk, email) 03:11, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I considered threshold, too. And I think you could probably get away with architrave -- technically, the decorative moulding that frames a door, window, or other opening.

But our article on Door seems clearly cited, and it says the following things:

a door is a hinged/sliding panel that covers a generally floor-length opening in a wall
the term "door" can refer to the sliding/hinged part, but it can also be / is also used to refer to the OPENING ITSELF.
the term "doorway can only refer to the opening.

Near as I can tell, if we take these things together, it seems those portals/passageways are technically either doors (by the second definition above) or doorways whether they are framed or unframed, or even whether they were ever intended to hold a door or not. I'd say "door" is much more misleading when you're talking about a panel-less opening, so "doorway", however ambiguous, may be as accurate a term as we've got. As noted above, "architrave" would work, too, even if it may not be as accurate as doorway; at least it is certainly less misleading, because hardly anyone knows what the heck it means. Unless you think "a generally floor-length opening in a wall" is the term you were looking for, Bhumiya. :-) Jfarber 03:56, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd go with "doorway", or "archway" if it has an arched shape. My house also has windows between two rooms, where one room was added later. Find a term for that ! StuRat 07:11, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard them called "pass-throughs." — Michael J 20:48, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would probably say "portal" or "entryway".--Pharos 19:13, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, everybody! Bhumiya (said/done) 04:25, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's surprising what problems architecture can throw up. In Russian "fortochka" is an everyday word, the appliance having been used for centuries to ventilate houses in extreme conditions. There is in fact an English technical term, "transom", but very few English speakers know what it means. (It's one pane of a window which you can open separately.) - EAH (Edward Hansen)

Use of H in the Byzantine period

The Madaba Map seems to use H for the spiritus asper, as in "ΗΑΓΙΑ ПОΛΙΣ". Our article Eta (letter) doesn't mention such usage. Was that standard?
(Lambiam, if you read this: I got there through the sigma article, which points out this map as an example of the lunate sigma. Guess how I got to that page. Funny how remote areas come together, isn't it?) — Sebastian 23:31, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I read it. I think the Η here is the feminine form of the definite article. The text should be split into words like this: "Η ΑΓΙΑ ПОΛΙΣ ΙΕΡΟΥΣΑ[ΛΗΜ]": "The Holy City Jerusa[lem]". --Lambiam ^Talk 00:06, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My assumption (edit conflict: also) would be that your quotation consists of three words: ἡ ἁγία πόλις. Wareh 00:08, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ηὕρηκατε! That's why I like it here! — Sebastian 06:38, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

March 25

A casual term

A content dispute in which I'm involved in brings up this phrase "a casual term that refers to..." Somehow I think linguists would have a more formal phrase that describes such a word. Thanks. Xiner (talk, email) 02:55, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I decided on "in casual contexts" - is there a free, respectable online dictionary that shows if a noun is countable or uncountable? Xiner (talk, email) 03:46, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Colloquialism? ny156uk 21:00, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

informal?

Elves

Is Pearl an elf? In the novel, Hawthorne describes that she's an "elf-child" or "wild infant". Is she considered an elf in regards to her personality or her blood?Coffsneeze 12:27, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you're talking about The Scarlet Letter. This isn't really a language question, though. —An gr 12:32, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe this is just my misunderstanding, but I would have assumed English Lit style questions belonged here. Skittle 17:12, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say the Humanities Desk is more appropriate, provided this isn't a homework question. The main reference desk page describes this page as being for "Spelling, Grammar, Word etymology, Linguistics & Language usage, and Requesting translations". —An gr 17:31, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that a question about literature is a HUM question. But...We offer translations? Wow...doesn't that usually count as "doing homework"? Jfarber 17:52, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not if it isn't a homework question. —An gr 18:37, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As that book is concerned with humans, not mythical races, I take it the author was comparing her appearance or personaility with that of an elf, not saying she actually was an elf. StuRat 21:11, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See Changeling for an elf-human connection. This may reflect a speculation (or wishful thinking or whatever) in the context of the social stigma associated with a child born out of wedlock in a community bound by a certain religious worldview. As this is a figurative use of a word in a classic work of fiction, I'd have to agree that the query would be better posted to the Humanities Reference Desk rather than the Language RD. -- Deborahjay 23:07, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology

What is the etymology of towelhead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LadnavEht (talk • contribs)

"towel" + "head" --Ptcamn 20:28, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"towelhead" as a pejorative for an arab is from the perceived resemblance of the keffiyeh, part of the stereotype of Arabs, to a typical tea towel. (picture of teatowels here ). jnestorius^(talk) 20:46, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How

How come there's no Canadian Sign Language?100110100 22:11, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Googling "canadian sign language" gives a few dozen hits. Just from perusing two or three of them, it looks like hearing-impaired persons in anglophone Canada tend to use American Sign Language. However, there is (or was) a distinct "Maritime Sign Language" (also called "Nova Scotian Sign Language"), used in the Maritime provinces. --Mathew5000 22:33, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What would be the sign for "eh ?" StuRat 02:47, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eh? --Anonymous, March 26, 2007, 06:53 (UTC).

Spanish

What are the past forms of ver? Viste Vitiste Vio Vimos Vieron?

I assume you mean the preterit? vi, viste, vio, vimos, visteis, vieron. Verbix can be helpful for this sort of thing. --Miskwito 23:09, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You need to understand that there are many ways of speaking in the past in Spanish. The 'simple past' is two verb forms - preterit and imperfect. Generally (although Spanish is known for it's long list of exceptions to every rule), preterit is used for something that happened once; imperfect is used for habitual actions. --67.177.170.96 03:03, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, although Miskwito's answer is somewhat correct, some of those forms use accent marks. Corvus cornix 19:22, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's right. In Spanish there is "I saw" (vi) which is perfect and a verb form meaning "I was seeing" or "I used to see" which is imperfect. Don't know the translation, though, since I don't speak Spanish. A.Z. 05:04, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well the imperfect form of "I was seeing" and "I used to see" is "Yo veia", I expect it helps :) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 189.164.57.189 (talk) 07:03, 26 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Well, veía --Miskwito 06:01, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I guess it should be vistéis, then? vio is irregular, though, in that it's written without an accent on the <o>. --Miskwito 06:00, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not that there's a "long list of exceptions for every rule". It's that the supposed rules people propose do not really capture the system. In this case, aspect cannot be reduced to "one time only" or "habitual actions".mnewmanqc 12:45, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

:) =)

Quick question. What does it mean when someone writes something like :) or =) or =)P. 65.95.22.227 23:40, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Those are supposed to represent human faces (can you see two eyes and a mouth?). It is used to show the emotions of the person who is writing. Those specific ones are happy faces. A.Z. 00:14, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For further details, see Smiley. dr.ef.tymac 00:49, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Specifically, see the section in that article on Internet use and the related article Emoticon. Note in particular that the use of ":-)" and its variants are sometimes just used to mean "I'm happy", the original and more useful meaning is "I'm joking". --Anonymous, March 26, 2007, 06:59 (UTC).

It has a lot to do with the person it is, as well. Each person uses different smiley emocticon things to mean slightly different things, specific to the person, is what I've noticed. [Mαc Δαvιs] (How's my driving?) ❖ 16:43, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

:), :( =-p :') :^o :3? $( :*) :p c(_8^(|)!!!! Capuchin 08:50, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

March 26

Like a red thread ?

What is the meaning and/or source of the saying, 'like a red thread'? I can find many examples, but haven't uncovered the essence of the metaphor. Thanks if you can help. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.84.41.211 (talk) 12:27, 26 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

A little googling shows that this expression has gotten to be used very vaguely and (to be charitable) allusively. So it may be helpful to convey my unscientific impression that the original & most standard expression is "A runs like a red thread through B." This means that some salient feature or organizing principle A can be seen as giving unity and order to the mass of facts or examples B. It is often used rhetorically to expose some hidden or corrupt motive A that explains B. The first Google result is Goebbels on Bolshevism. I'd always assumed that the metaphor simply has in mind the striking visibility of the red thread (thus A is the feature embedded in the mess of history that makes you say "aha! I see the logic and sequence!"). But the predominance among the examples of very negative and pernicious "red threads" makes me wonder if there isn't some more interesting history I don't know here. Wareh 14:02, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Googling "Red thread" China or "Red thread" Chinese nets thousands upo thousands of pretty consistent references to an ancient Chinese belief that when a child is born, invisible red threads reach out from her to connect her to all the important people that bind her to life, including those who she is destined to meet but has not yet met. Red is the color of luck in Chinese custon; many children are banded with red thread upon birth as part of this custom. (I suspect adding "runs like" to the search term nets too much metaphor BASED on that belief, which seems to have stretched the "thread" of interpersonal connection so far that is causes the metaphoric vagueness Wareh finds, but the Chinese belief still seems to be at the origin/source of the saying). Jfarber 14:21, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Invisible and yet red ? That oxymoron deserves silent applause. The Invisible Pink Unicorn will be pleased. :-) StuRat 16:35, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is not an oxymoron, but rather figurative usage (or at worst a contradiction in terms). -- Deborahjay 17:09, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

According to our article, an oxymoron "combines two normally contradictory terms", so this would seem to qualify. StuRat 18:27, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re Jfarber's suggestion, the next question is, how and when did it make such early entry from Chinese into English? Was there a widely read reference to the Chinese belief in the 19th century or before? A really quick search shows the idiom as least as early as Bodenstedt's 1867 edition of Macbeth ("the word 'bloody' reappears on almost every page, and runs like a red thread through the whole piece"). Not particularly close to the Chinese idea; I guess I'm skeptical. Wareh 00:34, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...or it may be nothing more than a fairly straightforward simile taken from the eyecatching nature of a bright-colored thread in a tapestry or other fabric, red (and yellow) being a visually dominant color — the latter fact culled from a local (Hebrew-language, Israeli) field guide to wildflowers. -- Deborahjay 00:43, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've come up with an alternative theory. From Goethe's Elective Affinities (1809):

...we cannot find a fitter transition than through a simile which suggested itself to us on contemplating her exquisite pages. There is, we are told, a curious contrivance in the service of the English marine. The ropes in use in the royal navy, from the largest to the smallest, are so twisted that a red thread runs through them from end to end, which cannot be extracted without undoing the whole; and by which the smallest pieces may be recognized as belonging to the crown. Just so is there drawn through Ottilie's diary, a thread of attachment and affection which connects it all together, and characterizes the whole. And thus these remarks, these observations, these extracted sentences, and whatever else it may contain, were, to the writer, of peculiar meaning.

I'm quite convinced that this Goethean usage is key to our reception of the idiom. E. T. A. Hoffmann was already referring to it as a famous Goethean idea, and a German collection of famous phrases confirms that der rote Faden is famous and dates to Goethe 1809 (so too German wiktionary). The earliest Chinese connection I've found is in this mention (1865) and this mention (1868) of a red thread symbolizing matrimonial connection in Chinese (can't find any Chinese ref. pre-1900 in German). (Earlier English usages include Shakespeare criticism of 1863 and this mention of 1852.) The interesting outstanding question, to me, is whether Goethe had encountered the Chinese marriage custom & was influenced by it, despite the fact that he explicitly cites the English maritime usage as his inspiration. Wareh 01:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Further: [9] [10]. Wareh 18:09, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you want a Western, i.e. Judeo-Christian source: In Hebrew there's an expression "like a scarlet thread (חוט השני) [running through, e.g. a woven fabric]" that might be related. In contemporary usage, I've understood that to mean something prominent and visible that's nevertheless intrinsic to the weave. However, my Hebrew-language textile expert (whom I'm coaxing to open a Wikipedia account) tells me this well-known term originated with the biblical story of Rahab the Harlot (Joshua 2:18), "...thou shalt bind this line of scarlet thread in the window..." to indicate that her house was to be spared destruction (for having protected Joshua's two spies, in defiance of the order of the king of Jericho). There's a current practice of tying a red thread around one's wrist, popular among Kabbalah enthusiasts, but I don't have particular knowledge of that. -- Deborahjay 17:03, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The best answer to this is probably as mundane as an inaccurate translation from German. Both the given examples are from German speakers/writers, Goebbels and Goethe. In German, "roter Faden" (literally red thread) means central or recurrent theme. Hope this helps

I feel the last contribution above is the most helpful one. In English it's the "golden thread": the golden thread of English law is the presumption of innocence. In Russian, by the way, it's "krasnaia nit'" (literally red thread). - EAH (Edward Hansen)

I haven't heard this saying, but Ariadne gave Theseus red thread, with which he found his way out of the Labyrinth after killing the Minotaur.

A of B's

I've often wondered, is it grammatically correct to use the preposition of and the possessive marker 's in the form A of B's, for example that hat of John's? Thanks.--Domitius 14:37, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds perfectly OK to me. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 14:42, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. "That hat of Johns" sounds more like a head covering shared by several men who support poor women living in undesirable circumstances, in exchange for certain considerations. :-) StuRat 16:30, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On the face of it, it's a double possessive, but it's well established in idiom, e.g. "A friend of mine", not "A friend of me". JackofOz 01:03, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To me, a friend of me sounds wrong, you have to use mine here. But when is this double possessive required, and when is it optional, or wrong? The disappearance of Ambrose Bierce's?? A collar of my dog's?? The dress of a child's?? --Lambiam ^Talk 06:10, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure Possessive adjective will answer the question, but it's a start. Confusingly, it quotes the example "a book of mine", yet mine is a possessive pronoun, not a possessive adjective. I think it might have to do with definiteness - you could say A friend of Ambrose Bierce's because friend is a concrete noun, whereas you wouldn't say The disappearance of Ambrose Bierce's because disappearance is an abstract noun. I could be completely on the wrong track, though. JackofOz 06:34, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I thought about definiteness too, except that the first example in this thread, That hat of John's, is definite. —An gr 06:36, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think we're in agreement. Maybe re-read my post. JackofOz 06:42, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to work only when it's actually a possessive, rather than where the possessee/head is a nominalisation, as in The disappearance of Ambrose Bierce's: this would only work if disappearance were something that Ambrose could own. I think it must stem from when 's was a genitive case marker. It also only seems to work when there's not a more natural way of saying it; e.g. a child's dress, one of my dog's collars. But then why is the latter more natural, but not one of my friends more natural than a friend of mine? Focus possibly? With that hat of John's there's no good alternative construction, as against the hat of John's which is better expressed by John's hat, as 's possessives generally signal definiteness anyway. Drmaik 07:45, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Try this.--Estrellador* 17:16, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Double possessive" was the first thing I looked for in Wikipedia, and was rather surprised when we had no article about this construction. JackofOz 22:11, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm Talking

Talk with you or Talk to you; which is grammatically/linguistically correct ? 125.23.36.83 17:12, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Both are correct, but they mean two different things. Note the prepositions. -- Deborahjay 17:32, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, talking "with" someone implies a two-way conversation, while talking "to" someone implies a one-way conversation. However, people tend to use the terms interchangeably. StuRat 18:22, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See American and British English differences#Different prepositions in certain contexts. "talk with you" is the default (unmarked) form in the U.S., "talk to you" is in the UK. The shade of meaning between "with" and "to" differs as StuRat suggests in either region. jnestorius^(talk) 21:56, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As an Englishman, I find 'talk with' sounds unnatural - I doubt I would use it for anything. I would use 'to' by default and 'talk at' for a deeply one-sided conversation. Algebraist 00:11, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As an American-educated speaker of English, I would only say "talk to" in referring to a speech event initiated by one person; "talk at" doesn't indicate a mutual conversation or discussion as would be the case in "talk with." It's quite likely there's a sociocultural element at play here, generated by some inherent differences between the US and UK. (NB: Yet another example of "two peoples divided by their common language" or whatever that apocryphal [?] quotation is...!) -- Deborahjay 00:54, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To me, "talk at" sounds unnatural in American English, only being occasionally used to mean not only a one-sided conversation, but with an element of contempt, as in "I don't care what you have to say, your opinion is worthless". StuRat 01:34, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In Australia too, "talk to" is the standard phrase in everyday conversation. To "talk with" someone implies some sort of bargaining or negotiation. "Talk at", as Stu says, sounds unnatural and would only be used facetiously (did Suzi talk to you? Talked AT me more like!). FiggyBee 08:55, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

March 27

Translating a Wikipedia article

How can I translate an english page from Wikipedia to its romanian version of Wikipedia and post it there ? Just like that ? no mention of its source neither ? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ciocanelvalentin (talk • contribs) 15:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

You should mention either in a little note at the bottom of the article or on the talk page that it was translated from the English version. —An gr 15:13, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

At the very end of the article, write something like this (in Romanian): This article was initially translated from this Wikipedia article « en:Foo » , specifically from [http:// this version]. Link "this version" to the permanent link to the copy of the article you used. If you want help on translating, check out ro:Wikipedia:Articole de tradus, the Romanian version of Wikipedia:Translation. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 17:23, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Intrigued by vandalism

Hey hey! I saw this vandalism [11], and couldn't help wondering what it says. I assume it's arabic, but know little about this. Obviously, babelfish doesn't support such languages. Anyone know roughly what it says? I'm intrigued. Skittle 16:47, 27 March 2007 (UTC) ps Hope this is on the right desk; I seem to find the humanities areas oddly hard to categorise.[reply]

Google Translate has a beta version of Arabic-English. The service translates the start of the added paragraphs thus: "Evolution of change in the population from one organism to generations. The product differs from the raids in different ways. When this useful differences, a great opportunity to receive product from the remains and overwhelms, making the differences more normal in the [Nakst Jenraishn]. In this way, differences can stockpiled plenty [Tim], lead to major changes in [a] population. Evolution occurs through changes in the genes, the "recipe" for the building, located neighborhood." (Nakst Jenraishn is apparently a rendering of English Next Generation.) The last sentence, as served up by Google Translate, is: "This has resulted in the many diverse forms of life that exists today." The whole appears to be an attempted translation into Arabic of the lead of our article Introduction to evolution. --Lambiam ^Talk 21:58, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that's great. Maybe I'll give the user a quick message, letting them know about different language wikipedias :-) Skittle 23:43, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bella!

As I was passing two young women in the street in England, one of them said "Bella!", apparantly in reference to me.

What does "bella" mean exactly? I thought it was an italian expression, but there are many Portugese locally.

Searching Wikipedia or the internet only produces results about a magazine or a place. 62.253.48.20 21:26, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it means "beautiful" in Italian. I guess that means you've been given a lovely compliment. Presumably you're a female, otherwise it would have been "bello". JackofOz 22:09, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you have a doppelgänger named Bella. --Mathew5000 23:03, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Or maybe they thought you looked like Bella Abzug or Bela Lugosi ? StuRat 03:55, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Or Béla Bartók. —An gr 04:05, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What

What is that word (it might start with an 'e' like 'expedition' or 'excavation', but definitely not those words, but with the same 'ex' sound) that follows 'archaeological'? Like 'archaeological expedition' or 'archaeological excavation'?100110100 22:49, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It depends what you are trying to say. If it's the dig itself, then "excavation" is the word. But in the right context you might describe an "excursion", "expedition", "experiment", "exclamation" or lots other nouns as "archaeological". --Mathew5000 23:07, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think you nailed it on the head with "excursion", Mathew5000. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 06:00, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Archeological expedition is infinitely more common than "excursion" (which would, however, be the one if we mean a trip tourists are taken on to see something archeological); in my opinion, "expedition" is the only candidate worth setting beside "excavation." Wareh 17:21, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

L-colored vowels?

(trying to ask concisely) There are R-colored vowels for alveolar approximants, but are there L-colored vowels for the accompanying lateral approximants? Hyenaste ^(tell) 23:00, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

never thought of that before. But I've never heard of them, and don't think they would exist. r-colouring basically means the tongue blade is somewhat backed, not normal for vowels. l-colouring would mean the sound was almost lateral (air almost only flowing down the sides of the mouth), which doesn't really make any sense: once the air is flowing through the centre of the mouth, it's no longer lateral. Laterals can be syllabic (are so phonetically in my variety of English, as in 'bottle') in some languages, but they are still consonantal, as there is an obstruction in the airflow. Also in some varieties of English and Portuguese, the letter l represents a back vowel or non-lateral approximant in some environments, e.g. end of word, but that backing originates in the secondary articulation of velarisation of once-present l. Think Cockney 'bottle'. Drmaik 09:09, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

March 28

Can someone with better language skills please interwiki this article to the greek WP?

I'd do it but it's all greek to me. SS_Heraklion edit the article and take out the hand-made link too, please, it's in there as a TODO item. Sorry for asking here but it's minor, and I didn't have a better place to ask. Thanks. dr.ef.tymac 03:24, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done, along with much (!) proofreading. For future reference, I simply put

  [[el:Ηράκλειον (Ε/Γ-Ο/Γ)]]

The el is the code for the Greek (Hellenic) Wikipedia (el.wikipedia.org), and the part that was "all Greek" to you I simply copied from the page that was linked—it wasn't actually as ugly and full of %CE%97%CF%81%CE%AC%CE%BA%CE%AHHHH%HHHH%!!!% as it seemed. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 05:59, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(Applause) Not only did you WP:IW the article, but you did a whole rack of other needed changes that I was too tired to even consider, let alone complete. That was much more than "minor" work for such a small article. Kudos. dr.ef.tymac 14:57, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

English anagrams

What english word has the most anagrams that are also valid English Words? Anagram mentions "paternal" with 2 other words. I know of Live/Vile/veil/evil. Anything more than this 4 way? -- SGBailey 06:15, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here are 14 which appear in Webster's: "anestri, asterin, eranist, nastier, ratines, resiant, restain, retains, retinas, retsina, sainter, stainer, starnie, stearin" from [12] − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 07:07, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - Though I hate it when words that noine ever uses are offered as solutions. Of those 14, I would reduce the list to only "nastier, restain, retains, retinas, stainer". -- SGBailey 07:56, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But retsina is a lovely drinkhotclaws**== 08:17, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You've thrown in an arbitrary, subjective judgement: the condition that, by your own estimate, the word must be used often. This condition makes the question very difficult to answer, since different people will tend to use words depending on their location, occupation, education, etc. I imagine many molecular biologists say "stearin" often enough. Anyway, my point is we can't know which words are acceptable to you, so that criteria is kind of wonky. Do people continue providing you lists, and you continue whittling them down to ones you accept? (Bleh, I'm not trying to be aggravating but I am tired.) − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 08:53, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Name of a structure

"Le style, c'est l'homme." Hello, can you tell me is there a name for this kind of sentence structure (not necessarily in French, but also in other Indo-european languages)? Double subjects? Thanks a lot.--K.C. Tang 06:37, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's similar to cleft constructions (like "It's money that I love"), and the name's on the tip of my tongue, but...Oh! Dislocation! --Miskwito 07:14, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot! So are there any other Indo-european languages which employ dislocation frequently, besides French?--K.C. Tang 07:46, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mon cœur déçu: a French grammar/spell check

I am somewhat familiar with the French language, but by no means am I an expert. Could someone tell me if the following sentence is grammatically sound (consistent verb tense, proper gender and articles, conjugation, vocabulary):

Mon cœur déçu mais mon âme plutôt naïve, j'ai rêvé de crapaüter en canoë au delà des îles, près du mälström où brûlent les novæ.

I have modified it (to be more personal) from a version previously found at the article "pangram". Thanks! − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 08:43, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reading

How can I read any book in wikipedia?

If there is an online text freely available, an external link may often be found at the end of the article on the author or the book. Also, the sister project Wikisource is dedicated to providing online books, etc. Wareh 14:04, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The color of magic

Hi, I am writing a fantasy novel associated with the "color of magic" and for the life of me, the most difficult thing about writing is thinking up medieval/gothic/mystical-sounding names of people and places. There is this character who is associated with "orange magic" - could someone help with some name suggestions? For example, I have called the blue wizard "Azurean". In addition, there is this important city high up in the "Dur'grande" mountains, shrouded in mist, built by the original mountain inhabitants aeons ago... any suggestions please? "Misthaven" is ideal, but really is an abused name in the fantasy genre. Thank you all and sorry for the "un-encyclopedic" question. Sandman30s 09:08, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You could call the orange character Bill. —Angr 09:29, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Jokes aside, the orange wizard is female. Orange is a funny word without any significant latin roots or stems, unless someone knows something otherwise. Ochre is the closest shade I could find. "Ocharina" does not sound appealing. Neither does "Oranja", for a fantasy book. Sandman30s 12:49, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I realise this may be stating the obvious, but are you aware there is already a well-known fantasy novel called The Colour of Magic? FiggyBee 12:47, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I am aware of Terry Pratchett's novel. My concepts are radically different but I would not like to reveal my plot at this stage. Like I said there is an "association" with magical color. Thanks for the hint though :) A rather large worry of mine is not to be accused of plagiarism. Sandman30s 12:53, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If plagiarism or duplication of color associations is a concern, you might also benefit from exploring Piers Anthony's fantasy/sci fi series Apprentice Adept, which features a set of powerful adept magicians, each of which is named for a color, and each of which generates magic in a manner associated with that color. Jfarber 14:25, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this, I was not aware of that series. Thankfully my concept is still hugely different. Sandman30s 15:13, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe something reminiscent of gold (oranges were formerly called "golden apples")? Like Golda or Chryseis or something? —An gr 13:02, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gold will not quite fit the context of my plot. It has to be a shade of orange in the light spectrum. Sandman30s 15:13, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, take a look at Category:Shades of orange, maybe something will occur to you. I suppose naming her Tangerina would be a little too slapstick for your purposes. —An gr 15:46, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A foodstuff in Slovak

An e-colleague is curious as to the meaning in English of ERCE 8 Vajecne Cestoviny that appears on a packaged food item from Slovakia. -- Thanks, Deborahjay 16:53, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lonesome, On'ry and Mean

Hi, Does anyone here know what "On'ry" means? Internet searches only turn up references to the song. Thanks very much for your help! Bioarchie1234 17:15, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Short for ornery. Wareh 17:17, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And ornery is dialect for ordinary, a nicely understated synonym for mean (nasty), which is a homonym of mean (average), hence ordinary. In other words, it was a play on words from the get-go. People have always played with language. Dmargulis 17:24, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I've always wanted to know whether what Waylon was singing was a "nice" word! Bioarchie1234 17:31, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Revision as of 17:24, 28 March 2007 edit Dmargulis (talk \| contribs) 17 edits →Lonesome, On'ry and Mean ← Previous edit		Revision as of 17:31, 28 March 2007 edit undo Bioarchie1234 (talk \| contribs) 166 edits →Lonesome, On'ry and Mean Next edit →
Line 125:		Line 125:

	And ornery is dialect for ordinary, a nicely understated synonym for mean (nasty), which is a homonym of mean (average), hence ordinary. In other words, it was a play on words from the get-go. People have always played with language. [[User:Dmargulis\|Dmargulis]] 17:24, 28 March 2007 (UTC)		And ornery is dialect for ordinary, a nicely understated synonym for mean (nasty), which is a homonym of mean (average), hence ordinary. In other words, it was a play on words from the get-go. People have always played with language. [[User:Dmargulis\|Dmargulis]] 17:24, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

			Thanks! I've always wanted to know whether what [[Waylon Jennings\|Waylon]] was singing was a "nice" word! [[User:Bioarchie1234\|Bioarchie1234]] 17:31, 28 March 2007 (UTC)