Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 03:27, 21 December 2023

Welcome to the language section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

Shortcut

WP:RD/L

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

How can I get my question answered?

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

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.

December 14

Ancient Greek Translation Help

Hello, I'm making a fictional magic system and I'd like help with making sure I'm using the correct real-life procedure. Here's an example: Μᾰντεύω μέσω τό Σκέπτομενον ἐμοῦ περῐ́ ἡ Κῠνέουσᾰ αὐτῆς περῐ́ ὁ Μετώπου αὐτῶν. I'd translate it literally as "I divine by means of the observation of mine of the kissing of her of the foreheads of them guys" meaning "I divine by means of my observation of her kissing of their foreheads."

Overall, I think I'm unclear on what agrees with what. For example, does the gender of the noun determine the gender of the article, or is it the gender of the possessive pronoun? Some specific questions:

Is the first person singular present active conjugated verb correct (Μᾰντεύω)?
Are the prepositions correct (μέσω, περῐ́, and περῐ́)?
Given this is spoken in the first person by one non-binary diviner, are the first article (τό), the inflection on the participle (-ενον), and the first possessive pronoun correct (ἐμοῦ)?
Given the kisser is one female, are the second article (ἡ), the inflection on the first descriptive genitive noun (-ουσᾰ), and the second possessive pronoun correct (αὐτῆς)?
Given the bearer of foreheads are more than two men, are the third article (ὁ), the inflection on the second descriptive genitive noun (-ου), and the third possessive pronoun correct (αὐτῶν)?

So far, I've used the Wiktionary articles on these words, the Wikipedia article Ancient Greek nouns, as well as these sources:

I appreciate help answering my questions and if you have any other sources to share that I haven't already looked at, please do share. Thank you. Schyler (exquirito veritatem bonumque) 23:49, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't get the words right, you may always say that they are barbarous names as they did in Hellenistic magic.--Error (talk) 11:58, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's helpful. I do also want to learn more about gender agrees with inflections in verbs, nouns, and articles though. Schyler (exquirito veritatem bonumque) 15:01, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there's this from the Ancient Greek grammar article :"The definite article agrees with its associated noun in number, gender and case." So that solves that question, but now I'm looking for an answer to what the noun inflection agrees with. Schyler (exquirito veritatem bonumque) 17:19, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Some remarks.

The smiley breve mark ˘ over vowels may be seen in dictionaries but is not used in actual texts, so for example περῐ́ should be περί. But if the mark is arched the other way around, like a frown, it is a genuine Ancient Greek accent and should remain, as in ἐμοῦ.
Why do you write the first letters of nouns with capital letters? Usually we now use sentence case when rendering Ancient Greek texts. The ancient Greeks themselves used only one case; they wrote ΓΝΩΘΙ ΣΕΑΥΤΟΝ (without accents} or, later, γνῶθι σεαυτόν.
The word μέσω is Modern Greek. You could use instead διά + the genitive. Then you get, διὰ τοῦ σκέπτομενου ἐμοῦ.
But the form σκέπτομενον is the passive participle of σκέπτομαι, "that is being watched". Using as a noun, like here, it means "that which is being watched", so τό σκέπτομενον ἐμοῦ means "that of mine which is being watched", which I think is not what you mean.
Also, the primary sense of σκέπτομαι is to "watch", to "examine", and seems a bit creepy in the context, something like a voyeur spying on kissing people. You need a noun here; instead of going for a verbal noun, why not simply use ὄψις, meaning "sight", which can like in English refer to the act of seeing, or to what is seen. Then you don't need to specify the "of mine" bit because it will be understood in the context. Then you get, διὰ τῆς ὄψεως.
The repeated use of περί, "concerning", makes this sound very stilted. You wouldn't say in English, "I divine through the sight concerning the kissing of her concerning the foreheads of them thar guys."
There are more issues, but for now I have to attend to issues in real life.

Disclaimer. I am not a native speaker of Ancient Greek. My most recent serious exposure was being taught the language over sixty years ago, and that was only to understand texts in Greek, not to create correct sentences. I can spot some obvious errors, but I can't know what a reasonably natural and grammatically correct translation would be. --Lambiam 18:07, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I asked ChatGPT to translate "I divine by the sight of her kissing their foreheads." This was the result:

ἐγὼ μαντεύομαι ὑπὸ τῆς ὄψεως αὐτῆς φιλοῦσας αὐτῶν τὰς μετώπους.

Ancient Greek is a pro-drop language (as is Modern Greek), so the subject ἐγὼ may be omitted. The form μαντεύω appeared only after the Ancient Greek period in Koine Greek. The preposition ὑπὸ (+ genitive) also means "by, through", with a clear sense of "by means of".

I don't know whether φιλέω for the verb "kiss" is better here than κυνέω. My impression is that neither is particularly amorous, but that φιλέω can also mean to touch tenderly. If you go with κυνέω, the word becomes κυνέουσας or, contracted, κυνοῦσας. For the kiss of Judas, Matthew and Mark use καταφιλέω.

The genitive plural αὐτῶν is the same for all three grammatical genders, so, as in English, you cannot tell that the kissees are blokes. But the genitive singular αὐτῆς is unambiguously feminine, so the kisser is definitely female. --Lambiam 21:15, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is helpful and inspiring. In reply:

Noted, and this could be a device I use, like a paper town sub-plot.
It's just an artifact of the software I'm using.
I'll go with ὑπὸ since you've said it's clearly better and the AI supports your claim.
I think "that of mine which is being watched" is the sort of wordiness that makes sense for the story.
Certainly creepy, but not so much for the cultic story. I use this word because the fictional magic system has three 'types' of divination of increasing 'sincerity', so "sight" isn't quite right, I think, but maybe here I was just flat wrong on what a participle is and now I'm getting confused with the basic grammar, I guess. Here are the three types, so I'd welcome any pointers for using more a precise set of stems and a way to clear up my grammar confusion.

Stem: Σκέπτομ- (Observation or Examination)

Inflections: -ενος, -ένη, -ενον (m, f, n)

Stem: ἑρμηνεύ- (Interpretation or Explanation)

Inflections: -ων, -ουσᾰ, -ον (m, f, n)

Stem: Γιγνώσκ- (Judgement or Determination)

Inflections: -ων, -ουσᾰ, -ον (m, f, n)

Again, wordiness works.

Finally, can you speak to the the noun inflection agreement? Since the article agrees with the gender of the noun, does the noun inflection agree with the gender of the person? Schyler (exquirito veritatem bonumque) 23:26, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In a given context, the inflected form of a given noun is only determined by its number (singular/dual/plural) and the grammatical case imposed by the context (nominative/genitive/...). Wiktionary gives inflection tables for most nouns. For example, for ὄψις see wikt:ὄψις#Inflection (click "show"). When an adjective or participle is nominalized, it inherits the gender and number of the entity/ies of which it is an attribute. The gender of abstract entities is normally taken to be neuter, e.g. φαινόμενον. --Lambiam 23:57, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really grateful for your help. Nominalized participle was the grammar vocabulary word I was missing. I take it then that the translations I've listed are correctly nominalized participles, but should always be neuter (i.e., Σκέπτομενον,ἑρμηνεύον, Γιγνώσκον). Schyler (exquirito veritatem bonumque) 02:49, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The words ἑρμηνεῦον and γιγνῶσκον have circumflex accents.^[1][2] Whether the gender assignment is correct depends on the context. --Lambiam 10:55, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You said "when an adjective or participle is nominalized, it inherits the gender and number of the entity/ies of which it is an attribute". Does that mean in this context "it inherits the gender and number of the diviner"? Schyler (exquirito veritatem bonumque) 22:19, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There may be a grammatical misunderstanding. English has present participles, which are used like adjectives. English also has gerunds, which are verbal nouns. They have identical appearances but different meanings. When a participle is used as a noun, it becomes grammatically indistinguishable from the gerund, potentially creating ambiguities because the difference in meaning remains. In the sentence "people should receive in proportion to their deserving", deserving is a gerund. In the sentence "the delineation between the deserving and the undeserving is not a recent phenomenon", it is a nominalized participle. You appear to be under the impression that Greek present participles can be used as gerunds, but this dual use of the same forms is specific to English. The nominalized meaning of γιγνῶσκον is not that of some entity's act of knowing; it refers to the knowing entity itself. In the link I gave above the word is used by Xenophon, putting the words in the mouth of Socrates, as a participle qualifying the neuter noun βρέφος, meaning "baby". In this case the phrase has negative polarity – the baby does not know. But in some context we might have a savant baby, and then one could use neuter τὸ γιγνῶσκον to refer to the grammatically neuter baby itself, but not to its savviness, just like in English "the savant was drooling" does not mean we witnessed erudition produce saliva. --Lambiam 13:19, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If that theory of proportionality were correct, then your comments here would be a compliment. Schyler (exquirito veritatem bonumque) 17:32, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I don't understand this comment. As to the appropriate verbal noun, I think you can use τὸ + infinitive, e.g. τὸ σκέπτεσθαι ἐμοῦ. --Lambiam 22:43, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would be slightly skeptical of the assumption that non-binary people would want to be referred to by the ancient Greek neuter gender. It would be basically the same thing as using the pronoun "it" in modern English. Are non-binary people now OK with being referred to as "it"? And in older Indo-European languages, the masculine and neuter were distinguished from each other at most in the nominative and accusative cases. All other case forms were the same. There used to be a relic of this in English, when the possessive of "it" was "his" until around 1600, so that "his" (a historical genitive case form) had both masculine and neuter meanings. The form "its" was then brought into existence by analogy to eliminate this ambiguity (but still today, "whose" can be considered to be the possessive of both "who" and "what" for some purposes)... AnonMoos (talk) 21:56, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Surely me being in group doesn't make my opinion mean anything special, but 1) I'm skeptical that there's a 1:1 correspondence between Ancient Greek neuter gender and English "it", 2) the neuter gender is rather novel in my experience, so it feels validating, and 3) your comment answers none of the questions and in fact reading it was the most useless experience I've had all month, maybe all year, so congratulations Schyler (exquirito veritatem bonumque) 22:16, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And congratulations to you for ignoring the expertise of someone who knows quite a bit more about ancient Greek than you do. You use the neuter gender whenever you say the word "it", so I don't know what's so "novel" about it... AnonMoos (talk) 23:48, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the best-known non-binary character from Ancient Greece is Hermaphroditus. What pronoun(s) do the original sources use for them? Narky Blert (talk) 11:27, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The proper noun Ἑρμαφρόδιτος is masculine. Diodorus Siculus in his book Bibliotheca historica, uses the masculine definite article: τὸν ὀνομαζόμενον Ἑρμαφρόδιτον – "the so-named Hermaphroditus".^[3] Lucian, in the Dialogue between Apollo and Dionysus, lets Apollo refer to Hermaphroditus, disapprovingly, with masculine pronouns: ὁ δὲ θῆλυς καὶ ἡμίανδρος – "he on the other hand is feminine and half-man".^[4] --Lambiam 14:10, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. This reply is based on creative problem solving (Narky's comment) and research with proper sources (Lambian's comment). Schyler (exquirito veritatem bonumque) 16:14, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 15

N followed by Consonant - Why stereotypically(?) Sub-Saharan Africa?

I was watching the new Dr. Who and the first name of the New Doctor (Ncuti) brought to mind that in my head there are a lot of consonantal blends at the beginning of words that are N followed by a consonant that I associate with Africa, including Ng(even with the Vietnamese name Nguyen), Nj, Nc Ny and Nj. Is there a reason that this occurs?Naraht (talk) 04:01, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think this article might have some information on that sound: Voiced velar nasal. Schyler (exquirito veritatem bonumque) 05:31, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That would only apply to the case where an "ng" spelling represents a single phonetic consonant, and can occur at the beginning of a word, as in Vietnamese. For cases where an apparent phonetic cluster of a nasal consonant plus another consonant occurs at the beginning of a word, syllabic nasal and prenasalized consonant would be more relevant. In some Bantu languages, when the vowel of a CV- class prefix disappears in a historical sound change, and the consionant is nasal, then it can become syllabic; that's basically the origin of word-initial syllabic nasals in Swahili. AnonMoos (talk) 12:05, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Might it be that initial N is a frequent case marker or root in some Bantu language you hear? Actually the root of Bantu is *ntʊ̀- --Error (talk) 11:55, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In Bantu languages, a nominal stem can generally appear only with class prefixes, so the -nt- of Bantu wouldn't occur word-initially... AnonMoos (talk) 21:54, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is Swahili unusual in having nouns with zero prefix? —Tamfang (talk) 19:48, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Swahili has a number of cases in which the vowel in a former CV- class prefix deleted due to historical sound changes. This gave rise to a number of word-initial syllabic nasal consonants, but also in certain cases the C- of the prefix disappeared when it became adjacent to the first consonant of the stem. It would be difficult to consider such cases bare stems, since often a class prefix which disappears before some consonants still appears before other consonants, or before monosyllabic stems, or in adjective agreement, etc. AnonMoos (talk) 00:30, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Holger Czukay - "Czukay, an approximation of the Polish word for 'search' " according to his NYT obituary - what exact form? Case? Verb? Adjective?

Good whatever time it is in your location all,

I've looked through this article's history and talk page and and haven't seen this discussed.

As ~~everyone~~ every nerd fascinated by the intersection of C20 avant-garde and C20 pop music knows, Czukay is the Polish word for "searcher" (source: am nerd fascinated by the intersection of C20 avant-garde and C20 pop music).

This is somewhat obliquely addressed in his NYT obituary here - summary: Czukay took this as his artistic name as, when he was a student, Stockhausen often referred to him as a searcher.

According to en.wp Polish language, it has seven cases.

What would be the exact (if any) form that Czukay took on? And yes, I am fully aware that I am asking ~~social media~~ the reference desk to fact check the NYT. Shirt58 (talk) 🦘 09:52, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see there's nothing at Holger Czukay, perhaps unsurprisingly. I'd assume it was a verb case e.g. searches or searching. But am far too less of a Polish grammar nerd to really guess. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:02, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The only thing I can find on Wiktionary that comes close is szukaj (with initial sz-, not cz-). This would be the imperative form ("search!") of the verb szukać. Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:04, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

May I suggest an inquiry at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Poland? Alansplodge (talk) 10:46, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Here's an interview (in German) with Holger Czukay from 2010. According to this Czukay was the original name of the family, changed to Schüring bei Holger's grandfather to avoid problems with the Nazis. In the 60s he was told by two Polish singers that the name meant "search". He interprets it as the imperative, but maybe because he wants it to be the imperative and to convey that meaning rather than from a detailed linguistic understanding. My own name is not a million miles from Czukay's. While I'm not sure of its origins and meaning I'm fairly certain that it is not actually Polish but might come from one of the related languages that occur in the area, maybe Kashubian or Polabian or something. The interpretation as "search" may come from the similarity with the Polish word szukaj but need not necessarily be the actual meaning of the name. --Wrongfilter (talk) 11:30, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for that info, Wrongfilter. I suspect that "two Polish singers in the 60s" may not be WP:RS. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:34, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Almost the only thing I knew about Holger Czukay was that he did some songs with Jah Wobble and Jaki Liebezeit. I just liked the three names together: Holger Czukay, Jaki Liebezeit, and Jah Wobble (make sure to pronounce the J's differently!).

-- AnonMoos (talk) 12:15, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The closest Polish word is szukaj, which, as Future Perfect has already mentioned above, is the second-person singular imperative form of szukać, 'to search'. The word is commonly found on search buttons on Polish-language websites. Czukay or czukaj doesn't mean anything in Polish or in any other Slavic language as far as I know. I notice in the article that Czukay pronounced his name with a "sh" sound rather than a "ch" sound, which I suppose may have been influenced by someone telling him it sounded similar to szukaj. The name itself sounds to me like it could be of Turkic (Polish Tatar, perhaps) origin, but I've got no source for that. — Kpalion^(talk) 14:32, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 16

Name of a name

What is the terminology for "Hyatt" in A. Hyatt Smith? Is this considered a given name or a middle name? Clarityfiend (talk) 00:26, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

According to Given name, they are both given names. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:17, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Aye, people can have multiple given names: for example, I thought Joko Widodo, the current president of Indonesia, was not mononymous like many other Indonesian people are, but it turns out he is! He just has two given names. (Or, if you like, a given name consisting of two words.) Remsense留 01:20, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is a given middle name.^[5][6][7] --Lambiam 10:11, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What if someone has three or more given names, as in John James Joseph Doe? Is the second given name still referred to as a middle name? Or is it a second name? — Kpalion^(talk) 14:14, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've always informally heard it described as people having n middle names. Remsense留 14:15, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Middle implies after first name and before surname. Hence it would be multiple "middle" names. As in Charles Philip Arthur George (Mountbatten-Windsor), who has 3 of them. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:11, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so in my example, John is the first name, James is the first middle name and Joseph is the second middle name? — Kpalion^(talk) 08:57, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What the frog?

The etymology section of our frog articles says: How Old English frosc gave rise to frogga is, however, uncertain, as the development does not involve a regular sound-change. Instead, it seems that there was a trend in Old English to coin nicknames for animals ending in -g, with examples—themselves all of uncertain etymology—including dog, hog, pig, stag, and (ear)wig. Frog appears to have been adapted from frosc as part of this trend. This statement is supported by a ref to the OED which is behind a paywall. Where could I learn more about this trend? Matt Deres (talk) 01:34, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

EO is free, and here's their take on it.[8] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:26, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is what the OED says about the etymology of "frog":

Ultimately related to Old English frosc frosh n.1 and its cognates in other Germanic languages (see below), although the nature of the relationship is uncertain; the present word was probably originally an alteration of frosc as a result of association with docga dog n.1 and other words denoting animals which are listed at that entry, in which the geminate consonant perhaps originally had a hypocoristic motivation; however, other explanations are perhaps possible. Connection with a number of other words in fr- denoting a frog in English and other Germanic languages is much less certain (see (3) and (4) below).
The stem-final geminated consonant in Old English frogga, frocga is unusual and difficult to explain; it is probably related to the similar geminate shown by docga dog n.1 and other words denoting animals which are listed at that entry. As noted above, it is possible that frogga shows an alteration of Old English frosc (also frox, forsc: see frosh n.1) by association with this group of words, perhaps originally as a hypocoristic derivative, although it is perhaps also possible that frogga shows an isolated reflex of a Germanic base ultimately cognate with that of frosc(see further below).
Words for a frog with initial fr- in Old English and other Germanic languages can be divided into four groups:
(1) Old English frosc (also frox, forsc: see frosh n.1), cognate with Middle Dutch vorsch, versch, vorsche (Dutch vors, now chiefly in kikvors), Middle Low German vrosch, vorsch, vors, Old High German frosc (Middle High German vorsch, vors, German Frosch), Old Icelandic froskr, Swedish (regional) frosk, further etymology uncertain, perhaps ultimately a derivative < an extended form of an Indo-European verbal base with the meaning ‘to hop’, reflected by Sanskrit pru- to leap (probably further related to plu- to swim (see flow v.; perhaps compare plavaga, plavaṅga monkey, frog); the same extended form is perhaps reflected also by Russianpryt′ speed, quickness, liveliness (late 18th cent., although earlier currency is perhaps implied by the adverb adjective prytkij ‘quick, lively’ (17th cent. in Old Russian) and the adverb prytko‘quickly, nimbly, in a lively manner’ (1562 in Old Russian); now chiefly in fixed phrases, e.g. vo vsju pryt′ ‘as fast as one's legs can carry one’), and (with added velar suffix) prygat′ to leap, to jump, to hop (late 18th cent.); perhaps compare also Lithuanian sprugti ‘to escape’, which may be < the same Indo-European base with movable s-, although the evidence to support such a reconstruction is very limited.
(2) frog n.1, which, as suggested above, could show an alteration or variant within Old Englishof frosc, probably by association with the group of words denoting animals discussed at dogn.1, or which could perhaps (less probably) show the only attested reflex of a different formation < the same Germanic verbal base as frosc and its cognates.
(3) Middle English frūde froud n., which (although also beginning with fr-) is probably unrelated; this is perhaps ultimately (with operation of Verner's Law) < an ablaut variant (showing also sound-symbolic lengthening of the vowel) of the same Germanic base as Old Icelandic frauðr, Old Swedish fördh, frödher (Swedish frö), Old Danish frødh (Danish frø); perhaps ultimately < the same base as froth n., hence referring to the slimy skin of a frog. (It is also possible that Middle English frode at froud n. Forms may show another distinct word in this same group.)
(4) Old Icelandic frauke, which probably shows a derivative of the forms under (3). It is possible that froke at Forms could instead show a borrowing of this word.
Many scholars have attempted to link all four groups of forms, assuming a variety of different starting points, but none of these attempts has been wholly successful. CodeTalker (talk) 05:02, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I had guessed that the -sk-ending in Proto-Germanic *fruskaz was related to the Proto-Germanic reflexive pronoun *sek, i.e. a creature that "jumps oneself", although Wiktionary seems to prefer the explanation "*prewgʰ- (“to leap”) +‎ *-ḱós (animal suffix)". 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 12:06, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all very kindly. A lot of the material is technical and over my head, but the answer to my question appears to be here: "The word belongs to a set of words of uncertain or phonologically problematic etymology with a stem-final geminated g in Old English which is not due to West Germanic consonant gemination and therefore does not undergo assibilation. These words form both a morphological and a semantic group, as they are usually Old English weak masculine nouns and denote animals; compare frog n.1, hog n.1, pig n.1, stag n.1, Old English sugga (see haysugge n.), Old English wicga (see earwig n.), and perhaps teg n.1 It has been suggested that these words show expressive gemination, perhaps due to their being originally hypocoristic forms." Matt Deres (talk) 16:46, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Courses or books on pragmatics for enthusiasts

I looked at the references on Pragmatics and didn't really see any works presented as obvious further reading for enthusiasts. "Enthusiasts" meaning people like me, who would like to learn jargon and drill deeper into the subject, perhaps having more familiarity with other areas of linguistics and lexicography, but are nonetheless not academics. Any recommendations would be much-appreciated! Remsense留 07:18, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Some results of a GBS on the term "Pragmatics" are:

Pragmatics. Stephen C. Levinson · 1983
An integrative and lucid analysis of central topics in the field of linguistic pragmatics deixis, implicature, presupposition, speed acts, and conversational structure.
Pragmatics. Siobhan Chapman · 2011
Comprehensive and highly readable, this is an essential text for undergraduates or postgraduates enrolled on specialist modules in pragmatics or on more general linguistics courses.
Principles of Pragmatics. Geoffrey N. Leech · 2016
This book presents a rhetorical model of pragmatics: that is, a model which studies linguistic communication in terms of communicative goals and principles of 'good communicative behaviour'.
Introduction to Pragmatics. Betty J. Birner · 2012
Throughout the book the relationship between semantics and pragmatics is continually addressed and reassessed.
Pragmatics: A slim guide. Betty J. Birner · 2021

This book offers a concise but comprehensive entry-level guide to the study of meaning in context.

The sentences in small print are probably blurbs supplied by the publishers, but should give an impression. The last book of this list also has a Kindle edition. Amazon.com may have editorial and customer reviews for some of these books. --Lambiam 09:57, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lambiam, I appreciate it! I don't want to give the impression that I didn't want to search for titles, I just figured someone might have some personal recommendation, but your collation is very much appreciated! Remsense留 09:58, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Was or were?

I'm having a conversation with User:Snowflake91 here. We can't agree on one thing - which version is correct: "division was two tournaments" or "division were two tournaments"? I claim that the first one is correct, Snowflake91 the second one. So I would like to ask someone more experienced to comment. Thanks, Maiō T. (talk) 17:58, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How many tournaments? One or two? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:06, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't matter if it's not the subject... Nardog (talk) 18:14, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The number of tournaments is irrelevant, it's the number of divisions that matters. "The division was..." would be correct. That said, why not recast the sentence? "The division comprised two tournaments" or "the division consisted of two tournaments" for example. DuncanHill (talk) 18:14, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's a way around it. Reminds me of the gentle argument as to do I feel "well" or do I feel "good"? One alternative is, "I feel fine!" ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:29, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I Feel Free. Cullen328 (talk) 05:32, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The example article (one of the many) is 2019 IIHF World U18 Championship Division II – "was/were two international under-18 tournaments" in the lead section right at the start. The "Division" here is the proper name of the competition, it doesn't necessarily mean that there is only one division – it is actually divided into "Division II A" and "Division II B", so two divisions/tournaments. Snowflake91 (talk) 18:42, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Snowflake91: Then the sentence needs recasting. "2019 IIHF U18 World Championship Division II" looks like a singular noun and so, unless qualified in some way, will be treated as such by readers. If it's more than one thing, then this needs to be indicated. You could append with "competitions", which would achieve your objective of The 2019 IIHF U18 World Championship Division II competitions were... Bazza (talk) 15:41, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've made that change. Bazza (talk) 10:10, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The rule is quite simple:

I is am that man who is seen in the picture.

You is are the person who is responsible for what happened.

We is are the best team which is also the only German team in the competition.

The division ~~were~~ was two tournaments, which were held in Russia.

Simple, isn't it? AFAIK, the only exception of this rule is with the subjects "here/there" (here/there is a rose, here/there are roses). The same rule applies to most languages, except for few I currently don't remember (Italian? @Trovatore: could you help please?) HOTmag (talk) 16:20, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@HOTmag: Unless it's the weird surreal stuff . Bazza (talk) 16:28, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Obvious. HOTmag (talk) 16:30, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@HOTmag: Not to everyone. Bazza (talk) 16:36, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, but User:Snowflake91 has already managed to change several "was" to "were" in articles. I came up with one more option: we could use the word "pair" instead of "two", so then there will definitely be "was". Maiō T. (talk) 20:40, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, you are always allowed to replace "two" by "a pair", but that's unnecessary: Actually, not only what should be followed by "a pair" - but also what should be followed by "two" in your sentence - is definitely "was" rather than "were", because all depends - on what "was/were" follows - rather than on what follows "was/were", as I've shown in my previous response by several analogous examples. Just as what should be followed by "the best team" - is definitely "were" rather than "was" - in the senetnce "we were the best team", and you don't have to replace "the best team" by "members of the best team" - for justifying "were", because all depends - on what "was/were" follows - rather than on what follows "was/were". HOTmag (talk) 21:05, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The utterance "the division was two tournaments" is pretty clunky though. A division is not usually a set of tournaments. I would re-word to avoid the problem.

By the way, the verb "to be" is a bit special in that it's not generally considered to have an object, but rather a predicate nominative (in this case) or predicate adjective (in the case of a sentence like "Joe is rich"). Verbs don't agree with their objects in English, but I think the number of the predicate nominative might sometimes control. I'd have to search (my brain at least) for an example. --Trovatore (talk) 22:24, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Actually I called you for clarifying the Italian issue. See above the last word before I mentioned your name. HOTmag (talk) 00:44, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, but as it turned out I had more to say about the English. There are interesting similar questions in Italian but I'm less confident on the answers. I do know that the copula in Italian sometimes agrees with what you might call the predicate nominative in English (for example quelle due persone siamo io e te, not *quelle due persone sono io e te).

In any case my intuition in English is that it's generally awkward to put a copula between a singular noun phrase and a plural one, with the singular coming first. That's why "a pair of tournaments" would be an improvement, making both sides singular. But a complete rewording might be even better. --Trovatore (talk) 01:30, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 17

Cantonese transliteration

How would 陳仁昌 and 陳仁傑 be transliterated in Cantonese today? KAVEBEAR (talk) 05:14, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming those are personal names...

Chinese: 陳仁昌; Jyutping: Can⁴ Jan⁴coeng¹; Cantonese Yale: Chàhn Yàhnchēung
Chinese: 陳仁傑; Jyutping: Can⁴ Jan⁴git⁶; Cantonese Yale: Chàhn Yàhngiht

But you wouldn't see those transliterations used for Cantonese personal names: based on my understanding of Hong Kong names, maybe Chan Yan-chong and Chan Yan-chieh, respectively? It may be different in Guangdong or abroad. Remsense留 07:50, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Names on -yatt

There exist A. S. Byatt, Lieutenant Fyatt, USS Gyatt, Hyatt hotels, the high ground of Lyatt and Furzy Sleight, Alan Myatt, Nyatt train station, Brad Pyatt, Labour councillor U. Ryatt, co-radio host Dick Syatt, Lucy R. Wyatt and film character Zyatt Dean. Is this accumulation of names on -yatt a remarkable outlier or is it more or less what one should expect? --Lambiam 14:57, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

According to A Dictionary of Surnames (Patrick Hanks and Flavia Hodges; Oxford 1988): Byatt is "by gate"; Hyatt is from a Hebrew/Yiddish word for "tailor"; Myatt is an English diminutive of Michael; Wyatt (with variant Gyatt) from an OE personal name Wigheard, and/or diminutive of Norman Guy or William. Others not listed. I imagine there was some convergence of spelling. —Tamfang (talk) 20:13, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

According to A Dictionary of Surnames (Patrick Hanks and Flavia Hodges; Oxford 1988): Hyatt is a variant spelling of Highet, a Scots habitation name, probably from Highgate in Ayrshire. DuncanHill (talk) 12:53, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 18

phrasing: is "researching on a biography" correct?

My intuition tells me it should be "researching a biography" or "doing research on a biography." Or better yet, "doing research for a biography", because the former options would imply the biography itself is being researched (?) Самекх (talk) 16:45, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Doing research for a biography" is clearest. AndyTheGrump (talk) 16:49, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Самекх: "Researching on a biography" is not a construct I recognise as valid. "Researching a biography" can mean either "investigate an already-written biography", or conduct research with a view to either creating a new biography, or amending an existing one. You're correct in suggesting that a few more words make things much clearer, and agree with AndyTheGrump. Bazza (talk) 16:53, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To me, "researching <OBJECT>" and "doing research on <OBJECT>" mean the same: to do a study into, or thorough examination of, the object of research. Someone who wants to write a biography of J. Alfred Prufrock should research the life and times of J. Alfred Prufrock. This may include reading existing biographies, but I wouldn't call their perusal "research". They are then doing this for a purpose: they are doing this research for an envisaged biography. If, on the other hand, an expert is called upon to determine the provenance of a libelous biography, the expert is asked to research said biography. --Lambiam 20:50, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I omitted "ing" on my original reply, and have inserted it. Bazza (talk) 21:10, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ashterix and the Chieftain'sh Shield

In the Finnish translation of Asterix and the Chieftain's Shield, all the Arvernian Gauls speak Gaulish in a dialect where they say all the "s" sounds as "sh". For example, a hypothetical sentence (not actually present in the book) would be "By Toutatish, theshe Romansh are crazy!" This form of speech does not seem to appear in the English translation. I haven't read the book in any other language than Finnish or English. Is it present in the original French, or in any other translation? JIP | Talk 23:11, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is present in the German translation and, if I'm not mistaken, in the original French. Arvernians also appear in Asterix in Corsica, Asterix and the Chieftain's Daughter and The Golden Sickle. Evidently, it is characteristic for the French dialect of the region. Not so long ago I was looking on youtube for examples of that as I'd never actually heard that, but strangely without success. --Wrongfilter (talk) 23:18, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I just remembered, my youtube search was prompted by Guy de Maupassant's fr:Mont-Oriol, which has a few locals speaking in patois: Ché pas vrai bougrrre que t'as chauté par-dechus le foché... ("C'est pas vrai que tu as sauté par-dessus le fossé..."). --Wrongfilter (talk) 23:25, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I checked with my own French copy, and I can confirm that it's present in the original French edition. Surprising that it'd be absent in the English edition, since there's even a joke about a young kid speaking regularly (nine times in a single word balloon), with the punchline that he has a speech impediment and lisps... 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 23:38, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The joke about the young kid is present in the Finnish translation. In the English translation he says "Sausages for afters, everyone!" Asterix or Obelix asks "Why did he slam the door so hard?" to which Winesandsprix answers "We Arvernians are rather fond of bangers." JIP | Talk 01:03, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, a bit unclear why the English translators deliberately decided on removing the dialectal jokes. Maybe they were considered too French, or it could have been a notion of political correctness(?) Although the Asterix albums contain much worse examples in that regard (such as the small African messenger boys later on in the album, which I suppose is a Flintstones-like gag about pneumatic tube transport). 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 11:52, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The French dialectical jokes would have been completely opaque to most English readers, who are generally unfamiliar with French dialectical variations. (Most adults are probably intellectually aware that they must exist, but 99% won't know what they are, and the expected child readership of Asterix works will be even less au fait with them.) {The poster formerly known as 87,81,230.195} 90.205.111.170 (talk) 01:08, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, but most other translations still seem to have kept the pattern. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 02:50, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps to avoid having to create an entirely new joke that would still fit with the drawings? BTW, does the "bangers" pun appear in North American editions? I imagine that it wouldn't make a great deal of sense there. Alansplodge (talk) 14:41, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The joke is just that the kid's pronouncing the s:es in saucisses/ sausages regularly, so it would work in English, too. The Swedish translation is a simplification with a literal translation of "korvar" (and a missed opportunity to include "salami"). I'm not sure if there are official North American editions, but I agree that the "bangers" pun is incredibly British. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 14:59, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) From my experience as a foreign reader who first came across Asterix as a child, it doesn't matter whether that speech pattern is present in the French dialect or not (that would be different from French readers), it is entirely sufficient to understand that the Arvernians in the Asterix universe speek like that. The English joke seems cheap in comparison and doesn't explain Obelix's bafflement. --Wrongfilter (talk) 15:13, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The slurring of s to sh is used to indicate drunkenness in English writing, and I think is used as such in the book in question. So it can't be used to signal a dialect unless ou want to suggest that all speakers of it are drunk. DuncanHill (talk) 16:07, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

From Occitan phonology (emphasis mine): In Auvergnat, most of the consonants, except /r/, can have a palatalized sound before i and u. Consequently, the consonant phonemes have two kinds of sounds, one being not palatal (by default) and the other being palatal (before i and u): /p/ → [p, pj]; /b/ → [b, bj]; /t/ → [t, tj]; /d/ → [d, dj]; /k/ → [k, kj]; /ɡ/ → [ɡ, ɡj]; /f/ → [f, fj]; /v/ → [v, vj]; /s/ → [s, ʃ]; /z/ → [z, ʒ]; /ts/ → [ts, tʃ]; /dz/ → [dz, dʒ]; /m/ → [m, mj]; /n/ → [n, nj]; /l/ → [l, lj]. — Kpalion^(talk) 17:52, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if it is the same dialect but a similar device was used in the Spanish dubbing of Welcome to the Sticks to render Ch'ti. --Error (talk) 16:04, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Entirely different. The Ch'ti are from the North, the Auvergnats from, well, Auvergne, in the centre of France (around Clermont-Ferrand). It should be noted that the Auvergnat mentioned by Kpalion is not a French, but an Occitan dialect, not sure whether how relevant that is. Incidentally, I've found an example on youtube, albeit a comedic one, at [9], listen to the bloke on the right at 0:09 or 0:42. --Wrongfilter (talk) 16:51, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. A scene from "Bienvenidos al norte"/"Welcome to the Sticks" in Shpanish dubbing. They change s to Spanish pronunciation: [ʃ]. In El escudo arverno, the Arvernians change s to ⟨ch⟩. --Error (talk) 17:51, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, those quotation marks in the Spanish edition come across a bit forced... 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 22:14, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

December 21

All new

Is there a legal or commercial reason why American networks advertise shows as being all new, as opposed to just… new? Was there a big problem of people being tricked into watching partially new shows? Lazar Taxon (talk) 03:27, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 236: / Line 236: @@
 = December 21 =
+== All new ==
+Is there a legal or commercial reason why American networks advertise shows as being ''all new'', as opposed to just… new? Was there a big problem of people being tricked into watching partially new shows? [[User:Lazar Taxon|Lazar Taxon]] ([[User talk:Lazar Taxon|talk]]) 03:27, 21 December 2023 (UTC)