Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language

Welcome to the language section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

skip to bottom

Select a section:

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

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

   

How can I get my question answered?

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

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

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

See also:

• Teahouse
• Help desk
• Village pump
• Help manual

July 12

Another Latin translation please

hi - I'm writing about two fictional political groups from ancient times; the Minisculists and the Variationists - would anyone care to translate the terms to Latin for me? Thanks Adambrowne666 (talk) 01:42, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

If you're content with ad-hoc neologisms, then you can simply replace the "-s" ending with an "-ae" ending (considering that those words are formed from Latin stems in the first place). AnonMoos (talk) 02:02, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, AnonMoos - so would that be Minisculae and Variationae?Adambrowne666 (talk) 08:48, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

No, Minisculistae and Variationistae. —Angr 09:36, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Not to be confused with the Menisculae, who were a team of classical Roman footballers troubled with wonky knees. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 22:25, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I'll be sure to make that distinction, thanks, Cookatoo. Thanks, Angr, and sorry, AnonMoos - I wasn't paying enough attention to your instructions. Still, I think I'm not satisfied yet; I posed the wrong question. In my story, there are two groups of atomists in classical times: those who think all atomies in the cosmos are submicroscopically small; and those who think that, just because every atom we know of is infinitesmal, that doesn't mean they all are - maybe there are some the size of poodles, or moons... Does anyone want to have a stab at making up names for those two groups, just for fun? Thanks again Adambrowne666 (talk) 22:58, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I dimly recall reading about some (Indian?) philosophical school which seems to argue that solar systems may be atoms in some "macro universe" and galaxies could be complex molecules, even living organisms, in this reality, one level up. Maybe some RD:staffer knows the name for this relativistic approach and could suggest a name for the adherents of poodle sized atoms?

Unfortunately I can not find any reference via a quick Google search. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 23:29, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually, maybe I should have been asking for a Greek translation

Seeing that the Later Ionians etc were so prominent among atomists, if I'm not overstaying my welcome here, maybe I should revise my original question and ask this: I'm writing about two fictional factions from ancient Greece - the Minisculists and the Variationists - two groups of atomists, the former believing that all atoms are tiny, the latter that there might somewhere be atoms of macroscopic size. Can anyone help me by translating the two terms to Greek (with Latin lettering)? Thanks very much Adambrowne666 (talk) 17:16, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry - should say, too, that the Indian thing sounds v interesting Cookatoo - will look into that as well, thanks.Adambrowne666 (talk) 04:45, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

"Afterletters"

Hi, I´m sorry for disturbing, but I´d have an question: Once I saw in en wiki an article about the letters that are written behind somebody´s name that refers to membership of the person in a certain community - e.g. OFM beyond the name for franciscans, FRCPsych. or F.R.C.P; maybe even PhD. as well. I can not in any way find out the denotation (name of the article). It was mayby something like "afterletters, postletters, postgram"...?? Could somebody of you help me, please? Thank you very much! --JanicekJiri (talk) 02:46, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Try post-nominal letters. And you never have to apologise for asking a question. That's what we're here for. -- JackofOz (talk) 02:51, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much, this is exactly what I was looking for, I guess. How did you found it? Best regards, --JanicekJiri (talk) 12:00, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

It's just one of those odd bits of information I've known for what seems like forever, JanicekJiri. We "experts" are renowned for having our heads full of stuff, and spend our entire lives just waiting for someone to come along and ask the right question. But if I didn't already know, I'd have first looked under something like academic degree, title, or abbreviation - all of which, curiously, failed to reveal the information. I'd then have googled "letters after name" - and hey, bingo, the very first hit was Wikipedia's article Post-nominal letters. -- JackofOz (talk) 12:47, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Chinese versus Japanese writing

Have reformed Japanese kanji diverged enough from Chinese logographs that a person who can't read either can tell which is which? NeonMerlin 16:27, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Not really. bibliomaniac15 17:30, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't understand exactly what you want to ask, but I think some changes can be obvious; just look at shinjitai for examples. However, Chinese letters have undergone changes of their own: please see simplified Chinese character. --Kjoonlee 17:59, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

In general no. Especially not if they're Han unified. But there are stylistic differences. Notice in the Han unification article examples, that the Japanese characters all lack serifs, even though many of them (otherwise) are identical to their Chinese counterparts. - ^Estoy_Aquí^{(t • c • e)} 22:07, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Serif or not is just a stylistic thing, like what serif is in English. Neither language dictate whether there should be serif or not, and it's purely up to the font whether to have serif or not. It's probably because you don't have a serif-font for Japanese or sans-serif font for Chinese that you see such a difference.

Generally Kanji is sort of in-between between Simplified and Traditional Chinese. So if you can tell the difference between Simplified and Traditional you might be able to tell kanji from Chinese proper, but otherwise not really. --antilived^{T | C | G} 01:26, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Traditional Chinese and Old-style Japanese characters can be considered the same, and both were simplified separately, at different times (Not long gaps, however, less than a lifespan apart). Some were simplified the same way, some were not, but in general they are recognizable. There are some differences among Traditional Chinese and pre-simplification Japanese though, as they developed in isolation of each other for a long time, and simplifications tend to occur slowly in all languages over time. The differences in those cases are very few, very far between, and in general minute, some even only different in stroke order. An example of divergent characters would be sakura, which is different in all three sets, and kuru (to come) which is the same in both simplified sets, but different in the traditional sets (Though that one might be hard to find info on). Sorry for not giving character examples, every time I try, the IME crashes trying to convert hiragana to kanji, I probably need to reboot.200.42.217.61 (talk) 21:34, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Compare, for example, the word qi, according to the article:

Chinese

• Traditional Chinese: 氣
• Simplified Chinese: 气

Japanese

• Kyūjitai: 氣
• Shinjitai: 気

Thanks. ~AH1^(TCU) 21:52, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Farsi translation, please

What does احمد باطبی mean? GreekHeroine (talk) 17:53, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Ahmad Batebi? Fribbler (talk) 18:08, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

A word please...

Is there a term for the tendency of US governmental organizations, like the FDA, OSHA, and EPA, originally set up to protect consumers/workers/citizens from businesses, instead being used to protect businesses from consumers/workers/citizens (such as by preventing lawsuits against unsavory business practices, since they are now "government approved"). StuRat (talk) 18:10, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

"Corruption" is what I would use... I don't know of any more specific though. Sorry... --Falconus^{p t c} 18:43, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Unintended consequence ? jnestorius^(talk) 19:33, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

"co-opted" as in "co-opted regulatory agency" --tcsetattr (talk / contribs) 21:11, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

The first two are rather general. I like "co-opted", although it doesn't quite catch the agency being used to do the exact opposite of it's stated purpose. Any other ideas ? StuRat (talk) 00:28, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Another example is "freedom of information", which in many cases turns out to be "refusal to divulge information, except at a prohibitive price, or even sometimes at any price". -- JackofOz (talk) 01:04, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Nice one Jack. I'd suggest "mission inversion". That has a nice "CIA" sound to it, as well. Retarius | Talk 11:31, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that works fairly well. Or perhaps "subversion" or even "perversion" ? StuRat (talk) 21:36, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like something from Soviet Russia ;-) --_{tiny plastic} Grey Knight ⊖ 10:26, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

In Soviet Russia, mission perverts you! Dgcopter (talk) 19:06, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I think the term is something like "regulatory capture." DOR (HK) (talk) 12:55, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Do you have an example of that usage ? StuRat (talk) 16:07, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Translation of "ta tienne" (FR)

Just wondering, is the phrase "ta tienne" just as ungrammatical and uncommon as "your yours" or is it more acceptable. I was wondering as I was translating the tracklist for Comme si de rien n'était and while I understand the gist of "ta tienne" (what is intended to be conveyed by the phrase), I wasn't sure if maybe it's just the French version of "all yours" or similar (so in the interim, I opted for a literal translation). I'm a bit more than a beginner at French, but I've never encountered this phrase before. Thanks for any help - ^Estoy_Aquí^{(t • c • e)} 21:56, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

At the French Wikipedia's Oracle, the counterpart of our Reference Desks, I've often seen "le tien" and "la tienne" being used for "that of yours", but I've never seen "ta tienne" or "ton tien". A Google search suggests that the latter 2 are grammatically incorrect; "le tien" and "la tienne" yield 1.4-1.5 million results, while "ta tienne" and "ton tien" give 16 800 and 56 900 results, respectively. --Bowlhover (talk) 07:43, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

The lyrics of the song emphasize that it is not good French: "Je suis ta tienne, ce n'est pas français non (...) je suis ta tienne, ce n'est pas correct non (...) oh oui, je suis ta tienne, ah ça ne se dit guère je sais..." DAVID ŠENEK 10:55, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah ok. That's what I thought, but just wasn't sure. I was sure it wasn't technically correct, but thought it might just like the many common grammatically incorrect (but generally ignored and accepted) phrases in English. Thanks. - ^Estoy_Aquí^{(t • c • e)} 13:52, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

July 13

comma and following space

Is there any evolved convention, a rule of thumb, that a comma should be followed by a space? Or, is it just a typographical convention? 59.91.253.119 (talk) 11:46, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, commas directly follow words and there is a space between words; so naturally, there is a space after a comma.--omnipotence407 (talk) 12:21, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Readability makes a good argument. eg Typography#Readability_and_legibility87.102.86.73 (talk) 16:34, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

"Include in" or "include on"?

If you're posting on an Internet forum, which of the following phrases is more grammatically correct?

• 1) I'd like to include in this thread...
• 2) I'd like to include on this thread...

Thanks in advance. --XxCutexXxGirlxX (talk) 18:08, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I'd say "in". You are essentially including your comments within (that is, "in" ) the discussion ... not on top of (that is, "on") the discussion. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 18:23, 13 July 2008 (UTC))

Neither one is correct. Include "what" in? Corvus cornix_talk 20:16, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Whatever is mentioned in the ellipsis. The phrases weren't intended to be complete sentences. —Angr 20:25, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Why is neither correct? The OP was implicitly stating (via the question itself, the reference to his posting, and the use of ellipses) that the OP wants to include his posting (i.e., comments) in the internet forum / discussion thread. That is, the ellipsis in Option #1 above essentially means: "I'd like to include in this thread my opinion about the latest Supreme Court ruling" (or some such). (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 20:28, 13 July 2008 (UTC))

In would be more standard, but it's not something that's been around for a long time. If you thought of it as a physical thread, it would be more accurate to say on this thread, as it's a stream of comments, and yours would be added on the end, but in reality, most threads are considered containers. However, now that I think of it, I can't remember what it's called, but many of the old BBS systems that would show all threads on one page, with the threads expanding potentially on the same page, "on" would be more correct, and was probably used more often then, since they really were a thread of comments strung together, adjacent others, in a given order. In reality though, someone posting on one of those systems today would still more likely use the term "in" because the distinction is tiny and honestly, not terribly important.200.42.217.61 (talk) 21:43, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I misunderstood the question. I though the examples were meant to be complete in themselves. Corvus cornix_talk 18:01, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Singular or plural verb

I ran across this sentence and am somewhat confused. I am not sure if the sentence is correct or incorrect and, if the latter, how to fix it. The sentence is: The screaming woman sound used as a doorbell is Fay Wray's screams from King Kong. Thus, removing all of the descriptive adjectives and adverbs, this sentence boils down to "Sound is screams." (I am not sure, but I think this is called an appositive?) Anyway ... clearly, "sound" is singular and "screams" is plural and "is" is singular. Is this correct and why? Or incorrect and why? And how does one correct it? I am not asking to rewrite / reconstruct the sentence. Rather, I want to understand the sentence as it is currently constructed. This can happen quite often, and I am only presenting this one example. Another example might be something like: "That sound you hear is the screams of frightened children." Again, "Sound is screams." I am confused. It does not make sense to use a singular verb ("is"). It also does not make sense to use a plural verb ("are"). It does not make sense to change the first noun to a plural ("sounds") to accomodate a plural verb "are". It also does not make sense to change the second noun to a singular ("scream") to accomodate a singular verb "is". What is the rule in these cases? Help? Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 18:13, 13 July 2008 (UTC))

While the difference between one scream and multiple screams is clear, the difference between one sound and many sounds is not as certain. Does that refer to sounds coming from different sources, sounds seperated by moments of silence, or some other definition ? Since "sound" seems to be the flexible term, I'd suggest altering it to make the sentences better:

"The screaming woman sounds used as a doorbell are Fay Wray's screams from King Kong."

"The sounds you hear are the screams of frightened children."

I'd say it was technically correct before, but looked bad, so why not fix it ? StuRat (talk) 19:33, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, StuRat. I am not looking to re-write the sentence, just to understand it. (It was someone else's sentence, to begin with.) I understand that any sentence can be re-written to sweep the problem under the carpet. I am seeking to understand the grammar and construction of the sentences as written, however. So, then you are saying that "Sound is screams" is a technically correct sentence (singular noun / singular verb / plural noun) ...? Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 19:50, 13 July 2008 (UTC))

Yes, it's grammatically correct; the singular verb agrees with the singular subject, and the number of the complement is immaterial. There's nothing wrong with either "One problem is inattentive motorists" or "Inattentive motorists are one problem," for example. Deor (talk) 01:01, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks to you both. This was very helpful to me. Thank you. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 15:16, 16 July 2008 (UTC))

What sort of sentence is this?

Wouldn't the sentence 'I want to put a hyphen between the words Fish and And and And and Chips in my Fish-And-Chip sign' have been clearer if quotation marks had been placed before Fish and between Fish and and and and and And and And and and and and and And and And and and and and and Chips as well as after Chips?

Is that-- both the whole sentence and the embedded "I want to put a hyphen..." clause -- any kind of linguistic example sequence, and if so what is it called? I can see how it's related to the use-mention distinction, though. 69.106.4.120 (talk) 20:12, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Wow! What sort of sentence is this, you ask? The sentence from hell? ... I'm guessing ... (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 05:20, 14 July 2008 (UTC))

It is just a normal "use vs. mention" example, somewhat complicated by it being a double-barrelled self referential statement, containing use, mention of use and mention of use of mention of use. Certainly, quotation marks before Fish and between Fish and and and and and And and And and and and and and And and And and and and and and Chips and after Chips would have turned this into the rather trivial example of "Fish" and "And" and "And" and "Chips" unless you are afflicted with stututututering and and or or and or or echolalalilia. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 07:32, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

The article on list of linguistic example sentences calls our Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo article an "example of lexical ambiguity". I just think it's a bit repetitive.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:47, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

July 14

Japanese translation

I need help translating these sentences for use in Yūto Tonokawa. He works for Key under Visual Art's (ビジュアルアーツ), and 麻枝さん refers to Jun Maeda.

直接の経緯は、ビジュアルアーツへの応募作が審査の方の目に留まったことです。それまでにも麻枝さんがかつて運営していたサイトでお世話になっていたことがあり、それが元で目を掛けていただいた、ということもあります。ちなみに応募作は原稿用紙６００枚超の、しかも少女が主人公の小説という業界では在り得ないものでした。その後ちゃんと別に正式な応募作を作ってあります。

I feel I understand what is being said, but I'm having trouble forming it into words. By the way, this is a response to this question (which I don't need a translation of): 都乃河さんはどのような経緯でkeyに入られたのでしょうか？

I also need help with this: 麻枝さんに「シナリオライターになろう！」と言われた瞬間でしょうか。This is Tonokawa's response to this question (don't need a translation): 都乃河さんがこの業界で働きたいと思われた理由を教えていただけたらと思います。 なにかきっかけがあるんじゃないかなと思ったので。

Last one (different response to second question above): 元々は外注ライターとして麻枝さんの手伝いをする予定だったのですが、急遽ライターが社内に必要とのことで、色々と審査もあり入社することになりました。

Thank you for your help!--十八 06:28, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Q: How did you come to work for Key?
A: In my case, I had to catch the attention of the person examining the applications at Visual Arts. I am also greatly indebted to Maeda-san, a former administrator there, who I see as the main reason for my getting hired. My application was a whopping 600 pages long, but there wasn't a market at the time for novels featuring young girls as the protagonists. After that, I filled out a regular application.

The translation of the middle question is: Did you immediately tell Maeda-san, "I want to be a scenario writer!"?

The translation of the last answer is: While I was originally helping Maeda-san in an outsource writer capacity, I was quickly brought in-house due to the need and my speed as a writer.

Hope that helps! ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 02:00, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I think the middle one is:Maybe that was the moment Maeda san told me "Be a scenario writer!". Oda Mari (talk) 06:01, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

The first half of the first is:First of all, my entry caught the attention of the person examining the applications at Visual Arts. Besides I knew Maeda-san through a website he once had and he took a kindly interest in me before that.

The last half of the third is:but I was brought in-house due to the quick need after some examination, Oda Mari (talk) 07:07, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

German einhalb neun means 00:39 or halbneun?

Der Schauspieler Max Schreck vom Schauspielhaus ist am Donnerstag früh um einhalb neun Uhr im Schwabinger Krankenhaus gestorben.

The above quote is from Max Schreck's obituary reproduced here. I am confused by "einhalb" - it is not in my German dictionary. Does einhalb neun mean halbeins und neun Minuten (00:39), or is it another way of expressing halbneun (08:30 or half past eight)? -84user (talk) 13:28, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

My native German speaking co-worker says she's never heard this and doesn't know how to interpret it. She guesses it means the same thing as "halb neun" (i.e. 8:30 / half past eight) but she isn't sure. It may be a Bavarian expression (my co-worker is from Hesse). —Angr 13:37, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I also asked at the German desk here and they appear to conclude it must be a Bavarian regional form of describing the time in official announcements. They concluded it must be 08:30 (or halb neun as I have heard Germans say it). One reply surmised that halb is the current-day remnant from einhalb (not in my largest dictionary though), in the same way that tausend is the short form for eintasusend. -84user (talk) 18:48, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

This reminds me of the very formal American usage of e.g. "six and one half" instead of "six and a half". Must be all the Bavarian immigrants. jnestorius^(talk) 20:34, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Same answer as above by user:Angr. I am Austrian (native German / Austro-Bavarian speaker) and have never heard of the expression "einhalb X Uhr". As does Angr, I assume it to mean "halb neun / half past eight". An RD:regular, user:Ferkelparade, who is a resident of Munich may be able to help. The obituary note on the actor in the WP article also translates it as 8:30, BTW. The article in the German WP does not mention the time of death.--Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 00:08, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I've never heard the expression either, at least not in everyday talk and certainly not as a Bavarianism (Bavarian would be "hoibe neine", "einhalb" wouldn't even be easily pronouncable in Bavarian). I think, however, that I've occasionally read the expression, although I cannot pinpoint where and in what sort of texts. It has a slightly old-fashioned ring to it, my gut feeling tells me it was probably more often used in the late 19th/early 20th century (although I don't have any references for that - I think I've occasionally read similar expressions in novels/plays from that time, but I cannot remember where and when). Oh, and I would also read it as meaning "halb neun". -- Ferkelparade π 12:12, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

The German w:de:Wikipedia:Auskunft thread has since grown, but the last reply included Einhalb neun Uhr ist ungebräuchlich (habe ich zum ersten Mal überhaupt gelesen) und veraltet. (ie. Einhalb neun Uhr is rare and outdated ...) Note that einhalb appeared printed in an official announcement and was not spoken. They also linked to another occurrence of "einhalb": Grimm's dictionary. And there is also Jean Bernard's 1942 diary. I should have thought to use Google Scholar - a search restricted to before 1968 finds "einhalb neun Uhr" in 1902 medical archives. It must be very rare usage, because I get zero or one hits for "einhalb *number* Uhr" compared to 40 or so for "halb *number* Uhr". Most of them looked like medical reports. BTW, Cookatoo, I was the one that added the 8:30 to the wikipedia article, after reading the German replies. -84user (talk) 01:34, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

As a side note, "halv sex" in Swedish doesn't mean six thirty, but rather five thirty. One explanation I've heard is that halv sex is half-way to six. --Kjoonlee 10:06, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Well yes, as in German. 79.66.54.186 (talk) 11:36, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

In German, at least in the South, things get more complicated, as you can also say "Viertel neun" and "drei Viertel neun", meaning 8:15 and 8:45, respectively. A "Viertel" being a quarter of whatever. I never use those terms, as I mentally always stumble over the unintuitive illogics of these phrases. Confusionism is my favourite philosophy... --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 22:10, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

As to the Swedish phrase "halv sex", I must admit that I may have misinterpreted it and possibly gave an answer which may have puzzled the Scandinavians... --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 22:21, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Prononciation of D in French

Hello. I am currently learning French and I have a question. The letter "D" in French sounds more like "J" when in front of the letter I (e.g. Dix), but on IPA they are noted in the same way. Is this a prononciation that only exists in some dialects? Thanks.--Faizaguo 16:08, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes. Pronouncing "d" like English "j" (or like French "dj") before "i" is characteristic of Quebec French. AFAIK it's not done anywhere else in the Francophonie. —Angr 18:27, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

T also becomes ts in front of certain vowels. Not all vowels though, isn't it just /i/ and /y/? In any case, you hear things like "tsu dzi" for "tu dis" in Quebec French. Another quirk of Quebec French is that "un" sounds like "urn". We don't learn to pronounce words like that in French class in English schools, but in French immersion schools they apparently learn to speak with a Quebec accent (at least, all the French immersion students I've ever met speak like that). Adam Bishop (talk) 01:07, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

its cause they turn their tongue to the right side of the top of their mouths from where we use it in english and its a slurr (to us).^MY♥_INchile 02:43, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks.--Faizaguo 08:53, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

to control for (in scientific studies)

I need to translate "to control for" in the following sentence: "These differences are evident even after initial differences in intelligence are controlled for."
Does any of you know how to translate this into swedish, or an english synonym for "control for" that would make it easier for me to come up with a translation? Thank you! Lova Falk (talk) 17:38, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

If it helps, here's the Swedish article on "Scientific Control"/"Control group": [1].. Fribbler (talk) 17:42, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid it doesn't help... In this case, there is no control group, but they compare two groups and they find differences. Then they do some statistical calculations to make sure that the initial differences in intelligence are not what has "caused" these differences. I just don't know a good way of saying this in swedish. Lova Falk (talk) 18:02, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

How about "...in intelligence are taken into account."? Fribbler (talk) 19:31, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

"Initial differences in intelligence" is treated as a confounding variable. Itsmejudith (talk) 22:51, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! Lova Falk (talk) 05:52, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Grammar Now!

Hi. Listenning to Democracy Now [2] every day, I repeatedly hear Amy Goodman say: "Our headlines are also available in Spanish, in (?) transcript and in (?) audio form for any radio to take as over 200 are." Vague memories of English grammar tell me it's somehow correct but it just grinds at my ears everytime. Is the "are" at the end correct in a strange sentence? Am I the only one to cringe when hearing it? 190.190.224.115 (talk) 20:18, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

No, you aren't the only one to cringe... I still haven't been able to figure out for sure what it means (and I am a native speaker of English)... I am fairly sure that ending a sentence with am/is/are can be correct, but as in that sentence it can be awkward if the writer isn't careful. To my ears, the following would be correct (or at least understandable): "Those apples were wasted as many others were," although I prefer "Those apples were wasted as were many others." I think that the main issue with the sentence Amy Goodman says is that it isn't at all clear to me what the "200" is referring to, and the sentence is just awkward in general... 200 Radios? That's my best guess... --Falconus^{p t c} 20:49, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I'd guess they mean over 200 headline stories are available, in various formats, as that makes more sense than 200 radios. However, I'd have no way of figuring that out from the mangled sentence shown above. StuRat (talk) 21:29, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I think it really refers to the number of radios that broadcast Democracy Now or its headlines. OP. 190.190.224.115 (talk) 22:43, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Isn't this another case of the "primary verb" -- taking, in this case -- being implied again at the end, to eliminate something that sounds just repetetive? Writer may be trying to avoid "Our headlines are also available ... for any radio to take as over 200 are taking."

You could also stick an "already" in there for even more improvement in clarity: "as over 200 are already taking."

--Danh, 63.231.161.34 (talk) 00:09, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

...for any radio station to take, as over 200 are. Yes, it refers to the number of radio stations currently taking Democracy Now headlines. And yes, it's somewhat awkward. Jack^(Lumber) 01:03, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I think that "… as over 200 do" would be more idiomatic. Deor (talk) 01:35, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

"I think you" or "I think that you"?

Which of the following phrases is more grammatically correct?

• 1) I think you look amazing.
• 2) I think that you look amazing.

Thanks in advance. --XxCutexXxGirlxX (talk) 20:31, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Grammatically, they are equally correct, but (in my opinion at least), 1 is more idiomatic and "flows" better. —Angr 20:36, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Indefinite article question

I have a question about indefinite articles. I speak Finnish natively, English fluently, Swedish and German well and French at a basic level. Other than that, I have a basic knowledge of Latin, Spanish, Portuguese and Italian. Now, about the indefinite articles. Finnish and Latin don't use articles, the other languages do. The English independent article is "a" or "an". For the other languages, it's "en" or "ett" in Swedish, "ein" or "eine" in German, "un" or "une" in French, and "uno" or "una" in Spanish, Portuguese and Italian (at least I think so). All except the English ones happen to be the same as the word for the numeral 1. Is English really the only language using indefinite articles that has separate words for the indefinite articles and the numeral 1? JIP | Talk 20:34, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Etymologically, 'a' and 'one' both derive from 'an', so English is less exceptional; given that the difference between article and numeral is often a matter of stress, one might argue that written English is just reflecting the common pronunciation difference better than other languages. Sinhalese apparently has an indefinite article distinct from the numeral one. jnestorius^(talk) 21:03, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Oooah, as do 91 languages on this cool map jnestorius^(talk) 21:06, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

In Dutch, the indefinite article is een [ən] and the numeral "one" is één [e:n]. As in English, the indef. art. is etymologically derived from the number one, but is phonologically reduced. —Angr 21:20, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I notice that map contradicts JIP's claim that the indefinite article is the same as the word for "one" in Swedish. —Angr 21:23, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

The methodology states:

If the only difference in a language is one of stress, then the language is treated as a language in which the numeral for ‘one’ is used as an indefinite article. In some languages, there are additional phonological differences between the numeral and the indefinite article. For example, in Dutch, the numeral een is pronounced with a full vowel [en], while the indefinite article is pronounced with a reduced vowel [ən]. While it is presumably the case that this was originally a single morpheme, which underwent greater phonetic reduction in certain contexts, it is assumed here that this difference has become lexicalized, so Dutch is treated here as a language in which the numeral and indefinite article are distinct.

The articles en, ett are the same as the numerals in written Swedish, so my guess would be that in speech the final consonant can be dropped for the article. Or something. jnestorius^(talk) 22:07, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

English also has a difference in grammar between one and a(n) in addition to pronunciation: the one apple that I didnt eat vs. *the an apple that I didnt eat. A determiner + numeral sequence (which is definite) is allowed whereas a (central) determiner + (central) determiner sequence is ungrammatical. So, it's not just phonological difference. – ishwar  (speak) 22:21, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Interesting point. In principle articles and numerals have different grammatical functions regardless of whether their forms are identical or not; but in French whereas you can say les trois choses, mes deux amours, you can't say *l'un chose, *mon un amour; you would need to use seule, unique, etc. So here's a supplementary question: is there any language with an indefinite article identical to the numeral one where the numeral one can be used in all situations where numerals greater than one can be used? jnestorius^(talk) 08:04, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm having trouble parsing your question, but in German you can say die eine Sache (the one thing), der eine Apfel (the one apple) with the number "one" having (abstracting away from inflectional endings) the same form as the indefinite article. —Angr 08:26, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

July 15

John Smith in Chinese

What is the Mandarin language equivalent of John Smith, or say, John Q. Public, Mr. Everyman, etc.

Thanks

Duomillia (talk) 01:13, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Technically, there's no "equivalent". There's no literal translation, so you might want to ask for something that sounds somewhat similar. IceUnshattered (talk) 01:41, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I had a friend in China called 张磊 (Zhang Lei, or in Taiwan, Chang Lei), who said his name was one of the most common names. See Chinese name for more. Steewi (talk) 01:41, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

The rough equivalent would be the expression 張三李四 Aas217 (talk) 01:48, 15 July 2008 (UTC) (talk) 01:47, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Not sure about John Smith, but the Chinese equivalent of "Junior" would be 小宝 or 宝宝 (xiao bao or bao bao). bibliomaniac15 01:51, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

The John Doe article lists equivalents in numerous languages, including several Chinese ones. (I can't vouch for any.) jnestorius^(talk) 08:18, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Latin vs. Ancient Greek

What are the similarities and differences between the two languages? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.168.2.59 (talk) 01:37, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

For starters, there's the alphabet. They each use different characters. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 02:06, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Other than the facts that they're both Indo-European languages, with the consequent similarities (along with differences) in roots and inflections, and that some Greek words were adopted into Latin, there's not a whole lot of similarities. Deor (talk) 02:57, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Do you speak/read any lnaguage of India?

If you do, please help me find out the translation of the english word hoopoe in the indian language you speak/read (Sanskrit, Hindi, Marathi, Gujarathi, Bengali, Punjabi, Tamil, Telugu, Urdu, Malayalam, Assamese, etc.). In english alphabet please. Thank you in advance. Eliko (talk) 16:12, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

As that page shows the bird's range includes India, you'd do well to contact an ornithological association there, or perhaps a university zoological department. These folks seem to have a handle on international birding; perhaps contact them for advice? -- Deborahjay (talk) 01:49, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I think zoologists are not supposed to have that kind of information I'm looking for, so I should probably contact people who speak/read indian languages. Anyways, thank you for your effort. I'm still looking for indian language speakers who may help me. Eliko (talk) 11:40, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

this page seems to think it's called "hudhud". ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 02:07, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

hudhud is the arabic word, and Haryana inhabitants seem to have been influenced by Arabic, whereas I'm looking for original indian languages. Anyways, thank you for your effort. I'm still looking for indian language speakers who may help me. Eliko (talk) 11:40, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi User:Eliko; if you don't get enough response here, you could try looking through Category:Wikipedians by language for active users who speak the languages you are interested in and contact them directly. It's slower, but at least you'll get someone who knows the language! --_{tiny plastic} Grey Knight ⊖ 13:50, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

It's really much slower and exceedingly exhaustive, what a pity! Anyway, thank you for your new advice. Eliko (talk) 21:04, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

July 16

Signatures

Most signatures at the end of letters have a form like this

Sincerely,
Jon Doe

I'd like to know if there is a formal name for the "Sincerely," part or any of the words that precede the name (Goodbye, Love, etc...)

♫Deathgleaner 03:56, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

It is usually called the closing. See business letter for the names for the other parts of a letter. Michael Slone (talk) 04:06, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

We have articles at Complimentary close and at Valediction. Deor (talk) 04:08, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

What kinds of nouns are these?

In English, why are the names of the four seasons not considered proper nouns, but names of the months of the year and days of the week are considered proper nouns? Also, into what category do names of sports and games such as "poker" and "baseball" belong? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.134.228.23 (talk) 07:48, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

To your second question, I'd say "poker" and "baseball" are definitely common nouns. To your first, I'd say it's a good question, and indeed I've seen people capitalize the names of the seasons probably more often than almost any other common noun, because there's a strong intuition they "should" be proper nouns. Your question is only answerable if we have an adequate definition of "common noun" and "proper noun", and I'm not sure we do. I always felt like the definition was sort of circular: "Why don't season names get capitalized? Because they aren't proper nouns. — What is a proper noun? A noun that gets capitalized." In French, day names, months, and languages do not get capitalized (i.e. they're considered common nouns), while in English they do (i.e. they're considered proper nouns), so there doesn't even seem to be a universal semantic criterion that can be applied. German makes things easier by simply capitalizing all nouns (but makes things harder by considering adjectives to be nouns in some circumstances, like "good" in the phrase "something good"). Languages written in other writing systems than the Latin, Greek, Cyrillic, and Armenian alphabets make things easier still by not having a distinction between capital and lower case letters. Maybe we should just start writing English in katakana... —Angr 08:36, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Related info: Capitalization rules for days, months, demonyms and language-names in many languages from [[Wikimedia] jnestorius^(talk) 08:46, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

It is a good question.. the answers may be historical/etymological

The days and months are mostly named after people eg Thursday Thor, Wednesday Odin, similarily the months August, Augustus the other months are mostly numerical in origin eg September from septem - so maybe it's because they are named after things, and are relatively modern that they are capitalised..

The seasons are so old and entrenched that it seems meaningless to capitalise them, I'd expect the months to go the same way in many years to come..87.102.86.73 (talk) 10:46, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I dont think etymology is the way to go.

R. Quirk and folks (in their big English grammar) have a definition of proper noun that is both semantic and grammatical. For the semantic criterion, proper nouns have unique reference. For the grammatical criteria, proper nouns lack (indefinite/definite) article contrast and number contrast. For example, Louisiana refers to only one thing and *a Louisiana & *the Louisiana and *Louisianas are ungrammatical. The same grammar applies to the West Indies (which has an obligatory the: you cant say *West Indy, *West Indies (with no article), *a West Indy, *the West Indy. Since English is flexible, you can use a proper noun like Louisiana as a count noun, in which case it loses unique reference and gains article & number contrast. (E.g. Lousiana is no longer the Louisiana that she once knew or Did he buy a Rembrandt at the auction last week? or How many George Bushes does it take to screw in a light bulb?). This noun category conversion makes the analysis harder. Anyway, for fun, you can put the seasons through these tests and try to come up with an answer.

The capitalization issue is something somewhat connected to proper noun status, but it is not directly correlated. Another thing to mention about capitalization in proper nouns is that you capitalize t in The Hague but not in the United States. Both are proper nouns. There doesnt seem to be any predictability here. I think that generally proper nouns will be capitalized and will retain their capitalization after noun category conversion. Maybe the variable capitalization is connected to nouns that are have membership in both proper noun and non-proper noun categories? (To elaborate, some nouns like cake, brick can be either count or mass nouns. One analysis would be that they dual membership in both count and mass noun categories). – ishwar  (speak) 15:13, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, by those criteria, days of the week at least should be common nouns and uncapitalized: "Monday" does not refer to only one thing, and "a Monday", "the Monday", and "Mondays" are all grammatical. For months it's less clear-cut: "July" does not refer to only one thing either, but "a July", "the July" and "Julys" are starting to sound (to me at least) like transferred usages along the lines of "a Remembrandt", "the Louisiana she once knew" and "George Bushes". The seasons still sound like common nouns: "a summer", "the summer", and "summers" are all okay. Languages are proper nouns too by those criteria, so either French has different linguistic criteria for the distinction or it spells them wrong. —Angr 15:24, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

It seems clearer to me now that 'summer','winter' etc has entered human conciousness as the name (small n) for those seasons, whereas the weeks and months still have titular associations (see http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/titular)..

It's also worth noting that weeks/months are not always capitalised (many don't) but it remains convention to do so for instance when marking a date in a letter..87.102.86.73 (talk) 01:51, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Do weeks have names? I've never seen a style guide that permits the names of months not to be capitalised. Anyone who writes, for example, "13 february" is probably from the same school that writes "i do alot of writing and im a good speller". -- JackofOz (talk) 07:13, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Decimate

I would like a ruling on the use of decimate or decimation. In your definitions it includes both to eliminate "nearly all," and the obsolete roman/tax use of the form, to remove a decime (10%). For taxes and discipline a decime was a fairly minor amount.

In general usage and in older unabridged dictionaries, to decimate means to move the decimal point to the left (100.0 to 10.00) or to be left with a tenth....a loss of an order of magnitude.

In short, the decimation of the Irish potato crop did not mean that 90% of the potatoes were fine.

If you have a dollar and spend a dime, have you decimated your resources?

And no modern military commander would send in a squad of 10 if the injury of one person would decimate their chances of victory.

A one million, one hundred thousand dollar fortune decimated in the Great Depression did not mean they kept a $Million.

My vote, as you see, is that decimate is (roughly) the loss of a resource in the range of an order of magnitude, a decimal. While a decime, is a dime. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.121.206.124 (talk) 12:38, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree -LambaJan (talk) 12:50, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I'd be inclined to agree too, for general purposes. For writing about taxation or Roman history, perhaps it's better to reserve the word for the reducing-by-a-tenth sense - these seem to be the places where the word could cause most confusion. In any case, in a Wikipedia article it might be a good idea to link the word to the article for the sense that's intended (Decimation (Roman army) for reducing by a tenth, Decimation (Roman army)#Current usage of the word for reducing by a large proportion). AJHW (talk) 14:39, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

We do not do "rulings" of the sort you are asking for. It's clear from the article that the formal meaning is reduction by 10%, and that the "reduction by a large amount" use is not universally accepted, not least since it pays no heed to what the word actually, as opposed to colloquially, means. Yes, the word is, like all others, on a language treadmill which sees the meaning shift. but we should certainly not elect to use the word in the clumsy not-universally-accepted wrong but colloquial sense, since we purport to be writing an encyclopedia which depends on people being able to understand what we mean. The easiest solution is, do not use the word except in its formal sense - reduction by 10%. Choose another word or phrase if you mean something else (like "reduce by an order of magnitude"). --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:32, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

And while we're at it, quantum leap. I mean, WTF? Why not just stick a label on your forehead stating "I have not got a clue what the words I use actually mean".--Tagishsimon (talk) 17:34, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm with Humpty Dumpty on this. 'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone,' it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.' -- Q Chris (talk) 07:19, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. I am going to look into this further, including the Roman practice. The simple notion (clumsy or not) that because the word contains a "dec," it means to reduce by 10% is a recent (since WWII) shift in use.....perhaps technically correct, or perhaps due to a superficial interpretation and conclusion. The leap seems flawed to me. While dec linguistically equals ten....it is not always percent. And while the Roman military practice operated on the principal of random selection by sequential lots of tens (1000 warriors divided into 100 groups of ten men, of which ten groups are chosen, of which 1 in 10 men were killed...) ten out of a thousand is a reduction of 1 percent of the legion...not ten percent. But this practice is said to have destroyed (decimated) 100 percent of the morale. Kathryn (original poser of the question).

We reduced our development databases at work to 10% of the production size. We were quite proud of the phrase we used to describe this immense project - "database decimation". I thought decimation was a coined, off-the-cuff word, without bothering to research usage at the time. I found it quite interesting to read the discussion above! Sandman30s (talk) 22:12, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Kathryn, I'm not quite clear what windmill you're tilting at right now with your "look into this further" and your "perhaps due to a superficial interpretation and conclusion". The OED finds examples of decimate meaning "To kill, destroy, or remove one in every ten of" from 1663. Where you get the idea that this is a "since WWII shift" from is beyond me. Equally the OED states that the word is used rhetorically or loosely to mean "to destroy or remove a large proportion of". --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:24, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Joshin ya

Where did the term, "I was just Joshin ya," come from? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.207.198.130 (talk) 16:52, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Moved from Miscellaneous Desk. There's a definition in wikt:josh but no etymology. -- Coneslayer (talk) 17:00, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Merriam-Webster dates the verb form from 1845, but says "origin unknown". The Online Etymology Dictionary (aka the other OED) says probably from the name Joshua, but doesn't have a lot to back that up. --LarryMac | Talk 17:34, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Merriam-Webster-Shebster. The OED says of the etymology "Cf. Josh Billings, pseudonym of an American humorist." From our article we find "Josh Billings was the pen name of humorist born Henry Wheeler Shaw (20 April 1818 – 14 October 1885). He was perhaps the second most famous humor writer and lecturer in the United States in the second half of the 19th century after Mark Twain." The inference is that to josh is derived from his assumed forename. The earliest use is confirmed at 1845, so he'd have had to have been a reasonably precocious talent. Or else there was something else going on that the OED has not picked up on, such as that josh, to joke, originated prior to Shaw assuming his pen-name and indeed guided him towards the choice of forename. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:32, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't see the need to denigrate one of my sources, I simply reported what it said. And if you had bothered to read my other link, you'd have seen "The word was in use earlier than the career of U.S. humorist "John [sic] Billings," pseudonym of Henry Wheeler Shaw (1818-85), who did not begin to write and lecture until 1860; but his popularity after 1869 may have influence [sic] that of the word." --LarryMac | Talk 19:47, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh dear. Sense of humour failure. Ah well. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:49, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

"Humor". This is Amerkin stuff we's discussin. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 20:19, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Gosh, U've shawly taken the "me" out of humour with that josh against Mark mark against josh. Seriously though, why would you "shebster" Merriam-Webster and then confirm its answer to the questioner? Zain Ebrahim (talk) 14:45, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

July 17

IPA of Advaita Vedanta

I have asked this in the talk page of the article, but it needs the expertise of someone who knows sanskrit pronunciation and IPA. I figure that if anyone has such broad knowledge it will be here. The Article gives the pronunciation as IPA: [əd̪vait̪ə veːd̪ɑːnt̪ə]. Shouldn't it be IPA: [əd̪vɛt̪ə veːd̪ɑːnt̪ə]? I am not nearly confident enough to change the article myself. -- Q Chris (talk) 07:26, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

No, /ai/ is right for Sanskrit. I'd use [ʋ] instead of [v] in both instances, though, and the /n/ before the dental /t/ is itself dental, so I'd go for IPA: [əd̪ʋait̪ə ʋeːd̪ɑːn̪t̪ə]. —Angr 07:39, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Is the pronunciation of ऐ different is Sanskrit to in Hindi because I checked what I thought was right against [this site]? The devenagari अद्वैत would have lead me to think that it should be an ɛ sound. I am not a fluent Hindi speaker so I could have that pronunciation wrong too! -- Q Chris (talk) 08:18, 17 July 2008 (UTC).

I don't know much about Hindi but I think /ai/ has been monophthongized to /ɛ/ in it. —Angr 08:26, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, that would explain why I got it wrong! -- Q Chris (talk) 08:35, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Old meaning of "leet"

In a Scottish church document from 1835, I read that a church asked "permission to put an ordained minister upon the leet". What does this mean? I don't have access to the OED right now, and I know without looking that it's going to be impossible to find this meaning of leet on Google :-) 71.182.134.18 (talk) 07:45, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Take your pick from meaning 1:

• "A special kind of court of record which the lords of certain manors were empowered by charter or prescription to hold annually or semi-annually"

or the more general meaning 2:

• "A list of persons designated as eligible for some office." --Richardrj ^{talk email} 08:55, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Um, you do know that the OED isn't the only dictionary on the web, right? --Kreachure (talk) 13:19, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

It has an entry in the Wiktionary here. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 20:54, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Alexei [sic] Fyodorov

The page spells his first name Олексій and Алексей in Ukrainian and Russian, respectively. Why would this not be transliterated "Aleksei" in English? That's how it appears in the English-language edition of the Encyclopedia of the Holocaust. Is this a rule for this, or is it a matter of convention or preference? -- Deborahjay (talk) 08:15, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

It's probably just convention, like Alexander Solzhenitsyn or Peter Tchaikovsky. (On the other hand, I notice our articles on the two of them call them Aleksandr and Pyotr.) —Angr 08:30, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Angr, the examples you give are anglicized first names, such as with the Russian war hero Joseph Trumpeldor whose name appears thus in the (English-only) Encyclopedia Judaica. My query is about transliteration in cases where the original Cyrillic has to be romanized. -- Thanks, Deborahjay (talk) 09:11, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, Alexei is sort of a borderline case. I've known English-speakers who weren't even of Russian heritage named Alexei, but the name was clearly borrowed into English from Russian. So it's sort of an anglicized name itself. In a formal romanization I would of course write Aleksei or Aleksey or Aleksej or Alekseĭ (depending on the romanization system being used), but I wouldn't be surprised if whoever started our article on Fyodorov wasn't being that scientificky about the spelling of the first name. I notice "Alexei Fyodorov" -wikipedia gets a lot more Google hits than "Aleksei Fyodorov" -wikipedia, so the anglicized spelling seems to be well entrenched. —Angr 09:56, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

In turn, Alexei was borrowed from the Latin Alexius (similarly for Sergius > Sergei etc). So it's really going back to its roots, and using x instead of ks is understandable. This sort of thing also happens with names that Russian borrowed from German. The German Lehmanstein became, in (strictly transliterated) Russian, Leymanshteyn, but to render it in English as "Leymanshteyn" would look, well, wrong, so it usually comes out as Lehmanstein. Then there's Alexandre Benois, whose name was originally French. In Russian it became Бэнуа, which is strictly transliterated "Benua" in English, but can anyone be blamed for spelling it "Benois"? -- JackofOz (talk) 11:58, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

The source language was Greek (Alexios, Sergios) rather than Latin (Alexius, Sergius), of course. The name's popularity in Russia may be traced to a medieval ecclesiast who became Moscow's patron saint. --Ghirla^-трёп- 12:52, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Similarly, there's Togliatti, Russia, so spelled on National Geographic maps, although Wikipedia spells it Tolyatti. —Angr 12:18, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm... what you two are describing touches on a related matter: the reliance on phonologic elements rather than strict letter-based equivalencies when transliterating. For example, vowel-poor Hebrew is quite inadequate to render the nuances of French pronunciation, let alone the complexities of French orthography: silent consonants aren't represented, so that accurate back-transcribing to romanize requires actual knowledge of the French original. For quite some time, I was unaware that the ubiquitous biscuits I called "Patty bar" (פטי בר) were none other than the classic Petit Beurre...! And with all due respect to the German/Russian axis (linguistically), I tend to regard the Jewish surnames, at least, as having been filtered through Yiddish which has its own orthography using Hebrew letters. -- Deborahjay (talk) 13:02, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

As WP:RUS guides us, Alexei, Alexey, Aleksei, and Aleksey are all acceptable transliterations, although I'd prefer the latter. --Ghirla^-трёп- 12:50, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it was Greek, my error. However, whichever spelling you choose, please don't pronounce it a-LEK-sy, but a-lek-SAY. -- JackofOz (talk) 13:20, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

But Sexy a-lek-SAY doesn't rhyme! —Angr 14:37, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, honey, who cares if he can't rhyme! ;-) -- Deborahjay (talk) 20:49, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

"virtuoso concerto

What does "virtuoso concerto" mean? I could not find it in wiktionary or wikipedia (though if you search for it, you'll see articles with the word).68.148.164.166 (talk) 09:32, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

That sounds like a typographical error to me. Virtuoso (meaning highly skilled) is applied to a performer or group of performers, or to their performance. It would not be applied to the word concerto, which is a musical composition for a solo instrument and orchestra. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 09:40, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it's a typographical error; what is meant is a concerto that demands great virtuosity from the soloist, or that gives the soloist the opportunity to show off his or her virtuosity. DAVID ŠENEK 09:56, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it's a typographical error at all, it is probably meant to indicate a solo concerto, as opposed to a concerto grosso. Both of these musical compositions are called concerti, but a soloist plays the primary melodic component in the former while the latter has a group of musicians playing the prominent role in a piece. Aas217 (talk) 18:18, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Etymology of the names of medical subspecialties

Why is an orthopaedic surgeon not an orthopaediatrician? Why do some specialties use -ology as a suffix, and others -iatrics? My first question on Wikipedia so I hope it's phrased properly and my apologies for rather rudely asking two questions at once! Thanks, Od6600 (talk) 12:14, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Regarding your first question, orthopaedic is the adjective for orthopod, which is a completely different structure from paediatrics... which leads to your second question. "iatrics" is a suffix derived from greek "iatros" which means doctor or healer or physician so this is used for medical specialties. "ology" is the "study of" so it could have be used interchangeably, over the years as these words came into being, for medical specialties; probably the suffix that sounded better was adopted. There is also the suffix "dontist" eg. orthodontist, periodontist for different specialties of dentistry. And don't forget the good old physician. Sandman30s (talk) 14:29, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I would have to disagree about orthopod being the origin of orthopaedic; in my experience orthopod is an affectionately dismissive slang term used, by physicians, to refer to our surgical colleagues. A Greek colleague of mine has suggested it derives from the origins of the profession which was at first about correcting abnormalities in childhood posture. I think you're probably spot on that -ology/-iatrics are chosen according to the sound of the resulting word; onciatrics and paediology just sound wrong! Thanks, Od6600 (talk) 09:56, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Paed- comes from a Greek word meaning "child", pod- (as in podiatry) comes from a Greek word meaning "foot", and (o)dont- comes from a Greek word meaning "tooth". These are the oblique stems (the nominative singular forms listed in dictionaries were different). AnonMoos (talk) 12:08, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Uknown phrase in unknown language

What does "Kak vi poivaete" mean? I don't know what language it's in, and I'm unsure about the third word. The first two are right, I think. It sounds Slavic. Thanks in advance. 80.123.210.172 (talk) 19:16, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes it's certainly slavic. the first two words mean "How are you..."? Are you sure you use the appropriate alphabet? Most of the slavic languages usualy use the Cyrillic alphabet, except for Croatian (and other few slavic languages) which use the Latin alphabet, so if you've used the appropriate alphabet then it's probably Croatian. Hope it helps. Eliko (talk) 19:25, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

It looks like a miss-spelled transliteration of "как вы поживаете?" - Russian for "how are you?" (lit: how do you live?), but I suppose it could be from another Slavic language altogether. Koolbreez (talk) 19:34, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

(snigger) - you mis-spelled mis-spelled as miss-spelled (couldn't resist this one). -- JackofOz (talk) 05:42, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

If a young woman had done it you could have said "miss mis-spelled mis-spelled as miss-spelled, but being English I preferred mis-spelt". -- Q Chris (talk) 11:44, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

By the way, if the latin alphabet in which the sentence is written is the original one, then the sentence is supposed to be Croatian, and then the first two words mean: "How do I create more". Eliko (talk) 23:04, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

"Most of the Slavic languages usually use the Cyrillic alphabet" ... except Polish, Czech, Slovak, Slovenian, Croatian, Kashubian. i.e. about half of them. And are you saying that 'vi' is a Croatian verb form meaning 'I create more'? --ColinFine (talk) 23:51, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't think that they are about half of them.

"Kak" means: how do I create; "vi" means: more.

Eliko (talk) 03:27, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Eliko, in which language do these words mean these things? -- JackofOz (talk) 05:42, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Croatian. Eliko (talk) 13:35, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

There are 15 modern Slavic languages with a non-deprecated ISO 639-2 code, which seems to be as neutral a definition of what counts as a language (as opposed to a dialect) as anything. Of these, 9 are usually written in the Latin alphabet, 5 usually in the Cyrillic alphabet, and 1 (Serbian) can be written in either.

Latin

1. Bosnian
2. Croatian
3. Czech
4. Kashubian
5. Polish
6. Slovak
7. Slovenian
8. Sorbian, Upper
9. Sorbian, Lower

Cyrillic

1. Belarusian
2. Bulgarian
3. Macedonian
4. Russian
5. Ukrainian

Either

1. Serbian

So if each language gets an equal "vote", well more than half of the Slavic languages are written in the Latin alphabet. Even if we wanted to be more conservative in our definition of language and lump Croatian and Bosnian in with Serbian, Kashubian in with Polish, and Upper and Lower Sorbian together, the score would still be 5-5-1, i.e. half Latin, half Cyrillic. However, if each language's "vote" is proportionate to its number of speakers, then of course Cyrillic wins because there are so many Russian speakers and so few Sorbian and Kashubian speakers. —Angr 05:34, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Swedish translation

Is this a name of a book? Uträkning huru Stämplade Pappers-afgiften bör betalas år 1777 och de följande åren. -and- Kongl. Nummer-Lotterie Directionens Kungörelse, Angående Någre Författningar, som wid detta Kongl. Lotterie komma at i akt tagas.__Christie the puppy lover (talk) 21:57, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

No, it's a set of instructions. the first and fifth words are unidentifiable, and the same is with the "Kongl." which is probably a brief spelling of a longer word.

Here is the translation (while leaving the unidentifiable words at their original positions):

Uträkning whether Stamps Paper afgiften should be paid for years 1777 and the following years. - and-Kongl. Number-Lottery Direction Order, Subject Some Statutes, which with this Kongl. Lottery come at the opportunity attendance.

Eliko (talk) 22:51, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Üträkning = calculation, afgiften = tax / duty, Kongl. = (guess) an abbreviation for royal. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 23:14, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Isn't the last word a passive/reflexive verb, 'be taken'? --ColinFine (talk) 23:57, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it is. The last part would be better as which at this Royal Lottery will be into use taken. The word use in my translation isn't great either. The phrasing is obviously a bit archaic. /Coffeeshivers (talk) 10:27, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Correcting myself here: The combination of the last the words can be found in contemporary modern swedish as the single word iakttagas, which basically means be observed. With that in mind, the last part should be interpreted as which at this Royal Lottery will be adhered to. ColinFine's interpretation of the word tagas is still correct. /Coffeeshivers (talk) 10:33, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

July 18

Visitor Center

Hello. While working on Laie Hawaii Temple‎, I came across four different forms of "Visitor Center":

1. Visitor Center
2. Visitors Center
3. Visitor's Center
4. Visitors' Center

I want to use the spelling favored by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but even that is hard to find out. They seem to favor "Visitors' Center" in many sources, but the other three are commonly used. Can anyone find out the standard term for the LDS visitor center? Thanks! Viriditas (talk) 03:08, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

This page has "Visitors' Center". Gary King (talk) 08:29, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Gary. I'll go ahead and make the change. And of course, when people complain about it, I'll give them your name. :-) Viriditas (talk) 13:20, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

The section of Private Eye's letters pages dealing with readers' corrections—"Pedants Corner"—has recently entertained such a volume of correspondence on whether an apostrophe was necessary for the title of the section, and if so, where it should appear, that the editors took to moving an apostrophe about the letters of pedants at random every issue for several months, before renaming the section "Pedantry Corner" and declaring correspondence closed. 86.44.28.16 (talk) 08:34, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Heh. Not a bad solution. Viriditas (talk) 13:20, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Gernerally speaking none are incorrect because all have arguments to support them. With LDS specifically try contacting the LDS Newsroom. Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 17:12, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Is the following sentence grammatically correct?

During epidemics, quarantine is a common prophylactic measure. --Bowlhover (talk) 07:48, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Sounds fine to me. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 08:15, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I think it's acceptable, also. Gary King (talk) 08:28, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

The grammar is fine, but you might want to reconsider the use of the word "prophylactic". While correct, many people may think it means a condom, and thus be confused. I suggest "preventative" instead, which conveys the same meaning but is understood by a wider audience. (Note that there are some people who would argue that you should use the most complicated words possible in any given situation. While this may be true if your goal is to impress people with your genius, or perhaps to humiliate those with a lesser knowledge of English, I consider being understood by all to be the more important goal.) StuRat (talk) 15:51, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Offensive term

I came across the term "picaninny light" which is obviously derived from pickaninny. Does anyone know what the term means? CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 08:18, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Are you sure that's the correct phrase? It only returns two hits on Google. Gary King (talk) 08:28, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

The OEDgives "Piccaninny: Very small; tiny, baby. spec. piccaninny dawn, piccaninny daylight (chiefly Austral.), earliest dawn, first light."--Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:26, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I forgot to mention that I found it in a book by Alan John (Jock) Marshall.

CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 16:36, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Picaninny (day)light is an Australian term meaning first light. It is probably dervived from the defintion of piccaninny "very young" thus "very young light" The OED does not list this term as obsolete so it is believable that you will find newer works with the term being used. Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 16:51, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Britic/britic

Should the article Britic be presented as lowercase? In britic, the name is apparently not capitalised, however I can see no reason in English as to why a title/name such as this would not be capitalised having read WP:MOS, Wikipedia:MOSCAPS#Mixed_or_non-capitalization, Wikipedia:Manual of Style (trademarks) etc. When used mid-sentence, obviously it will not be capitalised, however as a title and as the encyclopedia is written in English, should the title of the page not be Britic (capitalised)? Cheers Nouse4aname (talk) 09:13, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

It should not be capitalized, considering that the iPhone, which is branded in non-caps, is spelt like that on Wikipedia, and since britic is marketed without a capital letter, this should also be reflected. MinYinChao (talk) 09:18, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

It should be capitalised. iPhone is only allowed the lower case i because it has a capital as its second letter. MoS is clear on the subject For proper names and trademarks that are given in mixed or non-capitalization by their owners (such as k.d. lang, adidas and others), follow standard English text formatting and capitalization rules.

Nouse4aname you can make article start with a capital by removing the {{lowercase}} tag at the top of the article. - X201 (talk) 09:43, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually, per an issue raised on the talkpage, britic now has a capital as its second letter, placing it in exactly the same position as iPhone. MinYinChao (talk) 09:52, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, just noticed. All but one of the stylised ʀ 's will have to go though, the first one is allowed to show the normal trademarked representation of the name but all other occurrences of it should be in standard lettering i.e. bRitic. - X201 (talk) 10:03, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Done. MinYinChao (talk) 13:34, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

cleanliness is next to godliness

can u tell me about the proverb cleanliness is next to godliness in about 100 words 122.167.50.37 (talk) 13:30, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia will not do your homework. Stifle (talk) 13:34, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Try asking Google (especially the http://phrases.org.uk link). Don't copy-and-paste it, your teacher will find out :-P ; take the information and write it in your own words. --_{tiny plastic} Grey Knight ⊖ 13:50, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I've always found that "cleanliness is next to impossible". :-) StuRat (talk) 14:40, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

That's deep. ;-) -LambaJan (talk) 17:59, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

For that matter, so is godliness. That's why they're next to each other. —Angr 18:15, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Looking to form a plurality...

What's the plural of noria ? The caption for the pic in that article seems to just use "noria" as the plural, while the caption on the same pic in our article on Hama, renowned for having more than one noria, uses "norias". Are both correct or does one of our articles need a fix ? StuRat (talk) 14:40, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

According to http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Noria, its origin is in Spanish, from Aramaic nā’urā, Aramaic n’ar "to shake, roar"; Semitic root נער (n’r). So looks like "noria" is singular, and I'd give it a Spanish-style plural, which I think just works out as "norias". --_{tiny plastic} Grey Knight ⊖ 16:09, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

The OED lists this as the earist reference to noria in English "1696 P. AYRES Revengeful Mistress 24 Their usual Recreation in the Evenings, was..to view the Norias or admirable Water-works, with which the Spaniards industriously water their Gardens, or supply their Fountains" Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 16:59, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Another random French question ...

A few weeks ago, I asked a couple of questions about French, and the folks who responded were very helpful. So, thanks for that, first of all!

Now I have another random French question ... I've been practicing my French by watching various French shows/movies. One thing I've heard a couple of times is when person A is trying to get person B to stop doing something, if person B doesn't stop, person A will emphatically say, "J'ai dit stop!" (literally, "I said stop!"). I found it a little odd that a French speaker would slip into English to make a point or a demand more emphatically ... What's up with that? Is it common for French speakers to slip into English (or other languages) to make a point? I suppose English speakers do stuff like that occasionally, but it just struck me as odd that it would be done at a moment of heightened emotional tension; I'd think one would prefer to stick with one's native tongue in those situations.

Thanks in advance for your thoughts ... Dgcopter (talk) 18:16, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

German questions

1) Could someone explain why "Mir ist kalt" is more proper than "Ich bin kalt"?

2) Could someone explain the use of the article "dem" in simple terms that a layman can understand?

thanks Dismas|^(talk) 18:20, 18 July 2008 (UTC)