Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 16:38, 5 September 2008

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.

August 30

presidency/prime ministership

We can say in English "Such and such an event happened during the presidency of X", "The presidency lasted X years". What is the proper term for a Prime Minister (UK)? Is it Prime-ministership as in "during the Prime Ministership of so-and-so".

thanks Duomillia (talk) 00:52, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

'Premiership' is more common, I think, but it might be better to avoid this phrasing entirely. Algebraist 00:59, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In historical works, 'ministry' is used (eg 'Disraeli's second ministry'), but I don't think this would be readily understood in reference to a recent PM. --ColinFine (talk) 16:28, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The term "government", as in "During the x years of the Blair government...", is used quite frequently. If you want to refer to a particular personal combination of executives you may also use "In Blair´s second cabinet Robin Cook resigned...". --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 20:06, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In Australia, the head of the federal government is the Prime Minister and the heads of the state governments are premiers. The term "premiership" is sometimes used in relation to PMs, where it would not be misunderstood in the context. But because of that very potential for ambiguity, the term "prime ministership" is more often seen for PMs, and "premiership" is usually reserved for premiers. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:12, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Likewise here in Canada, except I'd say that "premiership" is not used at all here in relation to the PM. --Anonymous, 08:22 UTC, September 2, 2008.

The Douche Renaissance

We seem to have embarked on a new golden age of the terms "douche" and "douchebag." I'm curious as to the impetus of the resurgence of these phrases.

Oh yes, and is this urbandictionary definition of "d bag" fairly accurate: Ironic term for douche bag, since by abbreviating "douche-bag" unnecessarily, you, in turn, resemble a "douche-bag." Sappysap (talk) 01:06, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's rather funny hearing people calling other people shower... --antilived^{T | C | G} 07:13, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"He's an absolute shower" was a fairly common term of pejoration among upperish-class Brits at one time. Terry-Thomas used it a few times to good effect in It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World. -- JackofOz (talk) 07:33, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it had returned because of South Park, which also seems to be the reason for the popularity of "sweet" as an exclamation. Adam Bishop (talk) 07:55, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I assumed "sweet" was from Family Guy; Peter says it all the time. Matt Deres (talk) 16:11, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I used "sweet" as an exclamation back in at least 1996. I hadn't seen South Park at the time, but I may have picked it up from people who had. Steewi (talk) 02:36, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Swear words

Why are swear words often put in quotation marks? February 15, 2009 (talk) 12:51, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are they? Presumably it's because they are being quoted. Can you provide examples of what you mean?--Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:35, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay:

'You mustn't refer to others as "cuntheads" or "fuckheads".'

'That place, where you called others "bitches"...'

February 15, 2009 (talk) 23:26, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Those quotes are due to the use-mention distinction. They show that you're mentioning the word 'cuntheads' (say), not using it. There's nothing specific to swearwords about this usage. Algebraist 23:29, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tits

I am trying to find the derivation of the term 'tit' or 'tits' in relation to the female breast. I have looked at tits and breasts but am unable to find the answer there.--79.76.176.172 (talk) 16:51, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's something a dictionary would have. Try wiktionary or another online dictionary. Friday (talk) 17:02, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at tits and breasts, to quote the OP, infrequently provides useful answers to the encyclopedic inquisitive mind. From the very slim booklet "The collected wit and wisdom of --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 17:50, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Looking at tits and teats in the Wiktionary will enable you to find the answer there, however (OE, of Teutonic origin). Of course, your method seems to be much more fun. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 17:50, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

japanese grammar

Would it be OK to say...

1. "Kate-san wa sensei ga suisenjou wo kaite itadakeru ka dou ka kiki ni ikimashita" to mean "Kate went to ask her teacher whether or not he could write a recommendation for her" ?? Or is the grammar here screwed up?

Would it be better to say "Kate-san wa sensei ni suisenjou wo kaite moraeru ka dou ka kiki ni ikimashita"??

2. "Ryuugaku suru tame no shougakukin" or "Ryuugaku suru koto ga dekiru you ni shougakukin" or "Ryuugaku puroguramu no shougakukin"? Which is "scholarship to let someone go on an exchange program"?

1:it's better to use 'moraeru' and to omit 'san'.
2:Gakusei koukan puroguramu no tameno shougakukin. I think this site is helpful for you. Oda Mari (talk) 18:56, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Minugahana, for Oda Mari, I would just translate it as 'not what I expected'.--ChokinBako (talk) 23:22, 30 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

August 31

Plurals

What's the plural of 'piccolo'? Avnas Ishtaroth _{drop me a line} 00:10, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In Italian, piccoli. In English, piccolos. See wikt:piccolo. Algebraist 00:13, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What's the pulral of 'marquess'? I'd like that particular spelling. Avnas Ishtaroth _{drop me a line} 05:11, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Marquesses, I believe. -- JackofOz (talk) 06:05, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Terms of endearment in Ireland

What are some English words for loved ones that would be used in Ireland? (In other words, non Irish language words) --70.167.58.6 (talk) 01:25, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Sweetling", "Dearheart"... not sure if they're Irish but they sound sort of old-fashioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.239.177.28 (talk) 01:52, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

English, yes, but wouldn't cushla also be used? Corvus cornix_talk 05:20, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do anglicized spellings of Irish words count as "non Irish language words" as requested by the OP? Cushla is just an anglicized spelling of "cuisle". There's also "mavourneen", but that too is just an anglicized spelling of "mo mhuirnín". —An gr 06:34, 31 August 2008 (UTC)"[reply]

There's also 'acushla' and 'my acushla', as in "Acushla, my acushla, thou art beautiful!" But acushla is another version of cuisle. Strawless (talk) 13:46, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe what I'm asking for are any regional specific English slang words used around in and around Ireland for loved ones or people one finds attractive. (Something outrageous and fun like Aussie slang?) I don't consider anglicized Irish words slang. --71.158.215.87 (talk) 16:21, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can't think of any slang words for loved ones, but here are a few slang words I've heard for similar things. I've no idea if they are used in Ireland or not:

Attractive: bangin', blazing, fine, foxy, hot, smoking, skeeza, mint, phat (pretty hot and tempting)
Friend: mate, bro, buddy, pal, boyz, chum, crony, patron, amiga, amigo
Girlfriend / boyfriend: baby, babygirl, BF, GF, boo, breezy, skillet, squeeze JessicaThunderbolt 18:05, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

a-...

Hello. When the House is rockin', don't come a-knockin'. Or, some old hippie came a-hoppin' through our apartment. What does the bolded mean? Thanks in advance. --Mayfare (talk) 19:03, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know where it came from, it certainly is not formal English, but it doesn't really change the meaning at all. It's just kind of there; I believe that it is used either in certain dialects (American, I don't know about other countries), or intentionally by someone who just wants to make his wording sound a certain way (informal, or has some ring to it). I hear it a lot in songs and poetry. Maybe somebody can give a better explanation of how and why it came into existence, but for interpretation purposes, I think it's safe to just ignore the "a-". Hope that helps, Falconus^{p t c} 20:50, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If I may piggyback on the original question with a related one: is this prefix related to that in afloat, abuzz, aflutter, afire, aghast, agape, alive, aloud, aware? Tesseran (talk) 20:56, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Looking at the OED has mostly answered my question (though the situation seems to be much more complicated than I understood. One definition, excerpted below, may be what the original poster was looking for. Tesseran (talk) 21:16, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

a-, prefix1

Orig. a variant of OR- prefix, showing an unstressed form of the prefix used in verbal compounds

... Hence, a- came to be regarded as vaguely intensive, rhetorical, euphonic, or archaic, and was prefixed by Spenser and other archaists to words both of Old English and Romance origin for stylistic purposes.

With verbs, implying motion onward or away from a position; hence (originally with verbs of motion) adding intensity.

a, prep.1

Variant of ON prep. with loss of the final consonant -n, reflecting an unstressed pronunciation of the word in proclitic use; compare A- prefix3, AWAY adv., ARIGHT adv.

The separate preposition a ceased to be used in standard English after about 1700, being replaced by the full on, in, or the various prepositions which represent them in modern idiom, surviving only in a few set uses from branch II., such as to go a begging, to set a going, and in temporal distributive phrases, as twice a day, once a year, where it had been early identified with the indefinite article (see A adj. 4). It also survived in a large number of combinations, where it was treated as a prefix to the governed word, and the whole as a compound adverb. Cross-references are given below to a selection of these (see senses 2 , 3 , 5 , 6 , 8). Compare A- prefix3.

It's the second entry. kwami (talk) 18:43, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good question... A quick scan of the article A gave me that the prefix a just means 'not,' such as atypical, but that certainly does not make any sense in the above words... So I have no idea about that usage. --Falconus^{p t c} 21:01, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It comes from Scotland. It's also prevalent in Appalachian English. --Kjoonlee 21:07, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Participles found in present tense progressive aspect verb forms often have a vowel prefix commonly written with an "a" followed by a hyphen, and this is pronounced as a schwa sound. An example is "I'm a-goin' now." Cf. the composite present of Scottish Gaelic, as in Tha mi a-smochach, or "I'm smoking."

Quoted from the above article. --Kjoonlee 21:09, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict): In Old English this prefix (before gerunds / participles) indicated that the action described by the verb is taking place currently. A-knocking thus means knocking at this very moment of speaking. You find it frequently in Dickens and, of course, in the well known carol of the Twelve Days of Xmas. Apparently it is also used in Appalachian English, though I just read that and can´t verify it. Maybe a linguist can explain why it survived there whilst elsewhere it is - at most - used jokingly. -Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 21:12, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In Twelve Days of Christmas, I suspect it's put in for rhyming scansion mainly. Not that it's out of place or contrived, but if it had had a different tune, it might just as well have been "ten lords leaping ... eight maids milking", etc. I have no time to research this question, as I'm off to see a performance of Murder in the Cathedral. So, in a way, I'm about to go a-Becketing. :) -- JackofOz (talk) 22:55, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's the second entry from the OED. We have an independent phrase in Modern English with the exact same form, "on-going". Old "on-going" though meant that you were in (= "on") the process of going: "I'm on-going to the market". That contracted to "I'm a-going to the market" and finally "I'm going to the market". "a-going" has survived dialectically, in set phrases, and in literature. kwami (talk) 18:43, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The OED is right: it's an archaic form of "on". It's used in Scots, which may very well be the reason it's used in Appalachia, but there really is no way it's derived from Scottish Gaelic. Marnanel (talk) 17:58, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

eyes are bigger than one's stomach

What is the origin of this idiom? I have heard of a similar saying in Chinese and I was wondering whether if one was the source of the other or whether if this is an example of convergent idiomizing. Are there similar sayings in other languages? Coolotter88 (talk) 19:28, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's a similar saying in Norwegian: "Magen blir mett før øynene". Word-by-word translation: "The stomach is satiated before the eyes [are]". --NorwegianBlue^talk 19:48, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Wiktionary entry ([1]) implies that Dutch and French (and possibly Portuguese, if my guesses are correct) have identical idioms. There certainly exists a German phrase which is a literal translation. Wiktionary also has versions in Maltese and Vietnamese, but I have no idea what they say. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 21:14, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In Polish, we say jeść oczami, or "to eat with one's eyes". — Kpalion^(talk) 22:30, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The most common version of this idiom in Portuguese, "tens mais olhos que barriga" (you have more eyes than stomach) is kinda stupid, coz people do have more eyes than stomach (two eyes, one stomach) ;-). Hús ö nd 22:44, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do not speak Polish, but I think that "to eat with one´s eyes" has a different meaning, ie. that the presentation of the food will affect the appetite. It certainly will affect the price of a dish ordered in a restaurant when instead of a bowl with nondescript goo you are served Lobster Thermidor a Crevette with a mornay sauce served in a Provencale manner with shallots and aubergines garnished with truffle pate, brandy and with a fried egg on top and SPAM. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 22:56, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A person whose eyes are bigger than his stomach might find he's digging his grave with his fork. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:23, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Twiggy? Clarityfiend (talk) 17:14, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

September 1

how to say various romantic things in Latin

My girlfriend thinks I know Latin. She thinks it sounds sexy or something (sounds like Italian she says...) and rather than letting her know that I don't really know anything more that really really basic stuff, I'd like to know how to say some random romantic things in Latin before she realizes that I only speak English... So how do I say stuff like "you're adorable" and "I love you" et cetera?63.245.152.68 (talk) 12:25, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Those two are "adorabilis es" and "te amo". Or for the first one you could use gerundives, "adoranda es" or "amanda es", although I suppose she might think you are calling her by some other girl's name (unless Amanda is conveniently her name!). Check out Catullus 5 for some other romantic things. Generally I don't find Latin to be particularly romantic; it's great for describing politics and war, and you can be extremely crude with it, but it's not really sweet and romantic. Adam Bishop (talk) 12:36, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen various movies in which Latin was spoken, and it always sounds like a made-up language to my ears. That is, quite unnatural and stilted. Sebastiane was entirely in Latin, and it suffered badly because of this (I like to imagine he rejected the soldiers' advances as much for the ugly sounds they were making, as for moral reasons). I suppose this comes down to the actors not generally knowing - because nobody really knows anymore - how Latin actually sounded when it was spoken by native speakers, so they do their best with whatever coaching they're given. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:56, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, if you want to be obscene, try this list! Adam Bishop (talk) 04:33, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sooner or later you will need "ego sum rumex" (I am sorry) and "indulgeo mihi" (forgive me). manya (talk) 09:47, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you fancy the classics, there's always Catullus:

Caeli. Lesbia nostra. Lesbia illa.

illa Lesbia quam Catullus unam

plus quam se atque suos amauit omnes

nunc in quadruuiis et angiportis

glubit magnanimi Remi nepotes.

Which is, roughly,

O Heaven! Our Lesbia

That same Lesbia whom Catullus loved

more than himself and more than all his other lover

now in the crossroads and alleyways

Jerks off the noble sons of Rome....

Or Catullus, carmen 16:

Pedicabo ego vos et irrumabo,

Aureli pathice et cinaede Furi,

qui me ex versiculis meis putastis,

quod sunt molliculi, parum pudicum.

Nam castum esse decet pium poetam

ipsum, versiculos nihil necesse est;

qui tum denique habent salem ac leporem,

si sunt molliculi ac parum pudici,

et quod pruriat incitare possunt,

non dico pueris, sed his pilosis

qui duros nequeunt movere lumbos.

Vos, quod milia multa basiorum

legistis, male me marem putatis?

Pedicabo ego vos et irrumabo.

which one scholar translates thusly:

I’ll fuck you up the ass, and you can blow me,

you cocksucker Aurelius and you faggot Furius,

for suggesting that my little verses

are effeminate and not pure enough.

A good poet should be virtuous,

but his verses don’t need to be.

Who cares if verses that have spice and wit

are soft and not very pure?

They can also get you going.

I’m not talking to boys here, but to two hairy men

who can’t even move their creaky old loins.

Are you two putting me down

just because you’ve read about my thousands of kisses?

Fuck you both. You can blow me.

Though perhaps that is less erotic and less applicable than one would hope... - Nunh-huh 10:09, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some other ideas are Ovid's Ars Amatoria, and if you are willing to go with medieval Latin, Andreas Cappellanus. But they are as much about seducing impressionable girls as they are about romance. Adam Bishop (talk) 21:43, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cause célèbre

The following is a quote from today's featured article:

"Leo Ornstein (1893–2002) was one of the leading American experimental composers and pianists of the early twentieth century. His performances of works by avant-garde composers and his own innovative and even shocking pieces made him a cause célèbre on both sides of the Atlantic."

According to Wikipedia & Wiktionary, a cause célèbre is "an issue or incident arousing widespread controversy, outside campaigning and heated public debate."

According to the Merriam_Webster On-Line Dictionary, a cause célèbre can also mean "a notorious person." Obviously different sources can disagree.

My question (addressed especially to people who regularly answer questions here) is which dictionary or dictionaries they consider most reliable and helpful.

Thanks, Wanderer57 (talk) 19:31, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I'm thinking specifically of English language dictionaries. I mention this to forestall answers of the sort "the Mongahaleian Dictionary of Urdu is unparalleled."

I use Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language, Unabridged. It's certainly my favorite reference for any word, despite its bulkiness. It also happens to be the official reference for the National Spelling Bee (in the US).--El aprendelenguas (talk) 22:00, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Oxford English Dictionary is the best for some purposes. It's decades out of date, but its historical coverage is, I believe, unparalleled. Algebraist 22:48, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

W3NID is huge and 40 years out of date; OED is vast and 0 to 100 years out of date, depending on the word and sense. Webster's Collegiate [=Online] and the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary (SOED) are their somewhat smaller, more regularly revised siblings; both excellent for US and British usage respectively. A larger dictionary will both contain more words and contain more senses for each word; the things missing in a smaller dictionary are the more obscure words and senses. So Wiktionary leaving out the word doesn't mean it "disagrees" with Merriam-Webster. Sometimes you can have too much information: I've never heard "cause célèbre" used thus, and I don't think it should have been in the article since it's so obscure in the intended sense. Finding a word in a dictionary is not permission to use it wherever you like, safe in the knowledge that it's a "real word". The dictionary tells you how others have used a word: you must decide for yourself whether to use it in a given situation.

Online I use Onelook because it links to both Merriam-Webster and American Heritage — both are good and it's wise to check multiple sources. Offline for British English I like The Chambers Dictionary (formerly Chambers' Twentieth Century Dictionary, not to be confused with Chambers' Twenty-First Century Dictionary, an inferior work available online.) The Chambers is old-fashioned and literary with no frills; it squeezes a huge amount into definitions which are succinct if not downright terse. Collins is probably the best mainstream British dictionary smaller than SOED, though I haven't really tested the Oxford Dictionary of English. jnestorius^(talk) 22:37, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not its', it's its...

I remember finding this great quote about the use of "it's" and "its" in a Unix fortune before which I believe started out with "It's not its', it's its" or something like that. It went on for a number of sentences and made perfect sense, but might be confusing initially for some people if they don't know of the relevant grammar rules already, especially if they hear the quote instead of read it. Unfortunately, I can't seem to find the quote again. I thought I would be able to google it, but amazingly it didn't show up. Can anyone find the whole quote? Thanks! TresÁrboles (talk) 22:33, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think I know the sort of thing you are talking about, wikipedian Benjamin Mako Hill has a list of homophonous phrases and while I can't see it there, it may be worth leaving a polite note on his talk page and see if he knows it, as he may want to add it to his collection. ;) -Phydaux (talk) 15:50, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it's this quote:

"It's is not, it isn't ain't, and it's it's, not its, if you mean it is. If you don't, it's its. Then too, it's hers. It isn't her's. It isn't our's either. It's ours, and likewise yours and theirs." -- Oxford University Press, Edpress News

Found in Fortune4All's fortune data file. Korg (talk) 23:45, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Crisis of confidence regarding a sentence involving "had" and "have"

Recently, while composing a note, I wrote:

Hopefully, these are foam too, or else Cash 'n' Guns has gotten a lot more serious than I had expected!

and then my crisis started. :) I wondered if it was correct and changed it to:

Hopefully, these are foam too, or else Cash 'n' Guns has gotten a lot more serious than I expect!

I thought of other variations like:

Hopefully, these are foam too, or else Cash 'n' Guns has gotten a lot more serious than I have expected!

before finally reverting back to my original sentence.

- Which of these sentences is correct/best?
- Is there a good, clear web resource on this particular grammar point?

Thanks! TresÁrboles (talk) 22:52, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the article on the pluperfect tense. -- Wavelength (talk) 23:06, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not. The pluperfect or past perfect is "I had expected". "I have expected" is the perfect or present perfect tense. --Anonymous, 08:31 UTC, September 2, 2008.

Well, in proper English, you would say:

Hopefully, these are foam too. (Or else Cash 'n Guns has become a lot more serious than I expected)

--79.76.154.239 (talk) 23:53, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some people have issues with "hopefully", and would prefer "I hope these are foam too". Also, there needs to be a full stop after "expected". -- JackofOz (talk) 01:39, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The word "hopefully" here is a dangling modifier. -- Wavelength (talk) 02:11, 2 September 2008 (UTC)]][reply]

(ec with below) Either that or a sentence adverb. Deor (talk) 02:15, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with anon, above. "Gotten" is a horrible word. Exploding Boy (talk) 02:14, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not. It's a perfectly standard word, the past participle of "get", which can mean "become". I'd probably have used the simple past "...a lot more serious than I expected", but it depends on the context, which isn't clear. —An gr 05:44, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's a past participle of get; specifically, the U.S. version. The other one is "got". Depends where you're from. -- JackofOz (talk) 07:02, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Correction. In the US and Canada, the past participle of "got" is "got" when "I've got" means "I have", and "gotten" when it doesn't (i.e. when it actually refers to getting, including senses like becoming). For example, "I've got a cat" means I have a cat; "I've gotten a cat" means I bought/adopted/rescued/stole one. --Anonymous, 08:30 UTC, September 2, 2008.

Gotten is authentic... unlike snuck for sneaked, for instance. People in the US just need to remember that in some other English speaking countries, including the UK, gotten sounds weird, just like a lot of other old words that have fallen completely out of use. Strawless (talk) 12:53, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And people outside the U.S. need to remember that not everything that's characteristic of American English is an ignorant solecism. —An gr 13:20, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's mostly the English who have that view. And they are wrong, as you say. Strawless (talk) 14:15, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

People outside the US also need to remember that just because a usage exists in the US and not where they are, it doesn't mean that it's only a US usage. --Anon, 05:50 UTC, September 3, 2008.

As regards the form of the verb expect, I would go with "expected" rather than any of your options. As to the other points being debated, I would back quietly out of the room with no sudden movements. jnestorius^(talk) 21:29, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

September 2

Japanese change of address postcard

Can someone please tell me what information/fixed expressions are used on a Japanese change of address postcard? (Kanji ok). I had an example that I used to use, but I've lost it. Thanks. Exploding Boy (talk) 00:26, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See Japanese addressing system. Oda Mari (talk) 05:05, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but that's not really what I meant. I'm looking for the standard format for change of address postcards. Exploding Boy (talk) 05:11, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You mean something like this? Oda Mari (talk) 05:20, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And this one. Oda Mari (talk) 05:25, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not exactly. I know how to write the address on a postcard or an envelope. The situation is that I'm moving to a new apartment, and I want to send notices with my new home address, so that people know where to reach me. I have a book with a standard format postcard (it says, in Japanese, something like "I've moved. My new address is xxxxxx"). I've already packed the book, and I can't find any examples online, so I'm just wondering what the standard format is for that type of notice. It's probably a lot more simple than I remember (something like 引っ越しました followed by the new address), but I thought there was more to it. Am I wrong? Exploding Boy (talk) 05:29, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. Stupid of me. See these examples. Oda Mari (talk) 05:38, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect. Thank you. Exploding Boy (talk) 05:45, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Secret Code

I remember reading a FoxTrot strip where Peter and Denise are on to Jason and Marcus wiretapping them, so they start speaking in a secret code where one would say "The local train stops on the hour" and the other would say "the heavy flag flaps not at night". Does anyone know the name of this secret code? Thanks in advance.

Americanfreedom (talk) 04:09, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard the term "open code" for a code where ordinary words and phrases are substituted for others, but I can't find a source to confirm that (googling for the phrase produces too many false hits to be helpful). The Code (cryptography) article uses the term "idiot code" for a related concept. --Anonymous, 08:40 UTC, September 2, 2008.

Velvalee_Dickinson... AnonMoos (talk) 12:55, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In other words, Steganography. Corvus cornix_talk 18:32, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No. Steganography is about concealing the presence of a coded message. "The heavy flag flaps not at night" is not an example of that. --Anon, 05:51 UTC, September 3, 2008.

It would probably be considered a form of substitution cipher, where you're not substituting individual letters, but words or phrases, using a predefined dictionary. The Navajo code talkers in World War II did something similar, where certain concepts were substituted with a word in Navajo (e.g "hand grenade" becomes the Navajo word for "potato"). In the case of FoxTrot, I doubt there was a particular code being used. Bill Amend probably just used phrases that sounded mysterious, using the style of passphrase challenge-response that is common in spy novels/films. (To be sure that the person you're talking to is your contact, as opposed to an enemy spy, you first trade a set a pre-arranged phrases which no one who isn't your contact would know or could guess from context.) -- 128.104.112.147 (talk) 00:52, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not a cipher either. "Cipher" specifically refers to an encryption where the units are characters or bits rather than words or phrases. See Cipher#Ciphers versus codes. --Anonymous, 03:46 UTC, September 4, 2008.

Per aspera ad confusion

I've found Per Aspera Ad Astra, Per aspera ad Astra, and Per aspera ad astra (a redirect). Is the last one properly capitalized, or does Latin not capitalize? Clarityfiend (talk) 05:51, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Latin doesn't have clearcut rules for capitalization. While it was an everyday spoken language, lowercase letters hadn't been invented yet. Modern Latin tends to follow the capitalization rules of the native language of whoever's writing it. I'd say both the disambig pages should be merged to Per aspera ad astra (or Ad astra per aspera, the version of the proverb I know best). —An gr 06:02, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, the alphabet of classical Latin had letters in only one case, which was neither upper case nor lower case, and that alphabet has survived as our (Roman) capital letters. But Latin went on developing long after there were lower case letters, and when we write it now, as we nearly always do, in upper case and lower case, English speakers generally follow the practice of using capital letters where we would in English; the French use capital letters in Latin titles very sparingly, just as they do in French titles, but German speakers don't capitalize all Latin nouns, as their own language does. So I agree with Per aspera ad astra or Ad astra per aspera. Strawless (talk) 13:11, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There were other kinds of Latin script that had differently shaped letters - we usually think of Roman square capitals, but they also wrote with rustic capitals and Roman cursive. But yeah, they didn't really have a system of uppercase and lowercase, or even punctuation, like we do. Adam Bishop (talk) 19:40, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not really on topic, but only one of those is a disambig page, so a simple merge may not be appropriate. jnestorius^(talk) 21:21, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm on it. I should have it cleared up in a day or two (after a page deletion). Clarityfiend (talk) 09:13, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Latin pronunciation

Can someone summarise Latin pronunciation, preferably using examples from English? In addition to the pronunciation of individual letters, diphthongs, etc how do you determine which syllables are stressed? Thanks in advance--212.120.246.239 (talk) 19:42, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Latin spelling and pronunciation will surely be of interest. -- Coneslayer (talk) 19:44, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Memento nullos circa esse Romanos qui tuam corrigere possint locutionem. — OtherDave (talk) 19:57, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Which is correct

Which is correct: None of the group have.... OR None of the group has...?--79.76.154.239 (talk) 22:44, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That depends. In American English, it is common to refer to groups in the singular. In British English, as far as I know, it is common to refer to groups in the plural. Can someone who actually speaks British English either confirm or deny that last statement? J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 22:47, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's something about "none of the group" that just sounds bad to me. Personally I'd prefer "no one in the group has," which is always singular, by the way.--El aprendelenguas (talk) 23:02, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That might be because 'none of the group' treats 'group' as plural, which is (I believe) unnatural to a native American speaker. To J.delanoy: see American and British English differences#Formal and notional agreement. Groups can be referred to in the singular or plural depending on whether the group is acting as a corporate body or as a collection of individuals. In this usage, the group is being treated as a collection of individuals, none of whom have done something, so 'none of the group have' is correct in British English. Algebraist 23:13, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The original question is nothing to do with the plurality or not of 'group', because the subject is 'none', not 'group'. Among those who believe in 'correct', there are some who insist that 'none' should always take a singular verb (the rationalisation I was told was that it stands for 'no one'). In ordinary speech I think it is more often construed with the plural, but not exclusively. --ColinFine (talk) 23:37, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

just ask yourselves: what is 'none' a contraction of? Could it be 'no one'? Or 'not one'?

"None" can be plural or singular, and is derived from the Old English nān (itself from ne = not and ān = one).^[1]

^ Chambers 20th Century Dictionary, New Edition 1983, p. 861

DuncanHill (talk) 23:47, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the grammar guides I've seen agree that with "None of…" phrases the verb should be plural if the object of of is plural, singular if the object of of is singular ("None of them are going"/"None of the water was potable")—a form of notional agreement. In this case, as the original responders have said, it boils down to whether one construes group as singular or plural. Deor (talk) 23:58, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A better rule is that if you would expect there to be more than one, but there are none, then you should treat "none" as plural ("What do you mean, you have 10,000 employees and none of them are right-handed?"); otherwise treat it as singular. But it's correct either way. --Anonymous, 05:55 UTC, September 3, 2008.

These questions keep coming back, I think we need an article that explains if zero is sigular or plural once and for all, another that explains if group words ("team", "set", etc.) should be singular or plural, depending on where you are, which situation, or the actual meaning of the phrase (like "a total of..."). Otherwise we will keep rewriting the answer and arguing for pages and pages about it, everytime the question comes up. Not being a native speaker of English, I am not volunteering to write these articles. --Lgriot (talk) 03:43, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the great secret that schoolteachers are keeping from you: the English language lives in the heads of its native speakers. It is ridiculous to argue from syllogisms, and it is ridiculous to decide on the grounds that the word was two words before they were joined nine hundred years ago: it has certainly not been a contraction since then. You should therefore say both sentences to yourself and decide which one sounds correct, and then use that. If you really want someone else to lay down the law, then as a native speaker I claim my right to tell you that "none" takes the plural. Marnanel (talk) 20:25, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(That said, if you're asking whether "group" should be plural or singular, it's a dialectal matter, and WP:ENGVAR proscribes "fixing" dialectal differences.) Marnanel (talk) 20:27, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Only within Wikipedia, though.) -- JackofOz (talk) 21:54, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

September 3

"Case" in ancient languages

In Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Language#Per_aspera_ad_confusion above, and in Greek_alphabet there is the mention of the notion of letter "case". Upper and lower case refers to the location of the pieces of type in a typesetter's type case, that is, his compartmented tray. The capitals were on top and the, uhh, squiglier ones were below. As type didn't move until much later the terms seem anachronistic. Majuscule and minuscule seem a trifle pedantic. Is there a common-usage compliment to "capital" (which, of course, only has meaning post-minuscule) other than "lower case"? Saintrain (talk) 01:28, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The common-usage alternative to "lower case" is "small". However, in relation to Greek in particular, I have seen the two styles of letters called "print" (upper case) and "script" (lower case). --Anonymous, 05:59 UTC, September 3, 2008.

Real typographers dislike "small" used as a synonym for lower-case, since they generally use "small" to refer to small caps (which are not lower-case). There are a whole series of technical terms to describe various medieval handwriting styles (i.e. "uncials", "half-uncials", "Carolingian", "Insular", "miniscules" etc.), some of which were on the line of development of the modern lower-case letters... AnonMoos (talk) 11:33, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly this will be a stupid question, but did classical languages have what we would recognise as a case distinction at all? Uppercase letters were the ones they used in stonemasonry, and lowercase were the cursive ones. Did anyone, before the Middle Ages anyway, ever use both kinds in the same document? Marnanel (talk) 20:06, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not in Latin or Greek, at least. They didn't have minuscule forms until the 9th or 10th century. Do any other classical languages even have case distinctions today? Adam Bishop (talk) 20:12, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The modern lowercase letters grew out of medieval "hands" (as I said), so ancient Romans didn't have anything closely resembling lowercase letters in form or function. They did have cursive and shorthand. AnonMoos (talk) 23:02, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nynorsk grammar

anyone knows where to find a NORWEGIAN NYNORSK GRAMMARBOOK? i repeat, a NYNORSK(=NewNorwegian) grammarbook where i get lists that are bending the words..

like this:

A song - the song - songs - songs

i relaize I might be asking on the wrong place, but it seems impossible to find anywhere... I need a list of all words being bendt and shaped into different forms. in order to learn the lanuage i must have one... and a common wordbook is not what i am looking for..

Have a look here, especially here and on all the subpages that start with substantiv. In general, nynorsk is very regular - the main thing you have to know is whether a noun is ~~male~~ masculine, ~~female~~ feminine or neutrum (which will be mentioned in any good dictionary, along with a possible irregular plural form) -- Ferkelparade π 11:42, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nouns may be masculine or feminine (or neuter), but they are never male or female. —An gr 11:49, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, of course. I hang my head in shame at my involuntary sexualisation of language -- Ferkelparade π 14:00, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And people inside Berlin need to remember that not everything that's characteristic of German English is an ignorant solecism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk • contribs) 16:18, 3 September 2008

A full dictionary of Nynorsk (and Bokmål) is here: http://www.dokpro.uio.no/ordboksoek.html . After each word there's a code (like n1 for noun, neuter, type 1) and you click on "oversyn over grammatiske koder" to get the pattern for that word. Jørgen (talk) 20:05, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ashkenazic pronunciation in Israeli Hebrew?

When Sholem Aleichem is discussed in Israeli Hebrew, is the Ashkenazic pronunciation [ˈʃolem aˈleixem] used, or is it "Sephardified" to [ʃaˈlom aleiˈxem]? Are there any other Yiddish words of Hebrew origin that have been borrowed into Israeli Hebrew from Yiddish that retain their Ashkenazic pronunciation? —An gr 11:08, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In contemporary Hebrew spoken by the mainstream Israeli population, the author's first name is pronounced SHAlom rather than the Yiddish SHOlem, the accent on the first syllable being typical of Hebrew words (nouns, adjectives) used as personal names; the surname is virtually the same in both pronunciations. For your second question: it's actually Yiddish words used in Hebrew with their Yiddish pronunciation (of vowels, certain consonants, and syllabic stress), which is essentially equivalent to the "Ashkenazic" pronunciation of Hebrew (e.g. SHAbos rather than the "Sephardic"=mainstream shaBAT, TOYre vs. toRAH, BRIS vs. BREET, mishPUche vs. mishpaCHA, EMes vs. eMET, etc.). The insertion of Yiddish words and phrases in Hebrew (regardless of the Yiddish being of Hebrew origin or otherwise), as with their usage in English, is considered jocular. -- Deborahjay (talk) 02:01, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Colon_Township,_Michigan

Whoever thought that one up? —Preceding unsigned comment added by FrontdoorFreddie (talk • contribs) 13:46, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it's after Cristóbal Colón? -- Coneslayer (talk) 13:57, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to this source, it was named because the adjacent river and lake form the shape of a colon (punctuation). Marco polo (talk) 16:55, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He said "exactly". Judge for yourselves. Looks more like a reflected map of New Zealand to me. Marnanel (talk) 20:03, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Was it like that because of irrigation?--ChokinBako (talk) 19:05, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that one of the local lakes is Sturgeon. Or to give it its full title: Colonic Sturgeon lake —Preceding unsigned comment added by TrapdoorTrevor (talk • contribs) 21:41, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's otherwise known as the a***hole of the world. :) -- JackofOz (talk) 21:50, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Other word

Hi, what's other word for harmful? It starts with the letter N? I'm not from English-speaking country and don't have a dictionary now, so I really need your help. thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Atacamadesert12 (talk • contribs) 16:34, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Noxious? Fribbler (talk) 16:36, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Noisome? DuncanHill (talk) 16:37, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nixon? — OtherDave (talk) 17:26, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Noxious or maybe Narcotic —Preceding unsigned comment added by FrontdoorFreddie (talk • contribs) 17:54, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nasty. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.142.11.251 (talk) 21:18, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

D sounding like j and t sounding like tch

What do you call the process in which the d in graduate, becomes j when spoken. For example, it would be pronounced like- gra-jew-ate. It may be the same process, but what do you call it when the first t in flatulate, becomes a tch, like this- fla-tchoo-late. This can also be seen in congratulate and constituate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.86.0.130 (talk) 18:54, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Palatalization --ChokinBako (talk) 18:58, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Constituate? Does any such word exist? -- JackofOz (talk) 21:48, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so. Algebraist 22:12, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep in mind that there are a number of processes (both historical and phonological) referred to as "palatalization." In this instance, the alveolar stop (/t/ or /d/) assimilates properties from a following "y" (palatal approximant) sound; I've heard this attributed to the fact that a single articulation tool (the tongue) is compromising between the two target points of articulation. The "ch" and "j" sounds are postalveolar, which is indeed an area between alveolar and palatal. I suspect, however, that for many speakers that this is no longer a phonetic or phonological feature and instead the "y" sound has been altogether deleted in the process so that in speakers' underlying representations, flatulate is /ˈflæ.tʃu.leːt/ rather than /ˈflæ.tju.leːt/. — Æµ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 06:19, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the word we are looking for is affricate? Duomillia (talk) 19:27, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Affricate is the name of sounds like "ch" and "j", it's not the name for the process of changing "d" to "j". —An gr 20:16, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Americans

Why do they talk through their noses? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.142.11.251 (talk) 21:04, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Previous offensive reply deleted -- SGB

The question is probably an attempt to be offensive to Americans. However if the question is treated seriously then the answer is that they mostly don't, they use their lungs to push air through their vocal cords and the sound mostly passes through their mouth where it is shaped and processed to form words and other sounds. Some of the sound will pass through the nose. A blocked nose obviously causes a differnt type of sound to be made. As for "Why", generally folk learn to speak by mimicing those around them, so if those around speak with a particular dialect or patois then the individual will tend to do the same. -- SGBailey (talk) 22:08, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because we haven't mastered the art of sounding like we have a hot potato in our mouth? -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:28, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is from the book "Deutsch heute: Grundstufe" (1974), page xxxii.

"To make these long German vowels sound right, pronounce them with a lot more energy than the corresponding English vowel sounds. Our English vowels sound lackadaisical and funny to Germans. They say we talk as if we had a hot potato in our mouths--because we pronounce our vowels with so little energy."

-- Wavelength (talk) 18:33, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A Frenchman I know says Brits talk like they have a hot potato in the mouth and Americans sound like the adults in the Charlie Brown animated cartoons. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:05, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whether the question was intended to be offensive or not, it is true that some American accents (e.g. Western New York State) nasalize some vowels (especially /æ/) spontaneously (i.e. even when they're not next to nasal consonants). I remember hearing a local TV news reporter from Binghamton, New York, pronounce his own surname, Catlin, in such a way that I thought he was saying "Cantlin". And I've heard someone else pronounce the name "Patsy" so it sounds like "Pantsy". But it would be a tremendous overgeneralization to say all Americans do that. —An gr 06:28, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See Nasalization, Nasal consonant, and Nasal vowel. This is common in many, even most languages. Some perhaps more than others, though I don't think English or even American English is all that extreme compared to all other languages. Probably somewhere in the middle. Pfly (talk) 10:03, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Detailed information about nasalization in different languages is available at WALS - Feature/Chapter 10: Vowel Nasalization.

-- 18:41, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

"Results" speak

I have observed that if someone enters 5 events, wins 3 and loses 2 that an American (USA) will say "3 and 2" whilst an Englishman will say "3 out of 5". Is my observation accurate? How did it arise? What do other countries do (even non English speaking ones)? Is there a wikipedia article about any of this? -- SGBailey (talk) 22:02, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My experience of collectable card game tournaments in the UK is that one speaks of someone as being '3 and 2'. This may be a result of American dominance of the industry though. Algebraist 22:07, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

After Umteen decades, the first time I ever came across "3 and 2" and understood what it meant was this summer. I had heard it before but never realised that it was a report of some results. (I'm UKish.) -- SGBailey (talk) 22:11, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"3 and 2" sounds like a matchplay score. DuncanHill (talk) 22:13, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the term for the "3 and 2"-type scoring is Win-Loss Record, although that page currently points to an article on Baseball, which could explain why it is prevalent in the US vs. the UK. You'll also sometimes see the number of tie (draw) results given as a third number, which leads to the pun in the gameshow title Win, Lose or Draw. -- 128.104.112.147 (talk) 00:15, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are a couple of reasons why this form would be more common in the U.S. First, soccer ranks teams using "points" rather than strictly by a won-loss record. So while a baseball fan may say the team is 3-2, a soccer fan is more likely to say the team has 9 points through five games. Second, British sports standings use the form wins-draws-losses, so the team in question would actually be 3-0-2. Baseball and basketball have no ties (draws), while hockey and American football put draws at the end: 3-2-0. Ties are so rare in American football that they're usually left out. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:26, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with Mwalcoff. See also Group tournament ranking system. I think soccer usage has influenced British usage in sports like rugby and boxing where draws are rarer. jnestorius^(talk) 13:23, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Filipino

What are some Filipino words that were included in the International English Dictionary? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.224.52.44 (talk) 23:14, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dunno about that dictionary, but we have an article List of English words of Tagalog origin. Fribbler (talk) 10:02, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

September 4

French translation

In music, what would the word dehors mean, as in trés en dehors or fort et trés en dehors? 220.244.104.23 (talk) 10:11, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A google search for "en dehors" suggests it means "emphasised". Fribbler (talk) 11:19, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Our article Musical terminology says en dehors means "prominently" (Musical terminology#E). DuncanHill (talk) 12:39, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

learning french

does anyone know a good teach yourself course/book or anything for learning french from scratch that is based on learning and understanding the grammatical structure of the language as opposed to the seemingly popular system of just rote learning? thank you. Philc 0780 20:20, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure if I know what you mean by "rote learning," but the best French program I've ever encountered is French in Action. It's all in French—no English comparisons, but it's clear and thorough and rarely gets frustrating. The workbook of the program discusses grammar in detail, and there is no rote memorization because each lessons expands off of the last and there is enough repetition that you memorize words naturally..--El aprendelenguas (talk) 00:28, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rote learning is often used where I come from to describe learning from repetition as opposed to learning from understanding. Sorry, I didn't realise it may not be in common circulation. 92.21.120.224 (talk) 10:23, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

People learn in different ways, and often misjudge the difficulty of learning another language, especially after adolescence. One issue is what you mean by "learn a language." Learn to read it? Learn to write it? Understand it when spoken? Speak it? And for each of those: in what context?

So I'll respond to the question with a question: what do you want to learn French for? Do you want to read literature? Understand French films without subtitles? Feel comfortable on vacation? Get a job in a francophone environment?

You might take a look at online offerings like Frenchpod or Coffee Break French. If you already speak some French but don't have much chance to practice, my original research suggests you can get a lot more practice in an immersive online environment like Second Life; I've used more French there (both in text and in voice chat) during the past eight months than in the previous eight years. --- OtherDave (talk) 11:46, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have been to France a few times and I love it, though I speak next to no French and have relied heavily on friends who are bilingual, I prefer it there to the UK and would probably want to be able to stay there for extended periods of time, so really the full whack, learn to read and speak the language in both formal and informal contexts. Philc 0780 13:29, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

You might seek out textbooks used in courses to teach French reading comprehension to graduate students. In such courses, the students are mainly interested in learning just enough of the language to be able to read French-language technical articles in their own academic area -- and the corresponding textbooks make little pretense to teaching conversational skills, and have a higher proportion of grammatical analysis, and a much lower proportion of drill than texts aimed at ordinary undergrauate-level language classes... AnonMoos (talk) 13:06, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

September 5

Scunthorpe

What do residents of Scunthorpe call themselves? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 1000kA (talk • contribs) 00:56, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dave, Steve, Andrea, Alison, Tom, Peter...But more seriously I (and I live around 40 miles from Scunthorpe) refer to the place as 'Scunny' and quite a lot of people seem to refer to it as that. To be fair that's more the place than the people though. I doubt they are called 'scunthorpians' (like mancunians or liverpudians) by anybody. There isn't distinctive enoguh of a Scunthorpe accent to warrant its own name/locational reference, plus it doesn't lend itself to a short-form description (for obvious reasons) as well as some would. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 09:47, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Translation requested

I'm translating Twinkle for the french wiki. However, due to my null understanding of French language, I'll like to request translation of the next words:

Deletion of articles

Notify if possible (tooltip: Notifies the original author)

General criteria
- Not encyclopedic (tooltip: Pages that do not have encyclopedic importance)
- Pure vandalism (tooltip: Vandalism)
- Blatant advertisement (tooltip: Advertisement in articles)
- User request
- Redirects to nonexistent pages
- Re-created material (tooltip:
- Other reason (tooltip: Choose another reason)

(popup: Please write a reason)

Thanks, Macy 03:07, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

French instruction videos

Hi, I'm just curious about some videos that I had seen. They were for people learning French, and had a 1980s look to them. All the dialogues were in French, and the lessons were episodes with stories. The main characters were a young man and a young lady, and the young man's name was Vincent. He had a cute face and brown hair. The young lady was also cute, and reminded me of the teacher from Carrusel.

There are two episodes that I remember. One was where Vincent was invited to a family with kids. There was a budgie in a cage but Vincent made a mistake and the bird got away. Another episode was where Vincent and the young lady were working at the front desk of a hotel, instead of someone else. Vincent was saying things like "C'est facile!" and he was all smiles. But then lots of people rushed in at once and he ended up saying "C'est tres difficile," or something like that.

I think the video was sponsored by the académie française but I'm not sure about that. Does anyone have any idea what the title could be? --Kjoonlee 03:25, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Corrupted Spanish word for misprinted/overstock clothing worn by impoverished citizens in Latin America?

I have /heard/ this word in casual conversation 2 or 3 times in the past year. It seems that there is a Spanish or "Spanglish" TERM used in the United States for misprinted/ overstock/ teams-that-didn't win clothing that is donated to charities an worn in Latin America.

No amount of Google-ing or other research is giving me any answers...perhaps because I have no Spanish language skills and additionally no memory of the way the word sounds!

Thanks in advance.

221.218.168.101 (talk) 14:56, 5 September 2008 (UTC)KB_in_Beijing[reply]

As a note, I DID find information about Africa: [2] In Togo, the castoffs are called "dead white men's clothing." Few people in that West African country believe that a living person would throw away anything this good. Consumers in Uganda, Kenya and Tanzania call the used clothing mitumba, the Swahili word for bale. 221.218.168.101 (talk) 15:12, 5 September 2008 (UTC) KB_in_Beijing[reply]

Would anyone be interested in helping me with an English to Latin or Latin to English translation?

[1] Chambers 20th Century Dictionary, New Edition 1983, p. 861

[1]