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

March 13

Pahawh Hmong script help

What is the Pahawh Hmong script seen in this page for Jonas V. Vangay/Vang Na/Na Vaj?

And for Shong Lue Yang (Soob Lwj Yaj), Gnia Yee Yang (Nyiaj Yig Yaj), and Chia Koua Vang (Txiaj Kuam Vaj) (Page 1) - and Mitt Moua (Miv Muas), the associate translator (Page 3)

Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 00:31, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

This script is not yet part of Unicode (looks like it's in the pipeline) so someone would have to use an image to show this here.--Cam (talk) 00:48, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Ok. I'll see if I can find somebody who knows how to make images of them. WhisperToMe (talk) 17:09, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Currently famous people that use pseudonyms that mononyms and who are not musicians?

I am writing a paper for English about popular people that use pseudonyms, and it seems to me that the only really well known people that use pseudonyms are musicians like Sting, Ke$ha, Madonna, Lady Gaga, etc. I am wondering, are there any currently popular people in the arts, like authors, actors, artists, etc. that use pseudonyms, or is using a pseudonym only acceptable for musicians and no one else? --99.118.2.20 (talk) 04:17, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Here's a list of mostly American celebrities with their real/stage names: [1]. A common thread seems to be that it's good to have an English name to make it in American society. Obviously, porn actors also have stage names. You might also look into pen names for authors. John Le Carré is one. Common reasons are: being a woman (think of J. K Rowling, who uses her initials, though not a pseudonym); writing adult novels; writing on controversial topics. For a list, see Category:Pseudonymous writers. 96.46.204.126 (talk) 04:35, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

J K Rowling uses her initial (singular) plus another letter (K) that was never part of her name. Her full legal name is Joanne Rowling. So, it can be argued that "J K Rowling" is indeed a pseudonym, or at least a pseudo-pseudonym.  :) -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 07:51, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Russell Smith (novelist) wrote a pornographic novel under the pen name Diane Savage. The reason was he was trying to write from a woman's point of view. He thought female readers would be put off if they knew it was a man writing. 96.46.204.126 (talk) 04:46, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

I meant mononymous, not pseudonymous. Sorry for the confusion. --99.118.2.20 (talk) 05:10, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

So, somebody who uses a single name, which isn't there own name, and who isn't a musician ? ("Madonna" is the real first name of Madonna Louise Ciccone, BTW). There's the 1960's model Twiggy, for one. I imagine there are many fake wrestlers with a single name, perhaps with "The" in front. Here's a list of wrestler names with many single names included: [2]. And if we allow "The", we must, unfortunately, include The Situation. StuRat (talk) 05:23, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Topol and Bidisha are two that spring to mind; more may come to me later. But if you're really looking just for mononyms, why is Lady Gaga in your list? Henry^Flower 05:33, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

But, of course, "Topol" is Chaim Topol's real last name and "Bidisha" is Bidisha Bandyopadhyay's real first name. StuRat (talk) 05:36, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

But if we're counting Madonna, surely they're in too? Mononymous_person#In_the_West has a few more examples. Henry^Flower 05:44, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

See also List of one-word stage names. Some Brazilian soccer players like Pelé and Ronaldo are quite famous. 96.46.204.126 (talk) 06:27, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Twiggy, Pelé and Ronaldo fail the artist test.
Sleigh (talk) 07:02, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Teller's full legal name is Teller.--Shirt58 (talk) 07:33, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Banksy. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:42, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Didn't the OP clarify that he's interested in mononyms? He withdrew the requirement for them to be pseudonymous as well. It seems to me that Madonna, Topol abnd Bidisha all fit the bill. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 07:57, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

I've changed the section header to try to reflect what the OP was really trying to ask. And I'm assuming he's not talking about folks who are referred to in tabloids by their first names just for stylistic reasons (i.e. as if the reader knows them personally). ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:40, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Just for the record, I hate it when tabloids refer to celebrities just by their first name, on the assumption that readers are familiar enough with them. Whenever that happens, I think to myself "Contrary to what you tabloid writers would believe, not every Finn devotes their entire life to keeping up with all the celebrities in Finland have recently been up to." It's becoming all too frequent when I read a newspaper headline such as "Minna did such and such! See the pictures!" and I have to wonder "Minna f*cking who?". JIP | Talk 20:50, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

That may be an instance of name dropping, when they refer to somebody by their first name, which is supposed to make us think they are good friends. If a gossip columnist does that, there's a good chance this is why. StuRat (talk) 07:59, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Jordan - Cucumber Mike (talk) 10:21, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Record producers and Sound engineers Flood and Mack go by mononyms. --Shirt58 (talk) 10:57, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Nani. Richard Avery (talk) 12:37, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

In Burma, mononomy is not unusual, so you get people whose full legal names are things like the director Thukha and the actor Zeya. Those two are dead, so they don't fit the "currently popular" criterion, but if you browse through the subcategories of Category:Burmese people you may find others. Angr (talk) 15:26, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Also the case in Indonesia - one example is Yunizar. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:28, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Depending on how freely you make the distinction, Elizabeth may count, along with other Royals. For example, when William was enrolled at university and in the military, he was styled "William Wales" on official forms which required a double-barreled name, although that's derived from the title "Prince William of Wales" (as he was at the time), rather than any official birth name, or even the family name. (Which is Windsor or Mountbatten-Windsor, depending on how you interpret things.) -- 71.35.120.88 (talk) 16:21, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

The writer Alison Spedding used to use only "Spedding", though that may have changed and she may not qualify as "famous" by your standards. The very recently dead Jean Giraud was generally known by his nom de plume Mœbius, and such a practice has, I think, been not uncommon in the field of fine arts, though I'm not particularly knowledgeable about the contemporary scene, though there is of course Banksy. {The poster non-monomynously formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.193.78.4 (talk) 19:59, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Ooh, your mention of Mœbius brought Hergé to my mind—surely one of the most famous examples. He may be dead, but the recent film has brought him to prominence again. Deor (talk) 23:51, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Lots of artists like Gotlib and ATom just use their first names. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:30, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

In the field of computing, it's pretty much established that Linus means Linus Torvalds. To a lesser degree, Guido means Guido van Rossum, inventor of the Python programming language. The famous computer scientist Donald Knuth is most often referred to by just his surname Knuth. "K&R" means Brian Kernighan and Dennis Ritchie, the inventors of the C programming language. I think people also use just "Bill" to refer to Bill Gates. And there's that one computer scientist who wrote an article I once read, he was credited as Robby. Just Robby, no other name. I think he was from somewhere in Asia. JIP | Talk 20:43, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

You're stretching it, since none of these folks goes by the mononymn. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:30, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

I wasn't aware that was a requirement, I just thought being known by the monomymn would have sufficed. But still, if this Robby guy's real name is indeed just Robby, then it could be said that he goes by the mononymn, right? Too bad the only thing I know about him is the article I read about a decade ago, and I've already forgotten what it was about. JIP | Talk 21:38, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Cartoonists often use a single nom-de-plume such as Giles. Alansplodge (talk) 21:34, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

english

how i become a good litreture in english — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sonuk0630 (talk • contribs) 11:35, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Read as much as you can – books, newspapers, magazines, and well-established websites on the Internet. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 13:47, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure what the question means. Perhaps Sonuk0630 could give more detail on what he/she wants. --Colapeninsula (talk) 16:34, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Learning about spellchecking and capitalization would be a good start.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 17:11, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

I assume the question is meant to be "How do I become good (literate) in English ?". StuRat (talk) 06:10, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

If you're not yet able to understand written material, perhaps just watching English movies and TV would help. Talk radio is another option, but there you can't see how people's mouths move when they say words. StuRat (talk) 06:12, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Is German maybe your first language? "To become" is "werden" in German, not "bekommen". If you want to find a good piece of literature, what are you interested in? Falconus^{p t c} 14:20, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Do crosswords. HiLo48 (talk) 19:06, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

March 14

Chinese question

Hi! About http://www.cdc.gov/other/languages/images/chi/cdc_header_chi.gif - What are the Chinese characters for "U.S. Department of Health and Human Services" used in this image? Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 06:07, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

健康與人類服務部 See the bottom right of this page. There's a link. Oda Mari (talk) 08:25, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Oh! It looks like I missed the link. Thanks for pointing it out! WhisperToMe (talk) 17:10, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Olde Frenche

I have a couplet in Old French that's straightforward apart from one word:

On dit que cils fait la dorveille / Qui dort de l'ueil & dou cuer veille.

I assume cils is ceux and ueil is oeil, and cuer is listed in my dict. under coeur, but what is dou ? — kwami (talk) 07:12, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

doux? d'ou? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.99.254.208 (talk) 07:18, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Doux would probably have been dulz at the time. Maybe d'ou would work: who is asleep of eye and awake of heart ?? But I think that's forcing it. Is it just du, maybe? — kwami (talk) 07:26, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

(I think du is probably it: you'd expect a structure like that from the format anyway. Never mind, unless I got s.t. wrong. — kwami (talk) 08:05, 14 March 2012 (UTC))

Definitely just "du". When is this text from? That's how the combination of "de+le" is almost always spelled in the Old French I use (twelfth-fourteenth century stuff). In the context of the line it should also be a form of "de" to match with "de l'ueil". Adam Bishop (talk) 08:19, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, that pattern is what convinced me.

ca. 1370.

Thanks — kwami (talk) 08:57, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Aha, that's the Prise d'Alexandrie! Definitely "du". Adam Bishop (talk) 09:03, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks again. It's for an entry on dorveille at Wikt. — kwami (talk) 04:06, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Eppering

That word unknown to me found its way into the article egg tapping on 23 May 2010. Very few sources refer to it [3], [4]. What language is it? --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 16:14, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

It's not in any English dictionaries up to and including the OED. --Colapeninsula (talk) 17:14, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

See also [5]. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 18:35, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

The article doesn't say it's English as such, but that

". . . Central European Catholics of various nationalities call the tradition epper. This likely derives from or is related to the German word Opfer, also used to name the practice, which means 'sacrifice' or, literally, offering . . . . Ruthenians have the same tradition, which can include either rolling the eggs or cracking them in the hand. The word epper is used [there] . . . ."

Its use in both Germanic and Slavic areas suggests to me a borrowing (presumably from Germanic to Slavic) of significant antiquity, but I don't know enough about the history of folk movements in the area well enough to make any further deductions. Jack of Oz's link corroborates the word's importation into American English by Central European immigrants; it might be difficult to establish if in English it's (solely) a recent (and likely multiple) borrowing from Europe, or also a little known (and poorly documented) dialect survival in Br/Am English (itself a West Germanic language). {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.234 (talk) 00:14, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

March 15

prose so bad

I want prose so bad, as bad as this:

“ The morning was empty, like a chariot whose driver was not in it, out having lunch. Looking around, I could tell that waiting in this cold and gloomy place would be no picnic. I looked up at a church clock, and it said 7:15 (I'm making this time up, I don't remember exactly but it was early morning anyway). I flipped through my thoughts but came up empty-handed. I would have been shivering, for sure, had I not had 2-3 layers of clothing on. I wasn't too hungry either. Finally, I heard what could only be footsteps: footsteps. I looked in the direction I thought they were coming from, and sure enough they were coming from there. Before I could even recognize the person, however, I had no idea who they were. That's when they said something. "Hello" is what they said. (Again, they might have said "good morning" or "hi"). I said: "Are you John?" And John waited, at first he didn't answer. Was this the person I was meeting? Finally he said: "Yes, I'm John." ”

obviously this is bad on so many levels. I want to read more like this! A whole story. --80.99.254.208 (talk) 11:10, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Oh, pretty much anything by Ernest Hemingway should fit the bill. Or the Twilight Saga books. Angr (talk) 11:26, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

This promises to be pretty awful, as soon as they get more stuff out.--Rallette (talk) 12:23, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Hemingway has his defenders, I believe. You may be thinking of the phrase "It was a dark and stormy night" - WHAAOE. The full opening paragraph begins

It was a dark and stormy night; the rain fell in torrents--except at occasional intervals, when it was checked by a violent gust of wind which swept up the streets (for it is in London that our scene lies), rattling along the housetops, and fiercely agitating the scanty flame of the lamps that struggled against the darkness.

It is held up as an example of purple prose, and has spawned a competition for terrible writing, The Bulwer-Lytton Fiction Competition. BrainyBabe (talk) 13:07, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Brainy, did you ever compete? 134.255.45.244 (talk) 18:59, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Fanfiction.net --Colapeninsula (talk) 14:23, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

It seems like it's trying to be the literal and rather joking way that Douglas Adams or possibly Neil Gaiman would write but not pulling it off as effectively. Dismas|^(talk) 14:57, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

"The spaceship hovered in the air, in exactly the same way that bricks don't." Yes, it takes talent, which is lost on many writers. IBE (talk) 05:51, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Denominations for "police"

I recently asked this question at the Finnish Wikipedia, asking for denominations for "an employee of the police forces", which there seem to be a wealth in the Finnish language. What is the situation with English? I only know of "police (officer)", "cop", and (derogatory slang) "pig". In German, I know of two words: "Polizist(in)" which is the standard, and "Bulle" which is slang. Are there any more? JIP | Talk 22:14, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

We've got List of police-related slang terms, which includes bulls, dicks, feds, flatfeet, fuzz (for leftover hippies), etc. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:25, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

In the UK we've got "bobby", particularly in the phrase "more bobbies on the beat" as a matter of public policy, meaning to get more police officers patrolling the streets. Other more formal terms in the UK are of course constable, police constable (especially abbreviated PC) and before gender neutral phrasing "policeman" and "policewoman" (or WPC - "woman PC"). --rossb (talk) 23:32, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

"Women PC" and similar is all but outmoded now. I remember (when I was very young) seeing a van marked "Police Dogs" and cracking the joke "...or Women PCs, as they're also known." That 80s charm has long since left me, and ditto the term "Women Police Constables". If they're referred to by anything, it's "officers", nothing gender specific. doktorb _words^deeds 23:54, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Whenever I hear "WPC" I expect the next words to be "Yvonne Fletcher", killed on duty in a manner still unresolved. Our articles on Constable and Police officer may provide other leads for the OP. BrainyBabe (talk) 09:25, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I have a friend who is a paramedic in the London Ambulance Service, who always refers to the police as "the Gendarmes". He also calls Firefighters "dripstands" because at traffic accidents, they are said to be only useful for holding up the Intravenous drip bags. Otherwise, the list linked above seems to be very exhaustive. Alansplodge (talk) 17:39, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

the filth, the old bill, woodentops, rozzers, plods, peelers... AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:47, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

We have one in anglo Canada that isn't on the list. I would need a wordsmith to spell it though. Gendarmerie royale du Canada (GRC), is the french name, and the GRC was lengthed to the phonetic grrr-silly-ehs(?)--Canoe1967 (talk) 10:30, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

March 16

is this Romanian?

If so - please give a literal translation - if not, what language is it? thank you

Cvartet cu pian in do minor  ?

It's the name of a piano quartet, but - not positive about what language it is in. HammerFilmFan (talk) 01:17, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it's Romanian. Literally, "quartet with piano in C minor". Lesgles (talk) 04:17, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I Googled the phrase above, clicked the first link and picked up a virus! You have been warned. Alansplodge (talk) 21:45, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Need help in Georgian

Just to ward off jokes — it's Georgian language, not an eastern version of Southern American English.

Beneto9 is a native Georgian speaker with less command of English. S/he posted here (note that the request is now at WP:HD) asking for help with translating an article into Georgian; his/her userpage history appears to me to be a case of the user adding the translation on the userpage only to see another user replace it with a deletion tag. Since the user is newly registered both here and at ka:wp, I expect that s/he isn't very familiar with their policies, since the Help Desk post seems to be asking for help in understanding ka:wp policies. Therefore If you read this and you're familiar with Georgian, can you try to find relevant policies at ka:wp and give the user a simple explanation? They have a help desk, but because I know nothing of Georgian, it won't help me; I've searched in vain for an administrators' noticeboard over there. I understand that the user who blanked the userpage has left comments at Beneto's ka:wp talk, but the request for help was placed here after the last comment there, so a simple explanation of their policies (if you can find them) would be appreciated.

Thanks! Nyttend (talk) 03:49, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

'When it comes to wages day'

Translating Val McDermid's The Wire in the Blood, I found the sentences as follow:

'... Seaford's a big village. Favours owed, favours paid.' 'As long as we don't cross the line when it comes to wages day.'

The speaker of the first sentence is a policeman getting compliment from his boss for his good work collecting information, and the speaker of the second sentence is the boss.

I don't understand what the second sentence means. Please help. --Analphil (talk) 06:08, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

As a non-native, I understand it as "pay day". Yet, he should have said: "wage day" (if not "pay day"). 77.127.219.111 (talk) 07:43, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Not necessarily. A wage (s.) is just a rate of payment (e.g. $25 per hour). But when one receives payment for a week or a fortnight's work, one receives one's wages (pl.). I've never heard of "wages day", but it seems a more apt counterpart of "pay day" than "wage day" does. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 07:53, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Googling the phrase gives me the impression that it might be a Scottish expression.--Rallette (talk) 09:56, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

It might be. The background is East Sussex, but the writer is definitely Scottish. The point is, however, not what wages day means, but what the meaning of the whole sentence is. --Analphil (talk) 12:03, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I'd guess it refers to the idea of having your finances balanced by wages day, i.e. not spending more than you've earned, not being in debt. It's like a day of reckoning or day of accounting - you can perform favours and receive favours but it should all balance out in the end. "Cross the line" might refer to going into the red/going into debt, i.e. not balancing the books - "the bottom line" and similar expressions are often used to refer to profits/losses but I can't find examples of "cross the line" in this context. --Colapeninsula (talk) 12:16, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

It makes sense. Thank you. --Analphil (talk) 12:31, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I can't be sure without context, but what occurs to me is that it is about corruption (or rather, avoiding it). I interpret it as "favours owed either way are fine, but when it comes to wages day, i.e. actual money, we must be seen to be absolutely clean, i.e. not cross the line into corruption or the appearance of it". --ColinFine (talk) 12:43, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure I get it myself, but I feel ColinFine may be on the right track here. In the scene, two officers are presenting information to their superior, some of which has been gained illicitly, possibly from a bank in violation of banking secrecy: "A little bird helped us with some commercial credit checking." After the superior makes her remark about "not crossing the line", one of the two officers asks her, "Don't you trust us, ma'am?" to which she responds, "Give me five good reasons why I should." So maybe she's reminding her officers not to abuse their position to gain personal favours, especially not financial ones?--Rallette (talk) 13:14, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

How to teach Americans the RP accent of "or"?

Let's assume we'd like to teach a deaf GA speaker the RP accent of "or". Apparently, we have three ways to fulfil our task.

1. We can show them the exact IPA spelling of the RP "or". Unfortunately, the American speaker may be someone who does not read IPA.
2. We can write to them: "Try to say soh, yet without the s". Unfortunately, there isn't such a word like "soh", so that American speaker may fail to understand us.
3. We can write to them: "Try to say or, yet without the r". Unfortunately, the linguists claim that the o followed by r is pronounced by GA speakers as the o of "soft" is pronounced by GA speakers, or - in other linguists' opinion - as the o of "hope" is pronounced by GA speakers; Whereas, neither of those o's is similar to the "or" in RP.

I think I can solve the problem, provided that you accept my claim in my following thread. 77.127.219.111 (talk) 08:49, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

There are more precise ways of showing vowel pronunciation such as a Vowel diagram. But if you're teaching deaf people to speak, you don't show them IPA, you tell/show them how to physically pronounce the sound (see oralism). --Colapeninsula (talk) 09:57, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Of course I can teach them orally (by lip movement and likewise), but let's assume that - I don't trust that method - or I find it hard to use when teaching deaf people to speak. Anyways, according to User:Lsfreak (in the following thread), we can write to them: "try to say the first element of boy-diphthong". What do you think about this method? 77.127.219.111 (talk) 12:44, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree with your third method. It's probably applicable to many American speakers. However, there's a great deal of variability in the pronunciation of or in the United States. I think it's not uncommon for Americans to pronounce or like the vowel sound in caught (as in GA, not RP speech). Also note that probably 5-10% have two kinds of or; for these speakers horse and hoarse are pronounced differently. With them you'll have to use horse. 96.46.197.214 (talk) 12:51, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

As for my "third method" (as you've called it): Yes, that's what I'd thought, and you're the first here to approve of my hypothesis. As for "hoarse": I don't think it's relevant here, because I was talking explicitly about a [spelled] o followed by a [spelled] r - rather than by a [spelled] ar. 77.127.219.111 (talk) 13:26, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps, but for these speakers the vowel in force is the same as in hoarse, not horse. 96.46.193.139 (talk) 20:04, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

But you'd said: "With them you'll have to use horse", i.e. you'd claimed that the o in (RP) or is the same as in (GA) "horse", so how are you claiming now that "the vowel in force is the same as in hoarse, not horse"? Unless you think that the o in (RP) or is not the same as in (GA) "force", do you? 77.127.219.111 (talk) 17:21, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

The or in force is (for people who make this distinction, which is still robust probably only in Scotland and parts of Ireland) pronounced the same as the oar in hoarse, not the same as the or in horse. Spelling can't always be your guide here: for people who make this distinction, pork and fork don't rhyme, nor do short and sport. Angr (talk) 17:36, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

I thought 96.46.193.139 had been talking about Americans rather than about Scots, hadn't they? Anyways, I agree with you that in their last response they were claiming what you're claiming now, but I was asking about what they had claimed in their previous response, which seems to be quite the opposite. 77.127.219.111 (talk) 17:44, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

I was talking about Americans. What Angr is saying is that the distinction is not very widespread among Americans. That's true, but there are some regions where it's not uncommon. I gave the figure of 5-10%, but it's certainly lower if you restrict attention to younger or white speakers. I'm not sure what the contradiction is. I'm saying that a minority of GA speakers pronounce horse and hoarse differently. For these people, it's the vowel sound in their version of horse (and not hoarse) that you'd use to explain how to pronounce or in an RP accent. 96.46.193.139 (talk) 23:18, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

From your previous response I concluded that "force" is not equal to "horse" (for the GA speakers who make the distinction between horse and hoarse), whereas, form your pre-previous response I concluded that "or" is equal to "horse"; As a result, I concluded (in my previous response) that (in your opinion) "or" is not equal to "force" (for the GA speakers who make the distinction between horse and hoarse), was I correct? If you approve, then there's no contradiction. 77.127.219.111 (talk) 08:28, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

The General American accent of "o" followed by "r".

Some linguists claim the o followed by r is pronounced (in GA) as the o of "soft" is pronounced (in GA), while other linguists claim the o followed by r is pronounced (in GA) as the o of "hope" is pronounced (in GA).

However, I don't hear the GA o, followed by r, as similar to either of the other o's mentioned above. To my ears, the o followed by r is pronounced by GA speakers - neither as they pronounce the o of "soft" nor as they pronounce the o of "hope"" - but rather as the RP speakers pronounce the o" followed by r, or very similar to that accent (Yet, being rhotic, the GA speakers pronounce also the r, not like the RP speakers).

Do I hear well? 77.127.219.111 (talk) 08:49, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

In general - "or", "ore" and "oar" are homophones on the US. And not the same pronunciation from region to region. Collect (talk) 08:56, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I think there's dialect problems getting in the way. My understanding is that strictly 'correct' GA has [sɔft] (matching RP or), but in reality you're going to get a variety of pronunciations (which you've noticed - I live just outside 'GA-land' and I'd expect to hear any of [ɔ ɑ ɒ a] - I happen to have [ɒ]). The or-vowel, as I understand it, varies between [ɔ ~ o], so someone might assign it to the hope vowel depending on their interpretation (a closer or-vowel and a monophthongal hope-vowel), but I'd agree that it's usually quite different. As far as I know, the most stable way of describing RP or would be to hold the first element of the boy-diphthong, which as far as I know remains [ɔɪ] in most/every major accent, but it's rather un-intuitive and probably hard to explain to a layperson in a way they could replicate it easily. I'd say safest bet, barring an occasional outlier, would probably just be describing it as 'or without the r.' Lsfreak (talk) 09:57, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Given that some GA speakers pronounce the "or" as [ɒr] / [ɑr], I agree with you that the first element of boy-diphthong should be regarded as the closest (if not identical) to the RP or. Hewever, I (not like you) still think that the GA o of "soft" (pronounced [sɔft]) is not similar to the RP or (pronounced [o:]). 77.127.219.111 (talk) 12:36, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, bit of a misunderstanding there I think. It's soft that I would expect any of [ɔ ɑ ɒ a], and or is strictly [ɔ ~ o], though I could be being mislead by my dialect. I was thinking that even in places with cot-caught merger or a vowel shift, the sequence o-r is a kind of half-diphthong (thus a separate vowel) and remains unchanged. Also, RP or has [o:]? I was assuming a [ɔ:], which is what Wiktionary has for the entry.Lsfreak (talk) 19:03, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

The RP vowel for THOUGHT/FORCE/NORTH is usually transcribed /ɔː/, but for many speakers it's rather higher than cardinal ɔ, so that [oː] is a reasonable transcription. It's not at risk of merging with the GOAT vowel because the latter is strongly diphthongal with a fronted starting point, [əʊ]. But if you compare the way a cot/caught-distinguishing American says caught and the way an educated English person says caught you'll hear they're very different vowels, even though both sounds are customarily transcribed with ɔ. The American sound is more open than cardinal ɔ and could plausibly be transcribed [ɒ]; it also has a tendency to diphthongize in some accents. (Imagine Rosie O'Donnell saying thought or caught - it's basically [ɒə̯].) Angr (talk) 19:14, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree, and that's why I always wondered why the dictionaries indicate that the RP "or" has the same vowel as in GA "soft", while I always heard different vowels. Anyways, would you agree that the vowel in RP "or" is the closest to the GA vowel of "or" (which is, I think, quite similar to the first element of boy-diphthong and of low-diphthong)? 77.127.219.111 (talk) 17:51, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

In the American midwest, at least, "ore" and "oar" are pretty close to being homophones, with a long "o". Think "ower" (someone who owes money or something) and then run the two syllables into one. (In some parts of the land, "ower", with two syllables, is closer to how they would actually say the ostensibly one-syllable "ore" and "oar".) But "or" is different. The "o" s an "aw" sound, like in "paw" - or like the "oer" part of "George" the "or" part of "gorge". In New York and some other big cities, they drop the "r" and "or" actually is pronounced "aw" - or possibly, to this midwesterner's ears, more like "aw-wuh". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:01, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Canadian pronunciation of o followed by r. Is it like the o in "hope"?

77.127.219.111 (talk) 09:36, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I would say they are the same, both [o], but it's sort of the same as the answers for American usage given above. "Or" could have [ɔ] depending on the speaker. (On the other hand, Lsfreak mentions that "or" could have any of [ɔ ɑ ɒ a] in the US, but I would say that isn't true for Canada - and the stereotypical way that Americans think Canadians say "sorry" would seem to confirm that). Adam Bishop (talk) 10:24, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Are you referting to the whole diphthong of "hope", or to the its first element only? Btw, How about the o of "boy"? Isn't it similar to the o of "or"? 77.127.219.111 (talk) 13:08, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Just to clarify, as I did above, I meant that any of [ɔ ɑ ɒ a] could be expected for soft, not or. Also, I suspect the sorry thing is just a dialect-specific 'oddity', like how some places happen to have /ɑn/ and others /ɔn/ for on, rather than anything revealing about the dialect's vowels overall. Lsfreak (talk) 19:32, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I'm also Canadian, and I think it's true that or is more similar to the vowel sound in hope than to any other non-rhotic vowel in my English. It's not the same as the vowel in soft. However, the vowel preceding r in my or is, I think, exactly the same as the vowel sound in the RP or or aw. 96.46.197.214 (talk) 12:39, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

If you really pronounce it like the RP or - being a monophthong, then it can't be identical to the o of "hope" - being a diphthong, can it? Unless you've referred - to the first element of the diphthong - only, haven't you? Btw, how about the o of "boy"? Isn't it similar to the o of "or"? Anyways, you're the first here to claim that the o of "or" is exactly the same as the RP "or" - as far as the Canadian accent is concerned. I thought it was true also for the General American accent (as I've claimed in a previous thread of mine), however nobody (except for you) has approved of my hypothesis, so far. 77.127.219.111 (talk) 13:08, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

"Or" and "hope" could both have [ow]; "boy" also has a diphthong but of course that's [oj]. I would say they all have [o] for me, whether diphthongized or not. Adam Bishop (talk) 13:45, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

When I took and later was a TA for phonetics at a Canadian University, we were told that before /r/ was the only position other than the diphthong in boy where we'd ever encounter [ɔ] in Canadian English. However, many if not most people in the class were pretty adamant that they pronounced store with the same vowel as hope. So both probably occur depending on the person. --Terfili (talk) 16:15, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Yeah I can see that having either vowel, too. Adam Bishop (talk) 19:14, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

That's very possible, and I also think it's possible that perceptions get in the way. I can't tell the different between [oʊ] and [ɔɻ] based on sound, I have to go strictly by tongue movement - one glides close and the other retroflex, and if I start pronouncing stow, hold the vowel, and then shift to ore, the tongue drops and mouth opens. But it's not something I can tell just on sound. Lsfreak (talk) 19:32, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

77, I didn't say my or, without the r-colouring, was identical to my vowel in hope. What I said was that of all the non-rhotic vowels in my speech, the hope vowel is the one that's closest to or. In view of Terfili's remark however, I realize that I'd forgotten about the initial element of the diphthong in boy. That's identical to my or, just as Terfili and 77 suggest. I would have been in the minority in Terfili's phonetics class. Also, Canadians (from BC to Quebec) frequently have a mid-high monophthong in hope or something approaching one. In this respect, Canadians are similar to people in Minnesota and surrounding areas. 96.46.193.139 (talk) 19:37, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

The mid-high monophthong is especially common in unstressed syllables as far as I know. Also, since many people have trouble distinguishing [o] from [ow], it's likely that store was actually something like [stoɹ] for those people in the class. I doubt that [stoʊ̯ɹ] is a common pronunciation, if it even occurs at all. --Terfili (talk) 21:21, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

OP's summary: the Canadian accent (which is, I think, similar to the General American accent in this matter), has the vowel [o] in three cases: in the first element of boy-diphthong, of low-diphthong, and in nor (even as a monophthong, which is probably the more common case). 77.127.219.111 (talk) 18:29, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, not exactly. boy is [bɔɪ̯], low is [loʊ̯] (or sometimes [loː]), and nor is either [nɔɹ] or [noɹ]. --Terfili (talk) 09:06, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

What I understand from the comments of the other participants here, is that "boy" is pronounced [boɪ̯], and please notice that when I say that "boy" is pronounced [boɪ̯] I don't mean that it's pronounced [boʊ̯ɪ̯]. Similarly, "nor" is pronounced either [nor] or [noʊ̯r]. Of course, you're not committed to what I've concluded, but the other participants here are committed, because that's what is inferred from their comments. 77.127.219.111 (talk) 21:25, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Same spelling but different meanings

How is Words like 1. wind(air), wind(twist) 2.live(verb), live(noun) 3.read(present), read(past) called? Thank you111.223.177.135 (talk) 09:07, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Homonym. BrainyBabe (talk) 09:28, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

More accurately, the examples given are homographs. Strictly speaking, a homonym should be both a homograph (i.e. same spelling) and a homophone (i.e. same pronunciation). AJCham 09:40, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

See "Fast" which has a huge number of even antonymic meanings! Collect (talk) 14:15, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Just FYI, "live" isn't a noun, "life" is a noun which becomes "lives" in the plural, and "live" can be an adjective, as in "live music"/"live animals", or an adverb as in "the band play live". - filelakeshoe 20:14, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

So "lives" (plural noun) and "lives" (verb form) fits the premise. By the way, "wind" (air movement) used to be pronounced with a long "i", the same as "wind" (twist), at least in poetic usage. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:53, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Like in the Songs of Innocence "The Chimney Sweeper"

"And by came an angel who had a bright key,

And he opened the coffins and set them all free;

Then down a green plain leaping, laughing, they run,

And wash in a river, and shine in the sun.

"Then naked and white, all their bags left behind,

They rise upon clouds and sport in the wind;

And the angel told Tom, if he'd be a good boy,

He'd have God for his father, and never want joy."

--Shirt58 (talk) 05:26, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Common practice for translation samples

I applied for a job that requires some skills in my mother language. After a perfunctory phone interview, they sent me a 350 words long marketing text, which they want me to translate as a sample, without offering any payment. Is that common practice? PurpleSorceress (talk) 18:12, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Dunno if it's common, but it seems pretty dumb. I would certainly want evidence that you can translate relevant material, but the process being used gives you perfect opportunity to cheat. Not suggesting you would, but why not test your ability (and that of other candidates) in a somewhat more rigorous way? HiLo48 (talk) 18:49, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I hadn't even thought of that! My concern was actually the other way round: Whether they were just doing that to get some free translations by people who really try very hard to do the best they can. PurpleSorceress (talk) 18:53, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

When I applied for a job as a translator, I was sent a 500-word document as a test translation, for which I was not paid (but I did get the job). But they weren't getting a free translation from me - it was their standard test translation document, which they used only to evaluate applicants' translation skills; they didn't need the document translated for one of their customers! I assume it's the same with the company where you're applying. I'm not sure how sending you the text at home is giving you the opportunity to "cheat" - either you're a good translator or you aren't. Translators aren't expected to be able to translate without any outside assistance (dictionaries, the Internet, etc.) anyway, so what's wrong with using that assistance for the test translation? My company expected me to tell them honestly what materials I had used, but they didn't expect me to do it all off the top of my head without looking anything up. So if my experiences are typical, yes, it's common practice, and no, it's not dumb. Angr (talk) 19:04, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Free test translations are a controversial subject. See this essay. 96.46.193.139 (talk) 20:10, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Wow, what an excellent essay! The discussion shows many different opinions, including some close to Angr's. Thanks everyone for the help! PurpleSorceress (talk) 21:52, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

They should be able to discern if it's "cheating" or not, as someone fluent in the language should be able to provide a "natural" translation, whereas someone who tries to translate it from Google Translate would likely get boxed in by doing a literal (and probably stilted) translation. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:55, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Maybe my mind works in evil and suspicious ways, but I was thinking more along the lines of getting a friend more competent in the language to do it for me. HiLo48 (talk) 03:00, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Could be. But if the job hinges on that skill, they would probably take a more rigorous approach. In this case, if he did cheat, and they were to find out he really didn't know the language, he could probably have a chance to learn the word "fired" in several languages. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:16, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Silent words/clitics in Irish?

Irish phonology#Samples seems to suggest that some words in Irish are not pronounced at all - for instance in the second example from the bottom, the words "An" and "is" seem to correspond to nothing in the IPA. I think I remember this from some place names as well. Are these words somehow clitics or are they actually silent? - filelakeshoe 19:25, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

I would define clitic by how a word behaves morphosyntactically, not phonologically. There are certainly function words in Irish (most of the words spelled a for example) that can disappear in rapid speech, but they're not necessarily clitics from the morphological or syntactic point of view. In the sample texts you link to, I can find cases of is being reduced to [sˠ], but I don't see any example of it disappearing altogether. The question particle an is often deleted in speech, as in An bhfuil na fataí chomh maith is dúirt sé?, which the phonetic transcription shows was pronounced simply Bhfuil na fataí.... Another missing word in those samples is the a in An Ghaeilge a labhraítear i gCúige Mumhan, which the phonetic transcription shows to be simply An Ghaeilge labhraítear.... In this case, the final [ə] of Ghaeilge and the [ə] that is a are probably simply run together into a single [ə] sound. Angr (talk) 19:36, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Sorry yes, I had my definition of clitic the wrong way around, I meant whether the words' pronunciation changes (or disappears) based on the words preceding/following them. So that "an" disappearing is something like people asking "what you doing?" - filelakeshoe 19:47, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, pretty much. In addition, it can be thought of as a phonological rule of Irish that [ə] disappears next to another vowel, so that words starting with [ə] lose it when they follow a word ending in a vowel, and words ending with [ə] lose it when they precede a word starting with a vowel. This is shown in the spelling of some words (e.g. m'athair for mo athair 'my father') but usually not. The loss of the interrogative particle is probably a separate phenomenon since it doesn't happen to other words pronounced [ə(n)] (notably the definite article); but the underlying presence of the interrogative particle is recoverable because the verb that follows it always undergoes eclipsis and is in the dependent form of the verb if it exists. So any sentence that is heard to begin with an eclipsed verb -- or a dependent verb form -- can be assumed to start with an unpronounced interrogative particle an. Angr (talk) 21:53, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

What about the past tense particle do, which is preserved in verbs beginning with a vowel (d'ith sé, d'ól sé) and more generally in Munster Irish (do bhris sé) but not elsewhere (bhris sé)? jnestorius^(talk) 19:19, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

I suppose that's pretty much like the deletion of interrogative an, except that the omission of do is reflected in the standard written language too, while the omission of an isn't. I don't know for sure whether an is deleted before vowel-initial words, but I doubt it. I suspect An ólann tú caifé? is always [əˈn̪ˠoːl̪ˠən̪ˠ...] and never just [ˈoːl̪ˠən̪ˠ...] or even [ˈn̪ˠoːl̪ˠən̪ˠ...]. Angr (talk) 21:12, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

March 17

Do two wrongs sometimes make a right?

There was a recent question on RD/E, headed "Whom is David Steinberg married to?", and it caused me to enter a state of cogitation.

Someguy1221 used the accusative "whom" because it's governed by "married to". That's an admirable effort, but somehow it just doesn't sound right in this construction.

There used to be a rule that you shouldn't end a sentence with a preposition, and if that had applied here, the header would have been "To whom is D S married?". We're much more relaxed about that issue these days, but it still seems to be the case that, if you ignore that rule, you may have to compensate in some other way as well. In this case, the compensation would be to use "who" rather than "whom", because "Who is D S married to?" sounds much more natural to my years than what Someguy wrote, even though a pedant at 50 paces would spot two errors in it.

Am I overthinking this, or do two wrongs sometimes make a right? -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 08:58, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

It's dative, Jack, not accusative. 'To' + accusative is used for motion in a direction. :) KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 09:06, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

"Whom ... to" is technically correct, but obsolete. "Whom" is only used in a few set constructions such as "to whom", and then only in formal registers. That is, it isn't actually accusative case any more. It's more like a formal version of "Jim and me went", where the conjunction and triggers the "accusative". — kwami (talk) 09:03, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

It's not really accusative or dative (as KageTora said above), since modern English doesn't have those cases. It's the object case. Adam Bishop (talk) 09:10, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Which redirects to ... accusative case. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 09:13, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Maybe we could get away with calling it an oblique case, since it's used for constructions like "It's me" and not just for objects. — kwami (talk) 09:16, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Bah! That's what I meant, the oblique case. Sorry. Adam Bishop (talk) 09:17, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

I notice that our English personal pronouns article speaks of "objective pronouns", and we have object pronoun, which says they're in the "objective case", but links to oblique case. The terminology is a bit murky. — kwami (talk) 09:26, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

In answer to your question, yes, two or any number of wrongs can make a right when the violated rule doesn't exist. - filelakeshoe 10:21, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, you'll find any number of sources that say not to end a sentence with a preposition, so it was certainly regarded as a rule by millions of people. Unlike French, English makes up its own rules as it goes along, by common consent of the masses, and this was the consensus in formal registers for a long time. Just as splitting an infinitive was considered abhorrent by many; there may never have been a proper basis for such a rule, but so what, English does lots of things for which there's no proper basis.

What I want clear confirmation of is that, given a choice between "Who is he married to?" and "Whom is he married to?", it's preferable to write the former. Thanks. -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 17:57, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Oujda

How is Oujda pronounced? The only indication on the page at present is in the infobox, transliterated (Wujda) beside another language [which?] whose character set my computer evidently lacks. -- Deborahjay (talk) 09:40, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

The language is probably some Berber/Tamazight one. 92.80.35.202 (talk) 12:36, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps Oujda? There is some related material here. Bus stop (talk) 12:52, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Judging by the Arabic, I'd say "ooj-da".Eiad77 (talk) 13:51, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

It is pronounced "wodʒ-dæ" in Arabic like it has been transliterated. --Omidinist (talk) 17:54, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

I didn't say it was pronounced "ooj-da" in Arabic. I said judging by the Arabic it's pronounced "ooj-da". If it were pronounced "wodʒ-dæ" in Englsh I'd imagine it would start with a W. Eiad77 (talk) 22:17, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

But it does start with a W. 87.68.241.159 (talk) 22:21, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

But it seems to be a Berber word - rather than an Arabic word, so the "j" is pronounced like a French j (as it is always in Berber) - rather than like an English/Arabic j. Yes, this word is written in Arabic, whose "j" is pronounced like the English j, but note that the Berber language is usually written in Arabic scripts (unless it's written in Tifinagh scripts). Additionally, the speaker here pronounces it with a French j rather than with an English/Arabic j. Yes, the speaker is from France, but note that a big Berber minority lives in France. 87.68.241.159 (talk) 22:21, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Oujda (وجدة) is a city in Morocco and has a page in Arabic Wikipedia: here. --Omidinist (talk) 04:57, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

BTW, I may remind you the pronunciation of the word oui in French. --Omidinist (talk) 05:24, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

I can't figure out why you remine me of obvious facts. Yes, it's a Moroccan city, who said it wasn't? But notice that most (or almost all) of the Moroccan geographical names are from a Berber origin, and that's why I claimed that the name of that city seemed to be a Berber word - rather than an Arabic word.

Btw, the word oui in French is pronounced like the English "We" (or very similar to it), but when not preceding a vowel, the French "ou" is pronounced like the English "ou" (in the English "route" and likewise). However, I didn't resolve whether or not the word "Oujda" begins with the consonant [w] or with the vowel [u]: The Arabic transliteration suggests the consonant [w], whereas the French transliteration suggests the vowel [u], as the speaker here - does.

(OP): Two objectives here: (a) adding the IPA to the Oujda page, and (b) a Hebrew spelling, which by convention is based on the phonic values rather than an alphabetic transliteration. From the contributions above (thanks, all!), it seems that all the first syllable's phonemes may differ between the local Berber language and Arabic. What resolution do you suggest for present purposes? -- Deborahjay (talk) 06:35, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

It's not easy to answer (a), because the Arabic transliteration وجدة - having the consonant [w] in the begining, gave us the consonants only - without vowels (although Arabic does have signs for vowels), and this transliteration contradicts the French transliteration Oujda - having the vowel [u] in the begining.

As for (b): if we trust the speaker here, then I (as a native Hebrew speaker), would write אוּזְ'דַא - which is probably the safest transliteration (or: אוּזְ'דַה, which is a more common way for transliterating such a word, yet it's less safe, because most of the Hebrew readers ignore the "Mapiq"s, whereas some of the ה 's that end words - are pronounced as the consonant [h], e.g. in להּ, which is properly pronounced: [lah] rather than [la], unless it's a the name of the tone la, in which case the word לה is pronounced [la]). 77.124.86.28 (talk) 09:00, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Ummm, I neglected to mention that our dedicated data base program disallows diacritics other than the apostrophe, hence we maintain our key word list with nearest approximations. I can, however, indicate the Arabic pronunciation [אוג'דה] as an alternative to the French [אוז'דה], and change the primary/secondary order if and when we discover that the Arabic is prevalent or closer to the Berber if that's dominant. Likewise the IPA for the Oujda page. -- Deborahjay (talk) 09:19, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

To transcribe it "אוג'דה" (i.e. with a 'ג rather than with a 'ז) - on the ground of the Arabic transliteration, is like to transcribe the most common Arabic name - into Hebrew: מוהמד - on the ground that the English transliteration for that Arabic name is Muhammad. in other words, מוהמד is not the (direct) Hebrew transliteration for the original name, but rather is the (indirect) Hebrew transliteration for the English transliteration for the original name. Similarly, אוג'דה is not the (direct) Hebrew transliteration for the original (local) name of the city, but rather is the (indirect) Hebrew transliteration for the Arabic transliteration for the original (local) name of the city. Note that Berber does not have the English consonant j, whereas Arabic does not have the French consonant j (pronounced like the English s in "measure"), and that's why the Arabic transliteration uses a letter pronounced like the English j - instead of a letter pronounced like the French j, although the original local name - being a Berber word - must be pronounced with a French j - rather than with an English j. Notice that the speaker here pronounces it with a French j. 77.124.86.28 (talk) 10:36, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

And or but?

Which sentence sounds better?

French is his native language but he has a perfect command of the English language, which he has spoken since the age of 8 in order to communicate with the Canadian side of his family.

French is his native language and he has a perfect command of the English language, which he has spoken since the age of 8 in order to communicate with the Canadian side of his family.

Eiad77 (talk) 11:42, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

They both sound fine, depending on what you are trying to emphasize. Adam Bishop (talk) 13:53, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. The "but" version makes it sound as if it's surprising he is fluent in both, while the "and" version does not. StuRat (talk) 07:55, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Agree with StuRat, the "but" indicates that the speaker thinks it is remarkable or unusual that he also speaks English. Roger (talk) 09:37, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

March 19

use of the word DANDER to refer to animal/bird detritus

I came across DANDER in a recent Reader's Digest book, where it was clearly referring to the dust deposited by animals; but I had never before come across this usage of the word, which to me, and all the dictionaries I could find in the house, list as a US expression relating to one's temper (or lost if it). (I live in the UK; so perhaps this is another common US usage that I'm not unaware of.) I found the 'dander' link in Wikipedia, but there's no explanation regarding the derivation. Do you know when this alternative usage came into being, and how or why it came to be used this way? Ditton25 (talk) 08:46, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

According to the OED, dander in the sense of a "ruffled or angry temper" is "[c]onjectured by some to be a fig. use of dander n.³, dandruff, scurf; but possibly fig. of dander n.², ferment". It appears that dander in the sense of the dust deposited by furry animals is a variant of dandruff, but OED does not state when the word first appeared. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 09:28, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

At my home in the southeast US, we speak of people being allergic to cat dander. I am not aware of other uses of the word. Falconus^{p t c} 09:38, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Me too. This is the first time I have heard of dander being used to mean a "ruffled or angry temper". The OED reports that this is originally a US colloquial usage. — Cheers, JackLee ^–talk– 10:21, 19 March 2012 (UTC)