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

May 19

critter words with a certain stress pattern

Hi language lovers, I'm hoping you can help me brainstorm a list of animals/birds/insects/fish whose names meet the following criteria:

• three syllables
• stress on the middle syllable

So far I have mosquito, hyena and flamingo but would appreciate as many other suggestions as possible. Thanks, 184.147.137.171 (talk) 12:28, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Gorilla; Bonobo. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 12:32, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Opossum, coati, impala, beluga, gourami. Deor (talk) 12:54, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Koala. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 13:21, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

A nubile, but flighty, impala

Wants to marry a handsome koala.

Since gum trees are lacking

In Kenya, she's packing

To seek one in far-off Bodalla. —Deor (talk) 22:10, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Far worse fared a grizzly gorilla

Who married a cuddly chinchilla,

For now he requests

Paternity tests

When out came a fluffy godzilla. ---Sluzzelin talk 06:45, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Piranha, Alsatian, St Bernard, Retriever, Iguana Bluap (talk) 13:46, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Okapi, Cicada - Lindert (talk) 13:57, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

There's a long list downloadable as a zip-file here, click on "amphibrach 010" (see also the article on amphibrach). ---Sluzzelin talk 14:02, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

(Okay, it's quite long, and the animals are scattered sparsley. Of the ones not mentioned so far, I saw arachnid and chinchilla, but didn't go beyond yet). ---Sluzzelin talk 14:07, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you all, these are great! I will definitely review Sluzzelin's list, that's fantastically useful and I thank you, but if any more do occur to anyone do please keep them coming. 184.147.137.171 (talk) 17:00, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Alpaca, vicuña, guanaco. - Lindert (talk) 19:34, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Constrictor? Some people say chim-PAN-zee. Dalmatian. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 21:02, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

"St Bernard" might work if pronounced as the name of a British church, but it doesn't fit in American English. The rest do. μηδείς (talk) 22:05, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Rosella, Trevalla, Trevally, canary. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 23:06, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Agouti. I think. I read that much more than I hear it. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:59, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Crustacean. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 08:26, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Red Panda165.212.189.187 (talk) 18:45, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Red Panda doesn't work, it has two primary stresses, ans doe St Bernard in American. μηδείς (talk) 03:35, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Whatever, I stress it the same way I do all the other words listed above (eg chinchilla)?165.212.189.187 (talk) 17:43, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Again, thanks all. Red Panda actually would work in the context I need (not a limerick, though those were quite amusing!), so I've added a bunch similar to my list, such as king penguin, grey owl. But the true amphibrachs are perfect. Thanks everyone. 184.147.137.171 (talk) 18:06, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Query: Does "owl" have 2 syllabubs in your idiolect? I've never encountered that. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 22:36, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, definitely two syllables, not sure about the puddings :) For me it's a perfect rhyme with towel. 184.147.137.171 (talk) 11:26, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Ah, that's the thing. For me, "towel" is one syllable. Same for "bowel", "foul", "fowl", "howl", "jowl", "Powell" and "vowel". -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 11:40, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

JIM CROW What is the origin of this term, meaning discriminatory laws against African Americans

Please tell me who was the original Jim Crow. Was it a character from Dumbo, the Walt Disney Movie and if so, how did come by its current meaning? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.190.171.238 (talk) 23:28, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Please see Jim Crow laws. Bus stop (talk) 23:30, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

The name goes back a century or more before the Disney movie, according to the generally accepted story... AnonMoos (talk) 00:44, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

According to the article, that term "Jim Crow" was highly offensive, but presumably it's still used because of its historical significance, along with being obsolete now. But in pop culture, crows were used to symbolize black people, long before Disney came along. Moran and Mack,[1] for example. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:48, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Apparently the earliest use of the term was the song "Jump Jim Crow", dating from 1828. The song was performed in blackface so the association with crude black sterotypes was already well established. --Jayron32 02:36, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

May 20

Fuck

Hi, What is an idiomatic expression involving the word 'fuck' which means 'to be very difficult', as said of an exam? I considered "It [the exam] was fucked up" but that didn't seem specific enough and had the wrong connotation. "It fucked me over" seems odd. Obviously "It was fucking difficult" does not meet the idiomatic requirement. Thanks in advance. 72.128.82.131 (talk) 00:05, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Do you have reason to believe such an idiomatic expression exists? Bus stop (talk) 00:07, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Could say it was a mindfuck. Especially if it seemed intentionally tricky. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:03, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

• That test was a motherfucker. Looie496 (talk) 01:17, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Or the test was a real fucker. That would do, and is perfectly acceptable in my dialect. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 08:15, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

The exam was difficult as fuck :D 109.99.71.97 (talk) 18:19, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

ClusterF#(%; SNAFU165.212.189.187 (talk) 18:40, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Chinese names in book pages - What are the characters?

Hi! I would like to know what the Chinese characters are from these book pages?

• p. 92 - Poplar Island Press/Pappelinsel-Werkstatt/Yangshudao, Vincenz Hundhausen/Hong Taosheng, Sonderausgaben/Tekan
• page 93: Herbert Mueller/Mi Songlin, Forschungen and Fortschritte/Yanjiu yu jinbu, Wolfgang Franke/Fu Wukang

Thank you, WhisperToMe (talk) 08:37, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Yangshudao = 楊樹島 - a person name, Hong Taosheng = 洪濤生 - a person name, Tekan = 特刊 - special publication

Mi Songlin = 米松林 - a person name, Yanjiu yu jinbu = 研究與進步 - research and advancement，Fu Wukang = 傅吾康 - a person name -- Justin545 (talk) 10:49, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much :) (in the case of Yangshudao it seems like it was used as the name of a publishing company but it could easily be the name of a person too) WhisperToMe (talk) 14:54, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Because 楊 is one of Chinese last names, but I could be wrong... -- Justin545 (talk) 18:42, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

楊 is a Chinese last name. It also means "poplar" and that is part of "Poplar Island Press" WhisperToMe (talk) 20:07, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Homologate and prolepsis

I'm wondering what's a clear definition of these words in the context of epic simile, or just simile in general. I'm attempting to rewrite that article, and I've come across these words several times in my research. Context tells me that homologate essentially means that there are precise parallels between what is being compared and what it is being compared to. Prolepsis essentially seems to mean foreshadowing. Neither our article homology nor prolepsis seems to give a reasonable definition for this context, and I feel like my contextual inferences lack. Here is one of the articles that uses these terms. If anyone could shed some light on these terms generally (in the context of epic simile) or, especially, explain more specifically how they are used in this article, I would be forever grateful. ÷seresin 09:55, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

I believe the term "homology" comes from the Greek originally meaning "to name alike", and can mean several different things depending on the context, sometimes times it just means "agreement", (see, for example, homologation), but it can be used to indicate certain types of comparisons or analogies; for example in chemistry a homologous series is a group of molecules which differ by a single, repeating unit (c.f. acetaldehyde, propionaldehyde, butyraldehyde) that is the group has a common thread (in this case, the "straight chain aldehydes"). Homology (sociology) seems to be broadly similar, indicating common threads in sociological constructs. However, other uses of the term seem widely different in definition. Perhaps Autological word is the best link, since it deals with a linguistic concept like a simile. --Jayron32 17:21, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

So in the Whaler (1931) you see he calls the details of the metaphor which correspond to details of the object homologues. So the comet is the metaphor for Satan, because they are both radiant and ominous, etc. Satan appears as a serpent. The comet is in the sky among the constellation Ophiuchus, whose name means "serpent bearer". So the treatment of the comet in relation to this constellation corresponds to the treatment of Satan as a serpent. So that's the homologue there. Homologation is just the creation of such homologues by the author.

Prolepsis is exactly as you say: foreshadowing or anticipation. See p. 1073: The brushing of the honeysuckle against the man is the metaphor for the brushing of Hoder against Hermod. The man thinks a ghost went by him. Later Hoder kills himself. So the fact that the man thinks the honeysuckle is a ghost is anticipation or prolepsis of Hoder's suicide. --Atethnekos (Discussion, Contributions) 23:38, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

May 21

Wash the car? Not my remit.

Is the word "remit" in the sense of "scope of responsibilities" widely used in the English-speaking world? The dictionaries that I have (from 1980's) and the online dictionaries that I have access to (from the New Age, perhaps) do not convincingly tell me that this word is utterly understood everywhere. --Pxos (talk) 00:02, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

I've tended to encounter this usage from (quasi-)military types of people, if that's any help. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 01:03, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

For me, there is nothing unusual about this usage. However, I notice that http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/remit?view=uk calls it "chiefly British" (I am British), which may be why people from other parts of the world aren't as familiar with it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.160.222.57 (talk) 01:18, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

A peculiar usage. To "remit" is to "send back". How did that evolve into "job" or "responsibility"? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:06, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Just because it's chiefly UK (confirmed by Wiktionary) doesn't make it "peculiar". I don't find anything unusual about it either. --Viennese Waltz 14:10, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

So how do you get from "send back" (verb) to "responsibility" (noun)? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:22, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

OED says only that the noun is derived from the verb, but doesn't provide an answer to your question. One sense of the noun is "the transfer of a case from one court or judge to another, or to a judicial nominee. Also: an instance of this." Perhaps there was a transformation of meaning from "an instance of a case being sent from one court to another" to "the jurisdiction or scope of the authority of a court to which cases are sent". — SMUconlaw (talk) 14:46, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

And in British English, it's usually "Not in my remit". Bazza (talk) 14:31, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Either way, "remit" is a verb, not a noun. The noun is "remittance". And either way, to remit something or to send a remittance is the fulfillment of a responsibility, but is not the responsibility itself. But maybe Brits evolved the word as some kind of short cut. Or maybe it's an abbreviation of some other word? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:36, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Uhhh, no, I don't think so. When we talk about something being within an individual or organization's remit, we are using the word as a noun. OED confirms this. — SMUconlaw (talk) 14:46, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Except they don't explain why or how it got to be that way. So apparently they don't know. It's just one of those English-language peculiarities. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:49, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

In British English it most certainly is a noun - confirmed again by Wiktionary. It has a different meaning to "remittance". Bazza (talk) 14:41, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Wiktionary, as with Wikipedia itself, is user-entered, and is not a reliable source. It's obviously used in British English. I'd just like to know how the verb "remit" got to be a noun with a different meaning than the verb or its noun form. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:43, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Maybe the same way "permit" became a noun? (Though etymonline doesn't explain "how" that happened). ---Sluzzelin talk 14:53, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Except that the verb and noun forms are connected: I permit you to do this, or give you permission to do this, by giving you this piece of paper called a permit. That works. It doesn't work for "remit". But it appears that usage's evolution has been lost (or at least not found yet). ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:02, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

See [2](16). Bazza (talk) 14:58, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

That still doesn't explain the usage "responsibility", but it might have evolved from that legalistic definition. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:02, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

From the OED: - Sense 2a) "The referring or consignment of a matter to some other person or authority for settlement; (Law) the transfer of a case from one court or judge to another, or to a judicial nominee. Also: an instance of this." - earliest example 1650. Sense 2b) "A set of instructions, a brief; an area of authority or responsibility. Freq. in within (also beyond, etc.) one's remit." - earliest example 1870. So we have: - (verb) to send back > (verb) (for an authority) to send (back) (to a responsible person) (a specific matter) to decide > (noun) the act of sending a specific matter from one authority to a responsible person to decide > the terms of reference under which a specific matter sent from another authority must be decided > the terms of reference under which a matter not specifically sent from another authority must be decided. Seem like a logical progression to me from the particular to the non-particular. Valiantis (talk) 05:56, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Now it makes more sense. Thank you. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:19, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

It's worth pointing out that, just as with permit, the verb form of the word in Br.E takes the stress on the second syllable [/rɪˈmɪt/], whereas the noun form meaning "purview" stresses the first and elongates the vowel sound: [ˈriːmɪt]. I haven't heard the alternative meaning for the noun form - a different take on remittance - before, but a look in my Oxford dictionary suggests it's pronounced the same way as the verb rather than the other noun form. And yes, as a Br.Eng speaker I'm entirely familiar with the usage, and an example landed on my desk in a memo only today. - Karenjc 17:36, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

What about "remission" which is listed as a noun and does mean to lessen work-load?165.212.189.187 (talk) 17:41, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

"Remission" doesn't mean to lessen a workload, it means "a sending back" or "a slackening", like what happens when a disease goes into remission. Remission may lighten your burden, but that's not its meaning, it's just a possible outcome. It's the etymological opposite of "mission" which is a sending forward, or sending abroad. All of these words (and also including "message") derive from the Latin mittere "to send". The "responsibility" meaning which the Brits have assigned to it does not make sense by itself. I wonder whether the idea of sending a "remit" within a court of law suggests a play on words like "the ball is in your court", i.e. it's your responsibility to do something. That's the closest I can come to seeing any sense behind that usage of "remit". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:05, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

So I suppose you will be changing the wiktionary article then?165.212.189.187 (talk) 14:28, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

More kanji variants

Hi, please see:

http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/183/kanjivariants3.png

On the left-hand side is what I understand to be the usual kanji form. On the right-hand side is a variant, with the feature of interest highlighted. What I would like to know, for each pair, is the status of the right-hand variant in Japanese (e.g. commonly used / occasionally used / never used). 86.160.222.57 (talk) 01:10, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

They are never used except #5. #1, 4, 6, 7, and 8 look like simplified zh. #2 is simplified zh and #3 is traditional. The difference of #5 is the design of font and the one on the right is more like handwriting. I'll check the kanji later as I may be wrong. BTW, did you see my reply on 葛? And please consider creating an account. Oda Mari (talk) 10:39, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, yes I did see your reply about 葛. Is there a specific connection between that kanji and the ones I'm asking about here? 86.160.87.28 (talk) 11:39, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

As for #1, 穴+犬 is traditional ja and zh, and it's acceptable and occasionally used in ja. I didn't know, but the origin of the character was, as the combination tells, the way "A dog suddenly runs out of a hole". I couldn't find whether the right side 雨 is simplified or not. But we do not write that way in ja. #8 is an acceptable and occasionally used variant in ja. As for the reply of 葛, did you understand it? I wasn't sure if I could explain about it well as I don't know much about computer fonts and the history. Oda Mari (talk) 09:46, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes, thank you, I understood about 葛 quite well -- certainly well enough for my needs. 86.160.82.229 (talk) 13:36, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

... oh, by the way, is the variant in #8 "acceptable and occasionally used" in all characters that contain that element (e.g. 要, 煙, 票, etc.)? 86.160.82.229 (talk) 19:56, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I'd like to correct this. The variant in #8 is "acceptable but rarely used". See ja:襾部. As a radical, the middle one is the standard today, especially joyokanji like 要, 煙, 票, etc. Oda Mari (talk) 09:09, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

neuter sanskrit gender in asana names

What is meant by User:Khamgatam's edit summaries:

[3]

[4]?Curb Chain (talk) 01:19, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Seems to be changing each word from an abstract stem to a specific neuter nominative/accusative singular form. In all the "classical" Indo-European languages, the nominative and accusative case forms of words with neuter grammatical gender are always identical to each other, and in the Sanskrit a-declension neuter singular, the nominative-accusative ending is "m"... AnonMoos (talk) 03:16, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

So in the context of asana nomenclature, should the asanas be suffixed "asam"?Curb Chain (talk) 06:49, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Let me clarify: So in the context of asana nomenclature, should the asanas be suffixed "-asam" instead of "-asana"?

Sorry, I own a Sanskrit grammar, and know enough general and Indo-European linguistics to look up various things in it, but I really don't know anything about Yoga terminology. AnonMoos (talk) 08:38, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Does the same conjugation have the same process as Surya Namaskar -> Surya Namaskara?Curb Chain (talk) 18:42, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

If we are not talking about yoga terminology, which is the correct form, "-asam" or "-asana"?Curb Chain (talk) 18:46, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

I really don't know what you're trying to ask, since the diffs show a change of "asana" to "asanam", not to "asam"[sic]. In any case, to verify whether these words are neuter, I would need a specialized dictionary (which I don't have), and not just a grammar (which I do have)... AnonMoos (talk) 01:45, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Odd message received by me

Sakide dec fanol

Sadren moj aero de f'astren la nomadic vase nik gas bunto zar ozea. Kittybrewster ☎ 09:19, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

I'd ignore it. That user seems to be inserting gibberish on several people's talk pages. Rojomoke (talk) 12:32, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Vandal, sock. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 13:51, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

FWIW it looks a little like Esperanto to me. Google Translate‘s “Detect Language“ thinks so, too, but makes no sense of it.—Odysseus1479 06:25, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Does the verb “to deface” implies a bad faith?

Is expression “don’t deface” really an insult so serious that a proportional response to it could be a two-days-long flamewar?

Several apparently native English speakers try to convince me that it is, but I suppose that they say so because defend their friends in conflict with me, and/or because of antipathy towards me. Suggestions? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 13:11, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Not particularly a language question (more behavioral) but depending on context, it may seem insulting. Flame wars are frowned upon, however, and may lead to other consequences. The trick is to be the one that decreases the conflict. Alanscottwalker (talk) 13:19, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Is a flamewar called for? Of course not, a flamewar is never called for. Does "deface" assume bad faith? Yes, it definitely does. Look at [Merriam-Webster's definition: "to mar the appearance of : injure by effacing significant details". Look at the examples it gives: "The building was defaced with graffiti. He was fined for defacing public property." The synonyms: "vandalize (!), trash". Certainly a negative word that implies bad faith. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 13:25, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Strictly speaking the implications still depend on context: "Don't do that bad act" may imply nothing about the good or bad faith of the actor -- it may just be, "don't do that bad act," regardless of motive or faith, which is a message similar to many of our policy pages. Alanscottwalker (talk) 13:42, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Okay, fair enough, though I'm not sure I totally agree. The context relevant to the OP's question was that the word "deface" was used in a warning to another editor, so it was used in a context of "that was defacing" and/or "don't deface again", which I would say does imply bad faith, as it's calling a previous action that the editor did defacement. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:17, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

OK. But if I say to you "you have rendered that infobox unreadable by adding that code, please don't deface it." It does not matter to my statement that you thought it a good faith idea (ie., that you were acting with the best of intentions), or bad faith idea (that is you were trying to render it unreadable out of malice). Alanscottwalker (talk) 16:35, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Again, I don't think I agree; if you don't mean to imply that the person messed up the infobox in bad faith, then I think "deface" is the wrong word, because it implies that I did (as evidenced by the "vandalize" synonym; one cannot vandalize with good intent). Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 17:23, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Not if I am using it in its descriptive sense (eg. "to render disfigured"). That is just the consequence of your act, whatever your good or bad intention, or even if you had no intentions at all, in that regard. Alanscottwalker (talk) 17:39, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

I think your use would be widely misunderstood. If you told me to not the deface such- and- such infobox because of some bad code I'd entered, I would see that as a clear imprecation against my intentions. If the positions were reversed, I would say something like "Hey, I noticed you made an error in coding the infobox; putting that extra = in there makes it display incorrectly." Matt Deres (talk) 16:35, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

You can say it all kinds of ways but what you cannot do is assume an implication, I did not intend, not only because it is not required by the language, but also because you are assuming bad faith. -- Alanscottwalker (talk) 16:41, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

And you can rationalize it however you wish, but your usage is widely understood in a way different than what you're saying. The complement to AGF is to communicate in the clearest manner possible. Like "retarded" and "faggot" and many other words, "defaced" has disparaging associations that you can't just ignore because you happen to want to use it another way. Retarded just means delayed (first def), but I strongly urge you not to call your boss that when he's late for a meeting. Matt Deres (talk) 21:28, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

No. Those analogies are absurd. Most people do not mistake a descriptor of an act for an epithet of a person. Moreover, it is poor advice to take umbrage so easily, and in such and extreme manner, because it is nonsensical, and would be the barrier to actual communication. Alanscottwalker (talk) 22:12, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I see the difficulty now; you think we're giving advice to the listener. That is not so; we are giving advice to the speaker. You tell the audience to be patient, but advise the speaker to be succinct; you tell the audience to assume good faith, but you tell the speaker to be careful of what they say. My advice to the speaker is: don't use words like "deface" unless you specifically mean to imply that there were poor intentions; my advice to the listener is: maybe the speaker doesn't know what the word "deface" means. Matt Deres (talk) 02:19, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

As you say, we are giving advice to both, which is why it is more of a behavioral and context issue than an issue of the word. -- Alanscottwalker (talk) 09:45, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Puts me in mind of a Franglish phrase I saw somewhere: I'm desolated to be retarded. I hope you're not deranged. --Trovatore (talk) 21:33, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

To "deface" is equivalent to "vandalism", a term that gets abused in Wikipedia from time to time. So, yes, it does imply "bad faith". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:32, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

In this context, I'd say deface does have a negative connotation. However, note that the term is also used in a technical sense in relation to coats of arms and flags to mean altering an existing coat of arms or flag by adding an additional element to it. — SMUconlaw (talk) 14:37, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

If English is a second language for the person using the term "deface" then we should be interpreting that term's meaning with greater latitude than we would if that person were a native speaker. Bus stop (talk) 14:46, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Probably, but they should know that it does imply bad faith, and that they shouldn't use it unless they mean to imply bad faith in the future. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 14:52, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

"Deface" has a thoroughly negative connotation.[5] The "technical" sense would more likely be called a "reface", or a "face lift". If someone's using "deface" that way, they're using it incorrectly. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:47, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

The technical term is as SMUconlaw stated; it's not "reface" or "face lift". Bazza (talk) 16:10, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

A bizarre but thankfully obscure usage. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:57, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

As someone who has been speaking and listening to English exclusively every day for the past 36+ years (give or take), I have never heard the word "deface" used where it didn't have a pejorative or negative connotation. YMMV, and like any word, I'm sure there are arcane or specialized definitions which don't have the same usage as the most common one, but if someone said something was being defaced, nearly every native English speaker would assume that meant it was being ruined. --Jayron32 15:12, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Flags are said to be defaced when an additional symbol is added to them, but this vexillogical usage has no negative connotation. Textorus (talk) 21:28, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

See above. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 22:27, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

I think that would qualify as "arcane or specialized" usage of the term. Even vexillogists would get pissed if you told them you defaced their car with a can of spray paint. --Jayron32 03:49, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks to all who spent a time for my request! It was helpful. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 20:30, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

What is the Chinese on the sign?

What is the Chinese on the sign in this picture? File:Buford Highway.jpg

Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 15:43, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

It means "Warehouse Farmers' Market". Marco polo (talk) 17:18, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

What are the hanzi characters? I want to annotate the file with them. WhisperToMe (talk) 23:36, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

倉庫農夫市場 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.160.87.28 (talk) 00:01, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! WhisperToMe (talk) 02:51, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Portuguese names

José Luís do Amaral Nunes was a member of the Portuguese parliament in the 1970s and 1980s. He gets almost no Google hits (even when I don't exclude Portuguese), so I wonder if I formatted the name wrongly. I know that Spanish people often have two last names and use only one of them; is this also commonly done in Portugal? Or are there any other names that people in Portugal have but don't commonly use? Basically I'd like to know if there's another combination of names more commonly would apply to this guy. 2001:18E8:2:1020:2974:F1B5:B231:24B3 (talk) 19:27, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia has an article named Portuguese name. Perhaps that could help. --Jayron32 21:12, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

"do Amaral" is part of his full name but in practise it wouldn't be used (sort of like an English middle name). Jose Luis Nunes seems to have been leader of the socialist party in Parliament under the Mário Soares government(s). It's hard to find him on Google since this is a pretty stereotypical combination of Portuguese names, heh...He's listed on pt:Partido Socialista (Portugal), but he doesn't seem to have a Portuguese article either. He's also listed with his full name at pt:Assembleia_Constituinte_(Portugal), and seems to have been a deputy from Porto, where he has a street named after him, which may be useful info. Adam Bishop (talk) 00:59, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Plot device terminology

I'm curious which term (if any) is used for the plot device in which one character says or does something seemingly benign or irrelevent but in turn provides a clue or solution to a problem being worked on by another character.

A classic example would be in Independence Day when the father mentions David catching a cold, which in turn provides David—in a moment of clarity—with the idea for a computer virus. The closest I've come in my searches is MacGuffin. However, using the previous example, I think that would describe the virus itself, not the plot device which provided the idea to the character.

I'm assuming the term will be something in Latin, à la Deus ex machina. Thanks for any help. DKqwerty (talk) 19:32, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, well, I don't know about an official literary term, but I've seen it referred to as a Eureka moment, which on wikipedia, redirects to the Eureka effect. Is that closer? Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 19:41, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Chekhov's Gun. ÷seresin 05:02, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Also, see this. Woe to any man who clicks that link without hours to spend.÷seresin 05:06, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

"believe" or "believe in"?

When is it ok to add the preposition, and what difference does it make? Is this one of those verbs where the transitive and intransitive forms have no or little distinction?

• When Susan told her teacher that her dog ate her homework, her teacher disbelieved the story.
• When Susan told her teacher that her dog ate her homework, her teacher disbelieved in the story.
• When Susan told her teacher that her dog ate her homework, her teacher did not believe the story.
• When Susan told her teacher that her dog ate her homework, her teacher did not believe in the story. Sneazy (talk) 21:29, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

• One believes or disbelieves a statement or a testimony or a proposition. So in your examples the teacher disbelieved the story, and did not believe the story. The word "in" is out of place in those cases.
• "Believing in" is used in much broader contexts, like believing in God, believing in the afterlife, beliving in reincarnation, believing in democracy, believing in capitalism, or believing in one's partner in the sense of trusting they will always tell the truth and never be unfaithful. The expression "disbelieve in" does not exist, as far as I'm aware.

It can get confusing, though. In a conversation, Person A might say "I believe in reincarnation", and Person B might reply "I don't believe that there's any such thing". -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 22:12, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Items 1 and 3 are good, and 3 is better than 1, which sounds kind of formal. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:50, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

To state it simpler than above: You believe someone, you believe in a concept. So, you can say "I believe my Rabbi," but "I believe in Jewish theology". "I believe the President when he speaks" but "I believe in American democracy". There are uses of "Believe in" with people, but that usage means, roughly, "I have trust or confidence in this person". That is, if I say "I believe Bill" it means I think he's telling the truth in regards to a specific statement he's made. If I say "I believe in Bill", it means I think that Bill is generally worthy of respect or faith that he'll get the job done. When your mom says "I believe in you" she's saying "I think you'll be successful because I have faith in you", in the exact same way that if she says "I believe in Communism", she thinks Communism is going to be successful because it is a sound concept. If your mom says "I believe you" it just means she thinks you're telling the truth. --Jayron32 23:10, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

• Believe--truth, Believe in--existence. μηδείς (talk) 00:21, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

• Key comment in an old Andy Griffith Show. Opie meets a telephone lineman named Mr. McBeevee. Opie doesn't fully comprehend, and his story sounds made-up. But in spite of a threat of punishment, Opie won't recant his story. Barney to Andy: "Do you believe in Mr. McBeevee?" Andy: "No. But I believe in Opie."[6] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:18, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

• To believe means to accept something as true in a specific case. To believe in means to have faith in the existence or reliability of a person, thing, or concept in general and absolutely. Marco polo (talk) 12:55, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

• (1) Disbelief and disbelieving seem to imply not just a lack of belief but a positive belief in the contrary. Many people, for example, will think or say that they don't believe in God, but many of them are agnostics who don't necessarily disbelieve in the Almighty, either ("I neither believe nor disbelieve in God", cf. "I neither believe nor disbelieve in capitalism as such; I only believe what I see with my own eyes or I only believe in what works.") A polite way of declining to agree with someone might begin "I don't believe that's entirely true...", but saying "I disbelieve much of what you just said" is rather stronger. Thus, "I don't believe your story because I disbelieve your motives", or "because I disbelieve in satanic forces." Someone seeking verification might say "I don't disbelieve you, but I still need proof", i.e. I can't believe you without supporting evidence, so I for the moment I have to act as if I don't believe you [although I certainly don't know enough yet to positively disbelieve you.]

(2) I don't think it's common nowadays to say that "I disbelieve that (the earth is flat)", more, as in Sneazy's own example, "I disbelieve" in [some noun or equivalent], e.g. "I disbelieve in the flat earth theory" or "I disbelieve the soundness of that theory". Even though it might not make the intensity of the speaker's disbelief or non-belief so clear, I've always heard and seen for such clauses, "I don't believe [that] the earth is flat".

(3) The lyrics to popular songs are full of examples of both "believe" and "believe in", sometimes from the same singer, e.g. Dusty Springfield *. The ones that come quickest to my baby-boom mind [so much staler than those of au courant Gen-? trendsetters from Oz ;-) ] are "Oh! Darling, please believe me: I'll never do you no harm; Believe me when I tell you, I'll never make it alone..." by the Beatles and "Do You Believe in Magic? (in a young girl's heart...)" by The Lovin' Spoonful. Looking through all those lyrics might clarify the distinction, but I'm afraid that studying them might just muddy it. * "You Don't Have to Say You Love Me ... believe me! believe me!" and Believe in Me

(4) The Apostles' Creed begins, "I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of Heaven and Earth, and in Jesus Christ ...", but if you want to get confused by early 17th-century usage, see all the ways that "believe" is used (with and without "in" and "on") in Chapter 3, verses 12-36 of the Gospel of John in the King James (Authorised) Version of the Bible (1611), which ends "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life; and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life..."

(5) Which leads inevitably to the old chestnut, "Everybody should believe in something; I believe I'll have another drink." —— Shakescene (talk) 15:19, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Trucker lingo

Two questions here: (1) What are "swindle sheets"? Is this some improvised device for dodging scales? (2) What does it mean when they say that the rig is "low"? Is it the same as being "bingo-fuel" (in aviation lingo), or does it mean something else entirely? 24.23.196.85 (talk) 23:41, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

You could have answered the first question by typing "swindle sheet" into Google, with a lot less effort than it took to put the question here. Looie496 (talk) 00:11, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Ah, I see looking at your contribs that you've been turning into a serial ref-desk-abuser -- "deballockers" and whatnot. Looie496 (talk) 00:18, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

A random look at this user's contributions hints that we have an obvious sock, but the questions themselves seem quite reasonable (falconiformes/psittaciformes/passeriformes and red vs white darwf capture) although some seem obvious. But none seem abusive or debate inciting. I have a feeling we have quite a few regulars with socks. Enough that I think a general check user of all contributors is warrented. But again, these questions seem benignant. μηδείς (talk) 04:58, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

One or two questions about random trivia are not a problem. When they multiply into the dozens, it's an abuse. Take a look at wikt:benignant, by the way. Looie496 (talk) 14:06, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I thought "benignant" was a humorous made-up word. Interesting to see that it actually exists. 86.160.82.229 (talk) 19:50, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I try to answer other people's questions about why it takes so long to fly from Atlanta to New York, or how to clean up a THF spill, and THIS is the thanks that I get?! 24.23.196.85 (talk) 02:46, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

You get what you pay for. :) The term "swindle sheets" has to do with forms filled out at truckers' weigh stations. As in the line from "Convoy": "We tore up all our swindle sheets, and left 'em settin' on the scales." The one about "low", I don't know. I'd have to see it in context. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:39, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Now that was one helpful answer. 24.23.196.85 (talk) 02:57, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

The only thing that jumps out when I google "low truck rig" has to do with trucks that are low-slung, their underbelly nearly touching the pavement. I wouldn't guarantee that's what the answer is to your second question. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:51, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

I’ve heard the term “low-boy“ for a flat-bed trailer that’s low-slung for loading tracked heavy equipment without too long or steep a ramp.—Odysseus1479 06:45, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

May 22

Five more times => five times more?

As an English additional language speaker, I have a bit difficulty in understanding the following sentences in Cheetah:

Twenty-two such skins were found between 1926 and 1974. Since 1927, the king cheetah was reported five more times in the wild.

Should it rather be written as five times more (x5) or should it be interpreted as +5?

Thanking you, Suidpunt (talk) 15:26, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

In this sentence it means "was seen another five times" or "on five additional occasions" so "+5" is the correct sense. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 15:31, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes. "five more times" cannot be a quantifier, so it must mean "on five more occasions". "Five times more" is formally ambiguous, and could in context have either interpretation; but in most cases it will not be ambiguous: here it would have the same meaning as "five more times", because there isn't a number which it could be modifying. --ColinFine (talk) 23:00, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

The problem is the word "times" which has two numerical related definitions: "times" can mean "repetitions" or "iterations", as in "I only did it one time, but he did it two times". Times also means "multiplication", thus "Three times two equals six". So, the statement "five times more" is very ambiguous. Even in a full sentence, it would be hard to parse. If I said "I ran the Boston Marathon twice, but he ran it five times more than that", do you mean seven times (two times and five additional times) or ten times (five times two?) It's really hard to say. --Jayron32 03:27, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

The church bell chimes rang 841 times. That's 29 times for each man on the Edmund Fitzgerald. --Trovatore (talk) 00:12, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Is the term "Multichannel video programming distributor" used outside the United States?

It's a term used in U.S. law, and the Wikipedia article has no content referring to other countries.

Now I'm sure there IS a general term used outside the U.S.. I thought it was Pay television but a hatnote indicates that the Wikipedia article about that concerns premium networks and the like, not cable, satellite and other delivery systems in general.

If the specific term is not used outside the U.S. that might be a way to get that annoying tag removed.— Vchimpanzee · talk · contributions · 18:45, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Offenbach synagogue

What does the text here on the beam in the Offenbach synagogue mean? We read it as

בניז תקפד עקיבא

--Pp.paul.4 (talk) 21:22, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I agree with your transcription.

As for translation, the wording is awkward, and the writer seems not to have known Hebrew well, but the translation is apparently: "Building [i.e. built] (in) 584 [5584 on the Hebrew calendar = 1823/1824] (by) Akiva". הסרפד (call me Hasirpad) 21:33, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you so much. So there is no reference to Bnei Akiva in the text? --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 22:26, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

No, as the second word is almost definitely the Hebrew year (5)584, that is 1823/1824, long before the foundation of Bnei Akiva. הסרפד (call me Hasirpad) 06:56, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

בנין rather than בניז, I think. --ColinFine (talk) 23:09, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

The definition of the Greek word Metaphon that is no longer in use.

The greek word Metaphon is no longer in use and I've tried to find the definition for reference use in biblical classes in place of the word forehead, which use to not exist in the language and now only does as a body part I think. I haven't been able to find that either. The definition of the Greek word Metaphon is: the forefront of the minds eye, or memory. it's the way I learned it in a Theosopy( The Study of the Wisdom of God)class I was in in the early 1990,s. I was able to find it on the internet then, but don't remember where. Please see if you can find a reference point for me and for the benefit of my students as well as future students.

Thank you for your time and consideration,

Lawrence Burney

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.55.103.237 (talk) 23:20, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

As far as I know, there's no such (or similar) word in classical Greek, but I'll suggest that, given that the meaning you recall has to do with thought, the second element of the word is more likely to be -phron (-φρων) than -phon, which would presumably mean "sound". Deor (talk) 04:16, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

I think the word in question is μέτωπον (métōpon), "space between the eyes, forehead", which is found in the Book of Revelation. See also metoposcopy. Lesgles (talk) 04:28, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Well done, Lesgles. That hadn't occurred to me. Deor (talk) 10:34, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

There's Metatron the angel (but not meaning "forehead"). In ancient Greek, the verb μεταφωνεω means "to speak among", while μεταφρενον means the lower back... AnonMoos (talk) 05:34, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

May 23

Trying to make an acronym/initialism sentence for SHANGRI

I'm doing this to make a poster for a friend... So far I have got 'sweet harmonious ambiances nourishing genial roaming incomers'... Meaning an environment that happy traveling guests can be inspired... Now, I was wondering if that sentence would be technically correct or not? Or if it's just too farfetched to make much sense... Thank you for your help

178.166.30.203 (talk) 00:19, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

PLease state in simple English what you want to communicate with this acronym. μηδείς (talk) 00:51, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Basically, a friendly environment to inspire nice arriving travelers 178.166.30.203 (talk) 01:05, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Serene HANGout for Recent Incomers? Clarityfiend (talk) 01:21, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

It still might help a little more to understand exactly what you intend. Is this for a hostel, or a bed and breakfast, or some other sort of business? Is there a reason you announce you want nice clients? Are you trying to assure possible customers that they won't discover that the people who are already there are not nice? Without understanding exactly what this is to be used for you will essentially be getting random comments, like "stay here all night & get really intoxicated." μηδείς (talk) 01:55, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm so stealing that. That's awesome. --Jayron32 03:23, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

sleep harmoniously always, never get rudely interrupted 68.36.148.100 (talk) 05:54, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

serene homelike atmosphere needs gregariously refined inhabitants. If you would like to donate to my children's college fund please inquire on my talk page 68.36.148.100 (talk) 06:45, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Scholarship Help Anticipates Naturally-Grateful Refdesk Inquirer's Lavish Addition? —— Shakescene (talk) 15:40, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

• • • • Serene Haven And Neighbo[u]rly Guest Resort Inn, or
        Safe Harbo[u]r And Noiseless Guest Refuge In Lovely Area, or
        Superior Hotel Accepts No Grimy Rambling Intruders[' Loud Appeals]? —— Shakescene (talk) 12:49, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

English title of a Kant's work

May someone please translate this title: uber eine entdeckung, nach der alle kritik der reinen vernunft entbehrlich gemacht werden soll. I could use Google Translate, but I don't trust it. Thanks for help. --Omidinist (talk) 07:56, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

This page has the title as "Concerning a Discovery by which any Fresh Critique of Pure Reason May be Rendered Superfluous by the Use of an Older One."

Note that the original title in German appears to be Über eine Entdeckung, nach der alle neue Kritik der reinen Vernunft durch eine ältere entbehrlich gemacht werden soll. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 08:17, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you so much. --Omidinist (talk) 08:31, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

This work occurs in the Theoretical Philosophy after 1981 (2002) of the Cambridge Editions of the Works of Immanuel Kant (these are the standard English editions). There it's called On a discovery whereby any new critique of pure reason is to be made superfluous by an older one. --Atethnekos (Discussion, Contributions) 09:24, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Both are actually the same. Thank you too, my friend. --Omidinist (talk) 11:49, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Note though that the "by an older one" part does not actually occur in the title as Omidinist gives it. A direct translation would be, "Concerning a discovery, after which every critique of Pure Reason shall be made superfluous". Looie496 (talk) 13:48, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Although here too I'd prefer "whereby" or "according to which" to translate "nach der", rather than temporal "after which". Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:35, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Word describing style of speech

I want to know the word that describes style of speech. It starts with "v" and sounds alike to veneer. --Tyw7  (☎ Contact me! • Contributions) 11:41, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

The only word that's coming to mind is vernacular. It might help if you could clarify what you mean by "style of speech". Deor (talk) 12:05, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

That was the word I was thinking of. Thanks. --Tyw7  (☎ Contact me! • Contributions) 13:26, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

And all these V's let me think of V for Vendetta ...... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26h-H6CFO-A Lectonar (talk) 12:13, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

In particularly thick varieties of the non-rhotic New England English, especially around the Boston area, initial "R" sounds have been noted to take on a "V" quality. See This explanation, which notes that the substitution of "R" sounds with "V" sounds in working-class North Shore communities. --Jayron32 12:43, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Also common in Rhode Island, or should I say Vode Island. See # 6 in this link which inaccurately describes the pronunciation of the city of Cranston (Rhode Island) as Cvan-stin. A more accurate transcription (short of IPA) would be Kveean-stin. Marco polo (talk) 19:31, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

what is the Chinese name for Vaisakhi?

Vaisakhi (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

--119.234.1.11 (talk) 18:28, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Is there any particular reason why you think that a festival celebrated in the Indian subcontinent would have a Chinese name? AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:37, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

It is associated with the Buddhist holiday of Vesak, whose Chinese name is 卫塞节 (simplified characters), 衛塞節 (traditional characters), or wèisàijié (pinyin). Marco polo (talk) 19:19, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Why shouldn't there be one in Chinese, at the very least as a transliteration? Mingmingla (talk) 22:28, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

It is said that in Chinese (Mahayana) Buddhism Buddha's_Birthday is better known.--刻意(Kèyì) 00:03, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

While Vaisakhi is historically connected with the Buddhist holiday of Vesak (卫塞节), it is not in fact the same holiday. Apparently, Vaisakhi is known in Chinese as 拜萨哈节 (simplified), 拜薩哈節 (traditional), or bàisàhājié (pinyin). [7] Marco polo (talk) 00:47, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

OP here. Thank you for the translation, Marco polo! AndyTheGrump, there are Indians in China, Chinese in India and several countries with significant Chinese and Indian populations. --119.74.238.112 (talk) 03:43, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

May 24

C word v. B word

Sorry for the crudeness. Will the c word and "bitch" every switch and replace each other? After looking at their respective articles, it seems to me that "bitch" is the more offensive one. A guy being called a dick (or other slang words for male genitalia) isn't much of an insult; it just means he's a jerk. But if males started calling each other "ridgling" or were called a "ridgling" by angry women, wouldn't we (as a guy) sort of see how offensive it is to be compared to an animal?? Well, I've noticed more and more girls in real life are open to the c word and use it both sexually and as a way of saying a girl is a jerk. Is there any proof that maybe the c word will eventually overtake the b word as the lesser offending and more popular word?`Reflectionsinglass (talk) 05:09, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Where are you from that the c word is LESS offensive???165.212.189.187 (talk) 13:26, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

At the top of this page it states "We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate." (bold mine). I'm not sure there are any useful references we can provide you to answer this topic since you're just asking for people to predict what's going to happen in the future. --Jayron32 05:18, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

One thing I've noticed (and hope others can confirm) is that in North America cunt is usually a term of abuse for women, while in Britain and Australia it's usually addressed to men. In the latter countries it seems unlikely that it would replace bitch since bitch is everywhere usually applied to women and only occasionally to men. Angr (talk) 05:38, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

• we have no references that can predict curse swapping μηδείς (talk) 06:25, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

But there are certainly academic studies into the trends in how swear words are used and how they are regarded. More interestingly, as this is the Language desk, I wonder if there are real life cases of two words that have switched meaning? Sussexonian (talk) 07:55, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I can't remember which one now, but there is some Native American language whose word for "six" is cognate with the word for "seven" in all its closest relatives, and whose word for "seven" is cognate with the word for "six" in all its closest relatives, so apparently the words for "six" and "seven" switched meaning in that language. Angr (talk) 10:05, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps they're the origin of this British idiom. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 212.95.237.92 (talk) 13:26, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Search "antagonym" there are some good starting points there.165.212.189.187 (talk) 13:23, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

In America at least, you can say the "B-word" on all levels of TV (in an appropriate context), but you can't say the C-word at all, even on cable TV. So, no. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:09, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Unless, of course, you're on live TV and aren't the sort of person the producers expect to need a 7-second delay for. Angr (talk) 15:48, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Yes. "Can't" as in "not supposed to". Meanwhile that "B-word" has been used on TV for a long time. It's possible the "C-word" will achieve that status someday, but not likely anytime soon. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:11, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

When I first moved to Germany it took me a while to get used to how nonchalantly people on TV here drop F-bombs. It doesn't seem to be any stronger than "crap" or "hell" in the States. Angr (talk) 17:36, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps because they learned its frequent use from soldiers? Alanscottwalker (talk) 11:45, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

It didn't used to be that way here. Vulgar language, especially in public, used to be a sign of low breeding. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:36, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Wass up?

What does William de Berkeley, 1st Marquess of Berkeley's nickname "the Wass all" mean? Clarityfiend (talk) 19:51, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Maybe something to do with wassail? -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 20:00, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Possibly; Google only brings up results from our article and Burke's Peerage, neither of which explain. "Wass" seems to be a Middle English spelling for "was" [8] - although William "Was all" doesn't make much sense either. Alansplodge (talk) 00:06, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

"speculated to be"

At [9], I queried whether the following phrase is correct:

"... Mondeuse noire (pictured) has been speculated to be the Ancient Roman wine grape ..."

Although two people there said it was correct English (albeit in one case a bit awkward) I remain unconvinced. You can't "speculate something to be something", so how can something be "speculated to be something"? I would like further opinions on this. 86.146.104.207 (talk) 19:58, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Speculate is technically intransitive. One speculates "about something" or "that something is the case". One does not speculate "something", hence we cannot say "something has been speculated". I'd rewrite it as "It has been speculated that Mondeuse noire (pictured) is the Ancient Roman wine grape ...".

That said, people do employ these clumsy sorts of constructions all the time. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 20:08, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

In this case, a combination of passive voice and weasel words. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:10, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

May 25

Question about a word found in the article Hindu milk miracle

In your article entitled "Hindu milk miracle," the word "vikramaditya" appears under "Scientific explanation" heading. What does this word mean? I looked in dictionaries and in search engines, but could locate a meaning. It was printed unitalicised, so I think it was represented as an English word. 210.84.36.154 (talk) 00:31, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Vikramaditya is an name meaning "power-sun" in Sanskrit (and the name of several ancient kings), but my suspicion is that it's just vandalism or an editing error. You could ask user 218.186.17.244, who added it on April 11, 2011. Lesgles (talk) 01:15, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Billfold or Wallet

I once saw in an American English to British English handbook that wallet is British and billfold is American. What is it really? PS: I saw the wiki article for Wallet; it doesn't mention billfold except in the intro. This [10] says it is a US and Canadian word for wallet.--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 00:44, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

American here. I've heard the term billfold before, but I know of few Americans in my everyday interaction who use it on a regular basis. Almost everyone I know and have known in my life calls it a wallet. The term is known, but not common, in America. I have no idea about the UK, Australia, South Africa, or anywhere else, but here it's a known but not common term. --Jayron32 00:49, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

I've heard the word "billfold", presumably in an American movie or TV show, but nobody in Oz ever uses it. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 01:03, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

I would call "billfold" an old-fashioned word, kind of like "pocketbook" for a woman's small purse. I would say "wallet" is pretty common usage in America. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:13, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

For what it is worth, I did a little work on Google ngrams to look at the frequency of the two terms. Of note: 1) Wallet does now and has always vastly dominated in usage over billfold. 2) Billfold saw a bump in the 1940s-1950s, which is my sense: I associate the term with people at least 2 generations older than me. 3) The difference in usage cannot be explained as "US vs British english" differences, in the sense that if "billfold" was common or dominant in the U.S., it would be close to, or even surpass, the usage of "wallet" at Ngrams. Billfold appears to have always been in minor usage. Which is not to say that it isn't a primarily U.S. term, but rather that it is NOT the dominant term in the U.S. for the object. Or to say it another way, the term may or may not be purely American in usage, but even in America, it is not now, nor does it appear to have ever been, widely used. --Jayron32 01:17, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

The word "bill" in this sense is not used in the UK either, except when referring to "dollar bill". The usual word is "note". 86.146.106.208 (talk) 01:44, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

The history of these terms may be of interest:[11][12] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:45, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

'Bills' in UK English means underpants (coming from Bill Grundys - undies) so a 'billfold' would be a fold in your underpants (or a method for doing so) but 'bill' also means a demand for payment. We use 'notes' for money. 'The Bill' also means Police, for some reason. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 05:48, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

All of our American currency carries the words "Federal Reserve Note", but I've never heard any American refer to a bill as a "note" in normal usage. In literature we might refer to "banknotes" in prose or poetry - I'm reminded of the Owl and the Pussycat who went to sea, and brought with them "plenty of money, wrapped up in a five-pound note". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:46, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

So if I ever go to America, if I meet a guy called 'Bill', I should call him 'Note', instead, just to be British. Duly billed. Cheers. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 07:28, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

In 1966 Australia changed from pounds, shillings and pence to dollars and cents. A major "character" in the TV advertising campaign (see fun video here) to explain it all to the masses was "Dollar Bill". It's the only time I can recall the term "bill" being used for Australian currency, so I'm not sure how effective the campaign was. Interestingly, we gave up paper money for our dollar less than 20 years later, using a nice gold looking coin instead. So, no dollar bills in Australia. HiLo48 (talk) 07:37, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

I've lived in England all my life and have never heard 'bills' meaning underpants. Sounds like a bit of made-up rhyming slang. 'The Old Bill' for the police (not 'the bill' except for the TV show) is real but perhaps a bit dated. And if I saw 'billfold' I would think it was American. Sussexonian (talk) 08:47, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

The most likely explanation for "Old Bill" is that policemen were likened to Bruce Bairnsfather's cartoon character of the same name, a grumpy and sarcastic old veteran with a walrus moustache. I've lived in East London all my life and never heard of "Bills" meaning underpants, but you never can tell. Alansplodge (talk) 12:33, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

I was struck by the identical meaning and similar pronunciation of:

   Chipping  (English)
   Koping    (Swedish - with an umlaut over the o)  

Both mean market town and are part of many city or town names in both countries.

Google does not mention any linguistic relationship however. I believe there is one since Britain was invaded and occupied for a long time by the Norse whose language must have had influence on English.