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

June 27

Spanish "veredero"

"Esta violencia presente, las arremetidas descontroladas de los cuerpos de seguridad, sin ninguna garantía por parte del Estado para que este ofrezca a los venezolanos libertad para expresarse, solo contribuye a acrecentar la violencia, alejando aún más el veredero cumplimiento de sus derechos." ([1]). I think the usual meaning of the word is "courier"- does it have a different meaning here? Or why talk about the rights of couriers specifically? DTLHS (talk) 06:27, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

The Portuguese word verdadeiro means "true". Checking a Spanish dictionary, the Spanish equivalent is verdadero, and veredero does indeed mean "courier". I guess the passage means

This present violence, the uncontrolled acts of the security forces, without any guarantee on the part of the State that this offers to the Venezuelans liberty of self - expression, only contributes to increase the violence, alienating ever more the true achievement of their rights.

In context, it is hard to understand it as anything other than a typo. Wymspen (talk) 09:01, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Words like "self-expression" include a hyphen; but not a hyphen surrounded by spaces, because that makes it read like a dash, as if these are two unconnected words. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 23:34, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

• Sí, fue un verdadero error tipográfico. μηδείς (talk) 20:01, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

June 28

Plurals of -ooth words

Booths, youths, truths, ... probably others.

Some people pronounce these plurals with a /ðz/ rather than a /θs/, as if they were written boothes, youthes, truthes. Like smoothes.

How prevalent is this? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 00:59, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Well booth is usually pronounced /buːð/ here in northern England (in fact that used to be the most common pronunciation in the UK) so naturally the plural is with /ðz/. We have a northern supermarket called Booths ("the northern Waitrose") and I never hear it pronounced with /θs/. I use /ðz/ for the other plurals, but I often hear /θs/ especially from people who live in the south. I consider both to be correct. Dbfirs 07:05, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Do you also say truːð and youːð? If not, why is booth special? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 07:37, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

No, truth and youth and tooth are always /θ/ but booth and smooth are /ð/. I don't know why. Dbfirs 20:27, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

(Detroit) I would say "booth" to rhyme with "truth" and "tooth". "Smooth" is different. As for the plurals, they would sound like "truths" or "truthz", "tooths" or "toothz", "booths" or "boothz", but only "smoothz". StuRat (talk) 03:09, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

"Tooths", eh? Hmm. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 05:17, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

"Tooths" no, but maybe "sabertooths", and I would definitely use the unvoiced /θ/ for that. --Trovatore (talk) 06:57, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

I live/work in London. Not sure I've ever heard the word "truths". I hear the other two words pronounced both ways, but more commonly as -es. We do like our language to be inconsistent, don't we? Tomatoes... --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 10:06, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

"Truths" is used on the BBC radio program The Unbelievable Truth --TrogWoolley (talk) 10:13, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

"We hold these truths to be self-evident" is well known. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 10:34, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Sure. I've read the term, just never heard it. --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 10:49, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

I love that phrase, which in casual language might be "It should be freakin' obvious that..." StuRat (talk) 03:11, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Wiktionary says "youth" is pronounced with a "θ" but the plural with a "ðz", which also matches my experience of how the words are pronounced generally. How prevalent is "θs"? --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 12:51, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Saying it to myself a few times (educated British English, from the south) I find I am making a distinction between possessive youth's (pronounced "θs") and plural youths ("ðz"). That seems to apply to quite a lot of words ending with "th" - though not to "tooth" Wymspen (talk) 17:01, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

• The voicing of the final -th is the same as the voicing of the final -f in knive and hooves. The loss of voicing there (i.e., "θs") is a very recent development, and sounds uncouth as far as I am concerned.

Per Heinlein, the plural of toothbrush is teethbreesh. --Trovatore (talk) 20:32, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

It would be more logical if the singular was "teethbrush" - surely no-one brushes a single tooth? Wymspen (talk) 20:38, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Except there is no final -f in "knive" [sic] or "hooves". They are spelt with a v. It would be odd to pronounce them as -f, given that. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 00:07, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

That's the fallacy of spelling pronunciation, pronouncing a silent letter (such as t in often) because it is spelt. Truth is a feminine noun in Germanic (-ō stem, the modern reflex of which is normally a final -e) and the "th", being intervocalic in the plural, became voiced. From Middle English (singular) truthe, trewthe, treowthe. μηδείς (talk) 00:28, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

You may have a point, generally speaking, but does anyone pronounce "hooves" as /hoofs/, or "knives" as /naifs/? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 05:20, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

I have heard /hʊfs/. Basically, uncommon words become "regularized", so, since you hear knife almost daily, the "irregular" plural is retained, while "hoof" is heard much less frequently, and reverts to current phonological levelling. μηδείς (talk) 22:57, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

No-one has mentioned "sleuths" or "vermouths" yet, both of which I as an Englishman would pronounce with a θ. There's also crwth, a kind of medieval Welsh harp, but even when we antiquaries get together I seldom hear the plural being used. --Antiquary (talk) 21:32, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Vermouth, at least, is a borrowed word, and did not go through the final voicing of plurals in -es that occurred in Middle English. μηδείς (talk) 00:28, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

The Welsh are in the fortunate position of having distinguished the two consonants in their orthography, "dd" for /ð/ or "th" for /θ/. They also don't make plurals by adding an "s", so the plural is (I believe) crythau. Alansplodge (talk) 21:53, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

In Welsh, yes, but even Anglophone antiquaries use the word "crwth" and give it a normal English plural. --Antiquary (talk) 22:06, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Okay, point taken. Alansplodge (talk) 23:24, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

The difference between [f]→[v] plurals and [θ]→[ð] plurals (as well as the only common [s]→[z] plural, [haʊzɪz]/[haʊzɨz]) is that [f]→[v] shows up in conventional spelling, while the others don't. So there have been bitter disputes as to whether the plural of "roof" is "roofs" or "rooves", but this is less likely with [truːθs] vs. [truːðz] — not only because the difference doesn't show up in spelling, but also because a great number of linguistically unsophisticated speakers of English would have difficulty understanding or referring to the [θ]/[ð] contrast... AnonMoos (talk) 02:34, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Other than thy/thigh, is their a contrasting pair? μηδείς (talk) 02:59, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

There are minimal pairs by grammatical function: "wreath" (noun), "wreathe" (verb). Some people might not consider a minimal pair involving "thy" to be very valid for modern English... AnonMoos (talk) 03:21, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Ah, yes, wreath and wreathe, like breath and breathe. I do count thy as modern English. Thinks. μηδείς (talk) 23:08, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

And "mouth" (noun) vs "mouth" (verb), where there is not even a spelling difference. Exactly like "house" and "house". --ColinFine (talk) 23:32, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

June 29

English ths

The above topic has reminded me another awkwardness of English phonetics. In general, English avoids consonantal clusters with two types of sibilants (alveolar and post-alveolar) put together, and even though there exist a dozen or so of the words with /sʃ/ (e.g. horseshoe, spaceship, apprenticeship) and /ʃs/ (brushstroke, washstand), overall they are restricted to the morpheme/root boundaries; not to mention that usually they are assimilated, e.g. horseshoe [ˈhɔːʃːuː]. In most other cases there tends to be an epenthetic vowel. Namely in the plural ending -es (the fishes) and in the verb ending -es (he fishes). But at the same time English knows no restrictions for the clusters with alveolar and dental sibilants: breaths, he breathes, and finally the ultimate sixths. I suppose most ESL speakers, even those who have (inter)dental sibilants in their native languages, have a great difficulty with the latter word. Why does English restrict and avoids one type of difficult clusters but does not the other?

At the same time, at the word boundaries dental sibilants and alveolar stops assimilate very regularly[2]:

• "in the": /nð/ → [n̪n̪]
• "read these": /dð/ → [d̪d̪]
• "get them": /tð/ → [t̪t̪]

However, how are /s/, /z/ and /θ/, /ð/ supposed to assimilate? "This thing" must be [s̪s̪] [3], but doesn't that literally mean [θθ]? But what about words like maths or sixths? --Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 08:29, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

First off, don't confuse fast speech assimilations with those which take place in ordinary non-fast speech. Second any fast speech form of "get them" would actually be likely to be based on "get 'em". Third, I doubt that any form of standard English simplifies [θs] at the end of a word after a vowel ("Maths" is not used in American English, but "paths" etc. are)... AnonMoos (talk) 12:49, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Keep in mind maths in British is unvoiced, while paths is voiced in American. For "get them" I would either say /gɛɾm̩/ or /ɡɛtðm̩/. μηδείς (talk) 22:50, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

"Paths" does not have [ðz] in my version of American English... -- AnonMoos (talk) 23:55, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Californian? My dialect is pretty conservative, and path is a old word in Germanic. μηδείς (talk) 03:17, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

I would doubt whether [ðz] plurals are always historically more conservative than [θs] plurals. However, the 1937 Daniel Jones English Pronouncing Dictionary does list [pɑːðz] as the only pronunciation... AnonMoos (talk) 09:18, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Interesting: I use both pronunciations of paths; it seems to depend on whether the following word is accented ([θs]) or not ([ðz]). -- Elphion (talk) 16:43, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

@Любослов Езыкин: No, [s̪s̪] is a sequence of sibilants whereas [θθ] is not. I'm not sure whether /sθ, zð/ are simplified with any frequency (I always say [sθ, zð] in my imperfect General American accent and it has never raised eyebrows as being too pedantic, then again - my English is far from perfect, so that's also something to consider). In Cockney they'd be [s̪s̪, z̪z̪] or even short [s̪, z̪], with the dentality of /s, z/ being the only trace of /θ, ð/. I'm not sure about other accents. Mr KEBAB (talk) 15:07, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Sea-locked

I saw this the other day in reference to communities in Alaska that have no access other that by air or the sea. Is this a common phrase in the US? Is it used in any other variety of English? It seems a bit odd because I would not have thought that somewhere like Barrow, Alaska, with its airport, was really sea-locked. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 09:18, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

I've never heard the term before, but it doesn't seem any less reasonable than describing somewhere as landlocked when they can also be accessed by air. I presume the terms predate air trave. And even then, that doesn't really invalidate the concept: a land-locked place can only be accessed by crossing land, and a sea-locked place can only be accessed by crossing sea. Iapetus (talk) 10:18, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

This - http://www.unmultimedia.org/radio/english/2014/09/sea-locked-countries-face-up-to-climate-change/#.WVTgdYjyuUk - shows the term being used by the UN - though they did put it in quotation marks. Wymspen (talk) 11:13, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

I haven't heard this before. Presumably an ice road renders a community non-sealocked, but what of less formal transport, eg just skidooing or dogsledding across the frozen ocean from one village to another? Carbon Caryatid (talk) 11:41, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

In temperate and tropical latitudes, having a seacoast has usually been a transportational advantage, so "sea-locked" sounds odd to me. It may make sense in Arctic zones... AnonMoos (talk) 12:57, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Having no access by road is very isolating these days - and it isn't only in the Arctic. See Inverie Wymspen (talk) 13:33, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

"Inaccessible by road" is the term I've usually heard. Sea-locked sounds strange to me. --Xuxl (talk) 17:00, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

It's not a term that would have been used a couple of centuries ago when sailing was the normal way to get to many places. Etymology online does not list it. It must be a modern variant on "land-locked" which certainly was an issue historically, though not today. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:15, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Island, anyone? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:49, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes, it seems to be the most obvious usage referring to islands; but one may be living not on an island in theory, but be very isolated as a whole, thus living in practice like on an island. So they may still use such terms as "the mainland" when they refer to the more "civilized" rest of the country (it is a common usage in Russian Arctic, but I believe also everywhere else). --Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 22:26, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

An example local to me is the Isle of Purbeck, still so called, which is merely a somewhat squat peninsula on the south coast of England with estuary/sea to its north, east and south, now easily accessible by road. However, prior to the 19th century the rather barren countryside to its west made it virtually inaccessible by land, hence the name. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.217.103.214 (talk) 00:10, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Google Books has a couple of hundreds of ghits (both with and without a hyphen), so this does not seems to be an entirely recent neologism.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 22:26, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks all. I haven't heard the term before, 40+ years in the Arctic, and wouldn't say that being sea-locked is necessarily the same as isolated. Try spending 10 days in a cottage in Wansford, East Riding of Yorkshire with no vehicle and having to rely on a relative to pick you up. We have 7 days airline service to Yellowknife and Edmonton but would still be classed as sea-locked and some would still think it isolated. Under the definition I saw all places, except for Baker Lake, Nunavut, in Nunavut would be sea-locked, see also Category:Road-inaccessible communities of Canada. Although islands, my first thought was Gigha and Sanda Island as sea-locked, would make sense, Barrow isn't on an island. But how big and how extensive would the road system have to be to not be thought of sea-locked. Great Britain, Newfoundland (island) and Vancouver Island are all fair sized islands but I doubt that anyone would call them sea-locked. On the other hand Victoria Island (Canada) and Baffin Island are larger than the first three islands but are probably thought of as sea-locked. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 12:41, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

This is an entirely different concept, but a casual search might confuse the issue: Our article on Lock (water navigation) contains several mentions of sea locks. E.g.

Sometimes a river is made entirely non-tidal by constructing a sea lock directly into the estuary.

A sea lock is one that connects a canal or river directly with an estuary or ocean. All sea locks are tidal.

Carbon Caryatid (talk) 13:11, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Latin: anima and mens

There's 'mens sana in corpore sano' but the sports equipment company Asics takes its name from an acronym of a variant: "anima sana in corpore sano". Is the use of Asics just a peculiarity of the company, maybe to make the acronym sound good? Or was anima=mens a common synonymous?--Hofhof (talk) 22:40, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Anima comes from PIE breath > spirit, mens from measure > mind. They have different meanings and connotations. μηδείς (talk) 22:54, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Google Books has a bare dozen hits for "anima sana in corpore sano" from before 1949, when ASICS was founded, so they weren't the first to use that variant, though they might have come up with it independently. --Antiquary (talk) 09:24, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

June 30

Semantic relation

I have been trying to find a specific definition of "semantic relation" and what interlexemic semantic relations are about. Can you please explain or provide a link? Thanks. Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 00:10, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Searching the term on Wikipedia redirects to Ontology components#Relationships. Is this any help? Also; Lexeme. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.217.103.214 (talk) 00:18, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

I read that, but can't say it's of help completely. Thanks for your input though. I really appreciate it. Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 00:24, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

See this short article about WordNet: [4]. It says:

"The semantic relations into which a word enters determine the definition of that word. ... Synonymy is WordNet’s basic relation, because WordNet uses sets of synonyms ( synsets ) to represent word senses. Synonymy ( syn same, onyma name) is a symmetric relation between word forms. Antonymy (opposing-name) is also a symmetric semantic relation between word forms, especially important in organizing the meanings of adjectives and adverbs. Hyponymy (sub-name) and its inverse, [[hypernym]y (super-name), are transitive relations between synsets. Because there is usually only one hypernym, this semantic relation organizes the meanings of nouns into a hierarchical structure. Meronymy (part-name) and its inverse, holonymy (whole-name), are complex semantic relations. WordNet distinguishes component parts, substantive parts, and member parts. Troponymy (manner-name) is for verbs what hyponymy is for nouns, although the resulting hierarchies are much shallower. Entailment relations between verbs are also coded in WordNet."

It also notes: "A much larger variety of semantic relations can be defined between words and between word senses than are incorporated into WordNet. The semantic relations in WordNet were chosen because they apply broadly throughout English and because they are familiar—a user need not have advanced training in linguistics to understand them. "

I can email you the article if that would help. Basically, a semantic relation is a relation that gives semantic information. These get formalized a lot in various computational linguistics/AI stuff, but really they are everywhere, they are how we know what words mean. The word "duck" has a "is a type of" semantic relation with "bird". Differing ources will use different words or symbols to describe that relation, or not talk about it at all.

Hope that helps, SemanticMantis (talk) 21:39, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Little Englanders

When and why did the them "Little Englander" flip meaning from "unpatriotic person who wants to withdraw from Empire" to "jingoistic person who probably pines for the days of Empire"? Iapetus (talk) 09:50, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

If "little" is defined with respect to the British empire in the first case, but with respect to Europe or the EU in the second case, it more or less makes sense. In the United States, a lot of the same social groups or classes were fairly consistently anti-imperialist in 1898, reluctant to enter WW1 in 1915-1917, and isolationist in the 1930s, and went through several cycles of being considered patriotic or unpatriotic as national opinion fluctuated... Someone in the U.S. who was anti-imperialist in 1898 and against the U.S. entering the League of Nations in 1919-1920 would be fairly closely analogous to a "little Englander" in both meanings. AnonMoos (talk) 14:09, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

It's a tricky one. An extensive Google search didn't throw up much that was helpful, except that Prime Minister Harold Wilson was described (amongst other epithets) as "Little Englander Harold" by a journalist in 1964 - see The Cold War in South Asia: Britain, the United States and the Indian Subcontinent, 1945-1965 (p. 272) by Paul M. McGarr. I strongly suspect that this was still being used in the original sense as someone opposed to Imperial commitments, because Wilson espoused the British withdrawal from East of Suez (the UK maintained considerable military garrisons at Singapore, Hong Kong and Aden at that time) and he also applied for UK membership of the Common Market in 1967, but de Gualle said "Non!". Also, Wilson steered clear of the Vietnam War, while Margaret Thatcher (today regarded as the archetypal "Little Englander" [5] [6]) might well have been keen to participate, judging by her leading role in run-up to the Gulf War. Alansplodge (talk) 17:18, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Farsi or Persian

Different names for one language or different languages? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 14:36, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

I think you will find that Farsi is the native name for the language, in the same way that Irish speakers call their language Erse. 79.73.131.226 (talk) 15:37, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Actually, Irish speakers usually call their language "Gaeilge". If they need to specify Irish Gaelic as opposed to Scottish or Manx, they say "Gaeilge na hÉireann. "Erse" is an outdated English name for Gaelic (especially Scots Gaelic). --ColinFine (talk) 23:47, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Both words come from the same root.[7] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:21, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, so they are the endonym and the (English) exonym. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 18:20, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes, although the "F" in "Farsi" is actually due to the traditional lack of a [p] sound in the Arabic language! AnonMoos (talk) 01:59, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Parsi (or Parsee) are what Zoroastrians are called in India, the religion originated from Persia. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:41, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

This question has a political dimension. At least in Los Angeles, emigrés from Iran tend to prefer to be called Persian rather than Iranian, and while I'm less sure on this point, I think that carries over to the language name as well. I gather that this is a mark of opposition to the '79 revolution, but I'm not 100% sure that that's all there is to it. --Trovatore (talk) 02:12, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Its natives had been calling it Iran long, long before 1979. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:19, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Angeleno Persians call the country "Iran", but themselves "Persian". At least this is my observation in general. They tend to be fiercely opposed to the Islamic Republic. I think the two things are connected, but I admit I'm not sure of that. --Trovatore (talk) 18:24, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

According to the article, it was the Shah of Iran, in the 1930s, who asked the world to start calling the country Iran instead of Persia. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:15, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

As I've already said, they do call the country "Iran", so I'm not sure what your point is. --Trovatore (talk) 04:16, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

That refusing to use it because of a supposed linkage to the Islamic revolution is ill-informed, since it was the Shah, not Islamists, who pushed for the name's usage. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:22, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

But we are not talking about "Iran" v "Persia". We're talking about "Iranian" v "Persian". But in any case I admit I could be wrong. It's speculation on my part. I note that they are generally ill-disposed towards Khomeini and his legacy, and that they avoid the previously "correct" form Iranian; I speculate that the two things may be connected. --Trovatore (talk) 05:51, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Piece of work

"Piece of work" currently redirects to Shakespeare's Hamlet. But this does not seem to cover the commonly used pejorative term, usually used for a devious, conniving or mean/ unscrupulous woman. What is the origin of this meaning? Did it also come from the Shakespeare? 109.144.210.114 (talk) 18:58, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

My old copy of Partridge has the meaning "A person: from ca. 1920. Always pejorative: nearly always preceded by nasty ('X is a nasty piece of work'); the reference is either to moral character or to physical appearance, esp. looks, the latter often with an ethical implication." Deor (talk) 19:08, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

According to this - https://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2008/05/a-piece-of-work.html - the OED has the pejorative sense as early as 1713. It looks as if it simply came to mean a person, which could be either good or bad depending on the context. The bad sense has come to dominate, so even without the addition of nasty the sense is still bad. Wymspen (talk) 21:16, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

' and " for non-quotes

I quote text using single quotes (as per general British standard). I am - however - unsure whether I should be using double quotes to show slang, sarcasm etc. I would automatically assume this is the case, as you need to demonstrate a contrast between a quote and something else, but someone said that double quotes are reserved for things which are 'definitely in the text'. -Sb2001 (talk) 19:03, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

In standard English you use one type of quotation mark no matter what the reason for using quotation marks is, reserving the other type only for quotations within quotations. --76.71.5.114 (talk) 23:36, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

See "scare quotes". StuRat (talk) 03:25, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Right. Thank you, both.-Sb2001 (talk) 12:33, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Resolved

StuRat (talk) 13:12, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

July 1

Official list of official languages

Does any institution keep an official list of national languages? The UN or some institute responsible for managing an ISO rule? Is there any procedure out there to keep a centralized db of official languages? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.4.151.39 (talk) 14:06, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia has a List of official languages.--Jayron32 14:42, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I've already seen it. But, I wanted an official list of official national languages. If for example a government changes an official language do they have to report it, can other countries reject it? Is there any international rule dictating that countries have a right to be contacted on their language? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.224.153.207 (talk) 17:29, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

You may be assuming that every country has an "official" language specified in law, which isn't necessarily the case: for example, the UK and US have languages which are "official" de facto rather than in law. Bazza (talk) 18:11, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

A de facto standard language would be an unofficial language. The situation in the US is more complex, as each state and territory can set it's own languages. Some have official languages (mostly English), and some do not. StuRat (talk) 21:34, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Specifically, 27 states have official language laws, and 23 do not. - Nunh-huh 18:02, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Huh? Why would country A have any say over country B changing its official language? I don't have a reference for the (obvious) fact that it doesn't, but I'm wondering why you would think it's even remotely plausible that it would? --Trovatore (talk) 07:55, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

They don't have a say, but that doesn't mean they have to recognize a foreign country's language or use a language they see was imposed on the country or opt for using a past colonial language. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.4.148.175 (talk) 11:51, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

I'm sorry, you're just not making any sense. What does it mean for another country to "recognize" a country's official language? --Trovatore (talk) 19:55, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Like, if it passes by the language at the shop, it pretends not to notice the language, you know, like when you see your ex in a public place find something interesting to look at on your phone...--Jayron32 01:10, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

?? This must be Incomprehensible Statements Week.  :) -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 01:18, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Apparently someone doesn't recognize the joke here...-Jayron32 01:46, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

• During WWII, in response to a German demand for surrender during the 1944 Battle of the Bulge, an American paratroop officer, Retired Lt. Gen. Harry W.O. Kinnard, refused to accept German as an official means of communication, and suggested the famously defiant Klingon-language answer "Nuts!".

μηδείς (talk) 01:23, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Spanish surname confirmation

See the query in Talk:María Irigoyen Pérez#Surname(s). Thank you. -- Deborahjay (talk) 15:32, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Resolved

on the article's Talk page -- Deborahjay (talk) 05:44, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Yellow Sapphire

Is there a Chinese or Japanese (kanji) name specifically for the yellow sapphire? Thanks --151.41.200.153 (talk) 18:37, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

What is a cercle?

In our Template:Infobox religious building page, amongst the fields that are available, there is one called "cercle =". Looking down to the explanatory notes below, it helpfully says: "cercle — the cercle in which the building is in". Apart from being the French for "circle", is there some other meaning of which I am ignorant? Google was not my friend on this point. Alansplodge (talk) 21:26, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Related to circle (country subdivision) and cercle (French colonial), probably? Looks like it was added by Pigsonthewing (talk · contribs) back in 2007, so maybe we could ask him. Adam Bishop (talk) 02:17, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank you kindly. I wait with bated breath. Alansplodge (talk) 11:10, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

How do we ping people here? @Pigsonthewing: Oh, like so! Adam Bishop (talk) 14:27, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

My experience is that whenever somebody wikilinks your username you get an "alert" like this: 'Adam Bishop mentioned you on Wikipedia:Reference Desk/Language in "What is a cercle?"' Alansplodge (talk) 17:35, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

July 2

Special meaning of "league"

This is from Tolkien's The Silmarillion: "Greatest of all the mansions of the Dwarves was Khazad-dûm, the Dwarrowdelf, Hadhodrond in the Elvish tongue, that was afterwards in the days of its darkness called Moria; but it was far off in the Mountains of Mist beyond the wide leagues of Eriador, and to the Eldar came but as a name and a rumour from the words of the Dwarves of the Blue Mountains." — Now, what exactly does "league" refer to here? And could somebody perhaps explain the construction "as a name and a rumour from the words of the Dwarves of the Blue Mountains" to me? I don't quite get the meaning. Thanks in advance for any support!--Tidrek (talk) 20:03, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

See League (unit). It's a slightly rhetorical way of saying "beyond the wide expanse of Eriador". Deor (talk) 20:12, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Tolkien takes a league to be exactly three miles (~4.8 km). So yes, a rhetorical flourish meaning "vast expanse". "As a name and a rumour": i.e., from the words of the Dwarves, the Eldar knew the name and some vague information about Khazad-dûm. -- Elphion (talk) 20:29, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes. Since Khazad-dûm had presumably become prominent only after the Eldar traveled westward across the Misty Mountains on their way to Valinor, the Eldar who returned to, or remained in, Beleriand knew of it only what they heard—that is, its name and some scattered information about it—in the talk of the dwarves of Belegost and Nogrod, on the borders of their lands. Is that clear? Deor (talk) 20:46, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Like the measurement chain, it has become obsolete. Akld guy (talk) 23:53, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

As it happens, the distance between the wickets in cricket is 1 chain. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:10, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

No, it's 22 yards, which is the same. I think it's safe to say that the term "chain" is meaningless today to anyone younger than 50 or so. I can't remember the last time I heard it used explicitly as a unit of measurement. Akld guy (talk) 04:26, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

22 yards = 66 feet = 1 chain. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:32, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Look mate, read what I wrote. I agreed with you. 22 yards is the same as 1 chain. Don't pick an argument where there wasn't one. Akld guy (talk) 10:48, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

I would say "chain" is quite a bit more obsolete than "league". "League" survives in song and poetry, so people are likely to have been exposed to it and even know roughly how far it is. From less to more obscure, I would say league, fathom, furlong, rod, chain. --Trovatore (talk) 05:44, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

See also Seven-league boots and Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea (the latter being metric leagues of 4 kilometres each according to our article). Alansplodge (talk) 11:57, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

"as a name and a rumour from the words of the Dwarves of the Blue Mountains" I presume that means that they had heard of it (and had heard rumours about it) from the Dwarves of the Blue Mountains, but didn't have any knowledge of it or dealing with it beyond that. Iapetus (talk) 09:42, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

July 3

English grammar question

Which of the following sentences is correct and why?

1. The school requested that the student resubmit the application as soon as possible.
2. The school requested that the student resubmits the application as soon as possible.

I believe it's sentence one, but was unable to explain why "resubmits" might be incorrect. I also understand that there are probably better ways to ask such a question, but I am curious to know whether (or how) the use of "that" affects subject-verb number agreement. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:15, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

This looks to me to be an example of the use of the subjunctive. 79.73.134.123 (talk) 12:10, 3 July 2017 (UTC)