Welcome to the language section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.

Select a section:

WP:RD/L

Want a faster answer?

Main page: Help searching Wikipedia

How can I get my question answered?

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

Ready? Ask a new question!

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Wikipedia:Reference desk/Guidelines

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

March 12

Guinness only sold here

This picture from a bar in Dublin says "Guinness only sold here". What does it mean? "The only beer you'll get here is Guinness"? "This is the only place where you can get Guinness"? "We sell Guinness here, we don't rent it or give it away"? JIP | Talk 00:52, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Each of those is a possibility, but given the Irish pub context it will be understood to mean the first of these. My guess is that it's a mixture of wishful thinking by Diageo and their attempt at subliminal dissuasion from asking for an alternative to this liquid (which IMHO is hugely overrated). In a very different context it could have either of the other two meanings that you propose, although other wordings would be likelier (in Pyongyang, perhaps "Guinness sold only here"; in a trade show, perhaps "Guinness for payment only"). -- Hoary (talk) 01:40, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that tin-plate advert sign dates from long before "Diageo", and more from the era of the toucan or before? Martinevans123 (talk) 10:56, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, we can see from the photo that the slogan, if taken seriously (which surely isn't intended), is untrue, unless the lever thingie for Heineken (a dreadful beer) is a mere dummy. And there also seems to be another thingie for some other brand of lager, though I can't read the lettering. And that's before mentioning the whiskeys, the gins, the sugary concoctions, etc., or of course the ciders. (Ugh. I'll take a Chimay.) -- Hoary (talk) 01:48, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

[Facepalm] — Trovatore's answer below is definitive. How did I not think of it? — Hoary (talk) 08:33, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The sign is rather obviously very much older than the rest of the bar. Many pubs have old advertising signs as a form of decoration. Guinness is nowhere near as good as it used to be. Frankly I wouldn't bother with it nowadays.DuncanHill (talk) 01:57, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It means that Guiness is only sold there; nothing else is done to it. In particular it isn't drunk there. I suppose it can't even be carried away to be consumed off-premises, because that would be doing something to it other than selling it. --Trovatore (talk) 03:11, 12 March 2021 (UTC) [reply]

The sign is intended as a joke; something Guinness advertising used to be famous for. To avoid any ambiguity, in formal English "only" should always be placed immediately before the word or words that it modifies. That is an edit I make frequently.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:28, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The three different interpretations depend on which other word you link 'only' to, 'only Guinness', 'only sold', 'only here'. By moving the word only around, the disambiguation is reduced: In "only Guinness sold here", 'only' must link to 'Guinness'. In "Guinness sold here only", it links to 'here'. In "Guinness sold only here", it may link to 'sold' or 'here'. However, in the phrase discussed here, 'only' can link to the word before and the word after, and it can interestingly enough even jump across 'sold' and link to 'here'. The reason for this is somehow connected to a word that is missing in the phrase: 'is'. The grammatically complete sentence could be "Guinness only is sold here", forcing 'only' to link to 'Guinness', but it could also be "Guinness is only sold here". Here 'is sold' must be seen as one unit, even if it is split. The logical structure becomes "Guinness is-sold only here", even if English grammar allows another word order. Thus 'only' either can link to 'is-sold' or to 'here', giving the two remaining interpretations. --T*U (talk) 10:10, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, does anyone here know if the story about Guinness withdrawing from the US market after their unsuccessful launch in the '70s with the whole-page ad "Guinness is too good for you!" in NYTimes is true? Or is it just a good story? --T*U (talk) 10:30, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'll drink to that!. Paddy McGuinness 123 (talk) 11:02, 12 March 2021 (UTC) [reply]

p.s. a review of Guinness TV ads through the decades here. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:35, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, even if they meant "We don't sell anything except Guinness products in this establishment", that would still be a number of beers. Even 50 years ago, the Guinness brewery made a number of different products, many of which are available today; even ignoring the Guinness-licensed American-produced beers like the Rolling Rock-produced "Guinness Blonde" and the various recent "craft-brew" style beers released by Guinness's Open Gate brewery outside of Baltimore, the company has always had a number of beers; besides the classic "Guinness Draught Stout", there's "Guinness Extra Stout", the hard-to-find-in-the-U.S. and famously well-rated "Guinness Foreign Extra Stout", there's Harp Lager, Smithwick's, etc. It's possible the advertisement was genuine that the only sold Guinness products; indeed prior to the "gastropub" and craft-brewery movement of the 21st century, it wouldn't have been uncommon for a bar to only carry 4-5 kinds of beer anyways. --Jayron 32 13:30, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
'sup Jay? Do "doctors say you need a change"? Martinevans123 (talk) 13:42, 12 March 2021 (UTC) [1][reply]

Although not mentioned in our article, I rather think Ireland had tied houses. DuncanHill (talk) 13:40, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, in the UK "tied houses" are owned by a brewery and at one time only allowed their own beer to be sold there. They still exist in the UK but the concept of guest beers was forced on them by parliament and has persisted after the legal restrictions were lifted. Pubs which aren't "tied" to breweries are called free houses (sadly the beer isn't free). Ireland retained much of the British licensing laws which dated from the late 19th and early 20th centuries before independence.

Sam Smith houses are still rigidly tied. --ColinFine (talk) 16:54, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not too much of a hardship as their ales are out of the top drawer. Alansplodge (talk) 18:54, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ireland in the 1950s: News From A New Republic describes a campaign in 1952 by Seán Lemass to legislate against restrictive trade practices: "Guinness was an obvious culprit, with its system of tied houses — pubs that could serve only the company's products if there were competing lines".

Alansplodge (talk) 15:17, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

March 14

"To play Nintendo"

Can the company name "Nintendo" be classified as a neologism of the 1980s when used instead of the term "video game from Nintendo" or "video game console from Nintendo"? Usage examples: "to play Nintendo", "I'm taking the Nintendo with me on vacation." – Gebu (talk) 11:01, 14 March 2021 (UTC) edited 14:33, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all. There are other video game consoles besides the Nintendo, notably the PS4/5 and the Xbox. So when someone says "to play Nintendo", they actually mean they are playing Nintendo rather than one of those other consoles. --Viennese Waltz 11:10, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you think that that is what they mean. But if the OP could provide a substantial number of references where owners of, say, Sony, Microsoft, or Sega consoles referred to their machines as "nintendos" then I would argue that, yes, it's a neologism. See hoover, or coke. Bazza (talk) 11:17, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That still wouldn't meet the definition of a neologism, though. See List of generic and_genericized trademarks#List of protected trademarks frequently used as generic terms. --Viennese Waltz 11:40, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The only thing I found was There’s No Such Thing As A Nintendo which describes Nintendo's efforts to prevent its name from being used as a proprietary eponym. This article describes the downside for businesses of having their trade names enter everyday speech. Alansplodge (talk) 11:49, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Came from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Linguistics#"To play Nintendo", where the OP said I am in the process of adding articles to the Category:Neologisms (German) in the German Wikipedia.) Neologism is such an ill-defined term that having Wikipedia categories based on it strikes me as a fool's errand. Our article defines it as a term "that may be in the process of entering common use, but that has not yet been fully accepted into mainstream language", but at what point? Any term that has been accepted was in the process of entering common use at some point, and any term that didn't catch on may have been a neologism at one point but it no longer is. So categories like "1980s neologisms" seem like oxymorons if our definition is to be believed. Laptop, jumping the shark, millennials, and queer certainly aren't in the process of entering common use, are they?

As for Nintendo, even if it was used as a generic term for any game or console, it sounds like an instance of metonymy rather than a neologism, but again, because of the murky nature of the term, one could pick virtually anything and argue it is or was a neologism. Nardog (talk) 13:30, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your answers! Viennese Waltz is right. As far as I know, the phrase "to play Nintendo" was used for playing on a video game console from Nintendo. There may have been a similar phrase "to play Sega" for playing on a video game console from Sega. A similar phrase from the late 1990s is "to google". Again, a company name became a verb. According to Google (verb), this verb is a neologism. @Nardog: I am going to discuss the Wikipedia article about the linguistic term "neologism" on Talk:Neologism. – Gebu (talk) 14:33, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]