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.

May 23

Irish orthography

What's the difference between Eoin and Eóin (with the fada). I can't find/understand the difference on Irish orthography. I noticed without the fada is used much more. Is it proper usage with the fada? I'm hoping some Irish speakers can clarify this for me. 216.160.55.34 (talk) 03:39, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have a shot at this, but my Irish is elementary, so someone may need to correct me. Eoin is pronounced more or less as the English say "Owen". The purpose of the fada is to mark the -o- as long. But when you get three vowels together, usually only the one with a fada on it is pronounced. There's no difficulty about pronouncing Eoin, so we can live without the fada. Is that it? Xn4 11:02, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. The fada is superfluous here and completely incorrect as far as I'm aware. Fribbler (talk) 11:15, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A search of Vicipéid (the Irish Wikipedia) gives hundreds of instances of Eoin, none of Eóin. Xn4 14:02, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eóin is the older spelling. Long [o:] used to be spelled "ó" after broad consonants and "eó" after slender consonants, but because it was largely redundant, the accent got dropped (even Patrick S. Dinneen's 1927 dictionary doesn't use it). There are very few words where "eo" represents a short vowel: seo "this", anseo "here", deoch "a drink", and eochair "a key" may be the only common words where "eo" is short. —An gr 16:42, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In line with what Angr says, see Eóin.com - "Eóin is the oldest and most consistently-used Gaelic form of John in both Irish and Scottish Gaelic". So the fada clearly isn't 'improper', it's old-fashioned. Xn4 18:44, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect, though, they're comparing Eóin to other equivalents of John, like Iain in Scottish Gaelic and Seán in Irish, rather than to the fadaless spelling Eoin. —An gr 18:47, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Exdent: True it was the older spelling, though anseo was also spelled anso in pre-1960s Irish (Ulster and Connaght). The massive changes instituted by the caighdean reforms of the niineteen-sixties changed an awful lot of spellings. I prefer the new spellings :-) Though I accept the historical, of course. Is Mise le meas, an Fribleair . Fribbler (talk) 00:15, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So is this guy's name correct with the fada? 216.160.55.34 (talk) 21:41, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes; as far as I know, Scottish Gaelic (as opposed Irish) still puts an accent mark over the o in the "eo" digraph. However, a recent spelling reform abolished the acute accent in Scottish Gaelic and replaced it everywhere with the grave accent. So "Eóin" is an outdated spelling in both languages, but in Irish the newer spelling is "Eoin" and in Scottish Gaelic it's "Eòin". —An gr 21:48, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've just noticed on another page that we have a user here called Eóin. I'll alert him to this, and we'll see if he has anything to say! Xn4 00:38, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ban him! Disregarding accepted orthography? I think not! :-) Fribbler (talk) 00:40, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He may be very elderly... but no, I think I hear the sound of a horse-whip being swung through the air. Xn4 00:45, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I hate to disappoint but I have absolutely no knowledge of Irish! I'm from the states and received the name from my parents after they took some Irish language classes. I know my birth certificate has the fada but most other ID forms lose the fada or any other diacritics for that matter. I've been told that the fada is correct but then again I really don't know what I'm talking about. ~ Eóin (talk) 04:04, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I too spell my name Eóin and I'm irish so we'll just leave it there — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.232.64.5 (talk) 11:36, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fucking bitch vs. fucked bitch

Why do we say the first more often than the second? Mr.K. (talk) 14:18, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because 'fucking' is a standard English intensifier that can be applied to more or less anything, especially insults, while 'fucked' is a word with a fairly narrow range of meanings. In addition, 'fucked' is normally used predicatively ('that bitch is fucked'); for attributive use, 'fucked-up' is more natural with roughly the same range of meanings. Algebraist 14:26, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"F###ing" is not in intensifier in this context—it is an adjective indicating that the person/object it applies to is despised by the speaker. "F###ed" means something different and is ambiguous. It may mean that something is very wrong with the person/thing the word applies to. It may also mean that the person/thing was victimized, abused, or betrayed. It may also be literal, meaning that the person/thing is the object/patient of a sexual act. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.78.237.229 (talk) 14:55, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

'Bitch' already indicates despisal, which is intensified by 'fucking', hence my claim. Algebraist 14:59, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As I understand it, intensifiers are adverbs modifying adjectives making the latter stronger or weaker. Here "f###ing" is an adjective modifying a noun—not in the right category to be an intensifier. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.78.237.229 (talk) 15:30, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Usages may differ here, but the OED lists 'fucking' as an intensifier under both adjective and adverb. Indeed, the first quote under 2a. Used as an intensifier is 'fucking bitch' (well, '******* b—h' actually, but the inference seems sound). Algebraist

It is most definitely an intensifier. No two ways about it. If it was an adjective it would mean 'a bitch (who is in the act of) fucking'. Quite simple.--ChokinBako (talk) 19:39, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I dont think that 72.78.237.229 is wrong. You can say He's a fucking student. Theres nothing in the word student thats particularly negative, but you do get the impression that whoever said this doesnt like students. The word intensifier is a vague grammatical term (defined notionally). Words like very have also been termed intensifiers (as in He's very nice). What is being "intensified" by these words are different. fucking is expressive (it tells you about the speaker's attitude) while very is not.

I dont think that fucked and fucked up are equivalent. He's fucked and He's fucked up mean different things. – ishwar (speak) 20:08, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The neat thing about fucking is that it can be spliced in the middle of words: in-fucking-credible, unbe-fucking-lievable, tre-fucking-mendous, etc. — Æµ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 04:41, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See tmesis (and there's a word that looks like it needs something thrust inside it to complete it)! --Anonymous, 05:57 UTC, May 24, 2008.

In my linguistics classes, this was actually called "infixing." — Æµ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 07:50, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An infix is normally an affix, not an independent word. kwami (talk) 10:07, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

t-fucking-mesis t-fucking-schmesis! This is not the point of the question! :) --ChokinBako (talk) 19:05, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Back to the question, probably because "bitch" implies the person in question is already efft (ruined, despised, has offended in some way and is probably rooted). Efft isn't usually an adjective, but effing is and can be attached and repeated ad infinitim in many dialects. Rucked if I know, though... ; ) Julia Rossi (talk) 23:39, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm surprised this f-ing question got so many answers! Sandman30s (talk) 21:58, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Commented editions of English literature

What is the most prominent edition of commented English literature? (Something equivalent to the "Letras Hispánicas" of "Editorial Cátedra" in Spanish. Mr.K. (talk) 18:28, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Or like the Bibliothèque de la Pléiade for 'classic' French literature? We don't really have an equivalent in English, but for many important books of the kind you mean a good critical edition is published by the Oxford University Press, including a series called the Oxford World's Classics. I wouldn't suggest that the OUP has a general pre-eminence, but it shouldn't let you down. For early texts, there's the wonderful Early English Text Society. Xn4 19:01, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The texts in Norton Critical Editions are accompanied by good annotations, along with related criticism. For American literature, the Library of America volumes are similar to what you're looking for. Deor (talk) 19:40, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

May 24

Peer Reviewed?

(Removed question cross-posted at the more adequate Science Desk where it received at least one detailed reply).

Plastic artist

What is a plastic artist? See List of Chileans. -- SGBailey (talk) 15:19, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Someone who creates plastic art, visual art in three dimensions. Since the list features more painters than sculptors, I changed it to "Artists". ---Sluzzelin talk 15:56, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reading quotations

When reading a formal speech or oral presentation, how does one speak the following:

John had "...eaten a lot of honey...when he woke up."

Does one say "quote" and "end quote" at its respective locations? Does one say "dot dot dot" at the ellipses? Thanks. Acceptable (talk) 19:31, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You'd probably have to to be understood. That or phonetic punctuation. But I think it'd be better to reword. -- BenRG (talk) 02:25, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The quotation marks you could say as "I quote" (no unquote at the end) or "quote" eaten.... "unquote". The ellipses you would indicate by pausing briefly. --Lisa4edit (talk) 05:33, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

May 25

Double acronyms

How many acronyms are there that have two official expansions at the same time to refer to the same thing? (The only example I know of is ATWA.) Neon Merlin 00:17, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you're willing to go for fictitious entries, the Marvel comic-book based espionage group SHIELD has gone through at least three names. Originally, it stood for Supreme Headquarters, International Espionage, Law-Enforcement Division, which then became Strategic Hazard Intervention, Espionage Logistics Directorate. In the excellent Iron Man movie, they changed it to Strategic Homeland Intervention, Enforcement, and Logistics Division and made a bit of a joke about how clumsy the name was. Matt Deres (talk) 02:33, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ESL is English Sign Language and English as a Second Language for one, there are lots more. This site has long lists [1] --Lisa4edit (talk) 05:23, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But the question was about acronyms with two official expansions referring to the same thing. English sign language and English a second language aren't the same thing. "PTL" in the PTL Club can stand for either "Praise The Lord" or "People That Love". —An gr 07:48, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wasn't PTL revealed to secretly stand for "Pass The Loot" during the Bakker trials? -SandyJax (talk) 14:12, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WWF was both wrestling and wildlife until Vince McMahon changed his.hotclaws 07:58, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but again, the World Wrestling Federation and the World Wildlife Fund are not the same thing. The question was about acronyms with multiple expansions that refer to the same thing. —An gr 08:01, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The NT in 'Windows NT' has at times stood for N10, New Technology, and nothing at all. Paul Davidson (talk) 08:41, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As in Nothing aT all? :-) —An gr 08:44, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen several acronyms for organizations which changed one of the words somewhere along the line, either because the scope of the group changed, the image they wanted to project changed, or one of the words took on negative connotations. However, nothing as radical as ATWA. kwami (talk) 10:05, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lots, especially in context of computers. What comes into my mind is "GCC": it has changed from "GNU C compiler" to "GNU compiler collection" when they unified it with G++ and all the other backends for non-C languages. – b_jonas 11:13, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's also this joke about the expansion of "GNU" itself. – b_jonas 11:18, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nice question by the way. I wonder if there's a name for such acronyms. – b_jonas 11:21, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We could try to coin one (dualternyms, hehe) but I think that "constant rebranding disorder" is the real answer doktorb _words^deeds 11:34, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

DVD was originally "digital video disk" but is now "digital versatile disk". But then the OP specified "two official expansions at the same time", and I think with DVD the official expansion changed from one to the other, rather than the two being official at the same time. —An gr 11:59, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you're willing to accept backronyms then sic could be (from the article):

"spelling is correct", "same in copy", "spelling intentionally conserved", "said in context", or "sans intention comique" (French: without comic intent).

Zain Ebrahim (talk) 13:15, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The expansion of snafu is rendered differently, depending on how profane one chooses to be. Deor (talk) 13:20, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, good example. That goes to "RTFM" as well. – b_jonas 17:52, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know it's not quite an acronym, but SQ came to mind - the one written on restaurant menus next to expensive items. At least in my country they do that, don't know about others. I never quite knew what it stood for. Googling around suggests "special quotation", "subject to quotation", "seasonal quotation", "subject to quality", "Salon Qualitaire". I always thought it meant "special quisine" but that was my misconception carried over from parents who didn't want me to see them as lacking in knowledge. I'm surprised wiki doesn't have an article on this. Looking it this it might after all be a South African thing. Any ideas would be appreciated. Sandman30s (talk) 21:51, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Somali and Arabic

Is there a website where I can compare Somali letters with Arabic letters? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Don Mustafa (talk • contribs) 02:08, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at http://www.omniglot.com/writing/somali.htm and the pages it links to. Maybe you'll find something there. Wikipedia has articles on the Latin Somali alphabet and Wadaad's writing (i.e. the Arabic alphabet for Somali), as well as on Osmanya script and Borama script, but no direct comparison. —An gr 07:44, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How can I learn to write better?

Besides doing the obvious (like reading a lot), and considering that I have no access to a private teacher, where is the way to go? 217.168.4.191 (talk) 03:28, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Write as in creative writing or write as in spelling, grammar etc. ? I think [2] is pretty amazing, but sort of hard to navigate, although they have a search window. You might also read some literary criticism. --Lisa4edit (talk) 05:13, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the Purdue link. I'll take a look. 217.168.4.191 (talk) 12:55, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have you tried blogging about what you read, the issues of the day and so on? (You kids have it easy: in my day we had to kill and skin our own mimeo ...) — Ben Franklin said that, to teach himself to write well, he would read an essay, jot down its themes, and try to recreate the essay from his notes. — You could do worse than to read Fowler's Modern English Usage: some of the specifics of his advice are dated or (imho) wrongheaded, but overall it expresses good instincts. —Tamfang (talk) 23:06, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(More thoughts.) Don't expect to get it right on the first try; cut'n'paste is your friend! Get something on the screen quickly, and then organize it. You might start by getting down all the key phrases you can think of (each on a separate line), then organizing them into sentences, then arranging the sentences into a paragraph. Avoid the cheap journalistic habit of bundling unrelated points in one sentence just to get them in somewhere: "A devout Christian and avid organist, Knuth began writing The Art of Computer Programming in 1967..." —Tamfang (talk) 00:18, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A great piece that last one, but if you want general suggestions on how to improve, the best way is to reflect a lot. Keep everything you write, read it back to yourself when you've forgotten what it was about, and you will see it in a new light. When you read some of your howlers, you may remember previously thinking of them as brilliancies, whereas most of your elegant turns of phrase will have seemed innocuous at the time. That Ben Franklin advice looks pretty good also - you don't have to follow it to the letter, but in considering the writing of others, it's good to see if you can recreate small portions of it in your head. I do this myself, trying to remember, or rewrite, snippets of things that have impressed me, and it always shows up my deficiencies, and occasionally, my limited strengths. 130.95.106.128 (talk) 11:00, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Signs on artwork

Hello. There is an art display in our local courthouse that changes every month or so. This month there are some Japanese chigiri-e works featuring landscapes and buildings. Two of the works are of small shops or businesses, I believe, because they have signs on them. I just wonder what the signs say. Here are details of them from the artwork:

(1) File:Art sign 1.jpg (2) File:Art sign 2.jpg.

Thank you. — Michael J 11:48, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They're not anything I recognise. I would take them as a non-Japanese artist's impression of katakana - which would be unlikely to be used in that context anyway, unless the businesses had foreign names. --ColinFine (talk) 12:22, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not Japanese. They look like old Semitic graffiti to me, but with such simple shapes they could be just about anything. kwami (talk) 12:46, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for trying. I wasn't sure. (If they are katakana, maybe they are personal names on homes. Images of the entire artworks are here and here.) — Michael J 13:24, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Having seen the pictures, I'm even more convinced that they are an artist's impression of a script he or she doesn't read - but they don't look the slightest bit authentic, because their simplicity is reminiscent of katakana, which as I said would not be normal in that sort of context. --ColinFine (talk) 13:33, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Modern artists can be quite devious. It's quite likely it means nothing and its purpose it to make you wonder what it means.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 18:42, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is definitely not authentic katakana. As everyone says, it is either a non-native artist's impression of it, or something else. It is unreadable as katakana, and nobody in their right minds in Japan would put an unreadable name plate outside their house. How else is the postman going to deliver the post, considering houses don't have house numbers and most streets don't have names?--ChokinBako (talk) 19:57, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you all. I will give up trying to understand them, then, and just enjoy the pretty pictures. — Michael J 20:16, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Considering they're on shop fronts, if they were modeled after anything it was probably an impressionistic recollection of hiragana or perhaps grass-style kanji. kwami (talk) 23:11, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

"We can see who the richest person is".

"We can see who is the richest person".

Are there grammatical rules to assert whether either of these is incorrect? ----Seans Potato Business 13:56, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. In indirect questions like these, the verb doesn't move to the front to follow the fronted interrogative pronoun "who", as it does in direct questions. So "We can see who the richest person is" is correct, and "*We can see who is the richest person" is incorrect. In a direct question, it would be the other way around: "Who is the richest person?" is correct, and "*Who the richest person is?" is incorrect. —An gr 14:07, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. ----Seans Potato Business 15:22, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That analysis must be wrong, because both sentences are correct. I think the second one is more likely to be used when there's a context referring to a small group of people, so that "who" refers implicitly to one of the group. And I have no idea of why that would be. --Anonymous, 08:30 UTC, May 26, 2008.

The second sentence is certainly awkward, if not outright wrong. It sounds like a typical foreigner's error. Paul Davidson (talk) 11:12, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The second sentence is correct if we can see that the person on first base is the richest. —An gr 14:42, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Funny joke. In everyday speech and writing, "We can see who the richest person is" is right. The second variation, "We can see who is the richest person", is perfectly good English, too. If we make it "We can see which is the richest person", its validity becomes obvious, and we wouldn't as readily say "We can see which the richest person is." --Milkbreath (talk) 14:52, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If we can see who is standing at the door, then we can also see who is the richest. — I reckon that a native speaker would say who is foo when who means which one of these, but who foo is otherwise. —Tamfang (talk) 00:15, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Placebo effect

I was just watching an episode of House, where a woman was touch by a spiritual healer and no longer needed a zimmer frame to walk. Assuming that this was not an act of God, is there a word/phrase for it? I know what the Placebo effect is but that doesn't seem quite right for my needs. Thanks 92.2.194.36 (talk) 14:46, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Autosuggestion? ---Sluzzelin talk 15:09, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can come up with several more: Psychosomatic healing, Pygmalion effect, Post hoc ergo propter hoc subconscious effects, or any other by-product of strong optimism. I don't know if there are any more adequate (and less cynical) expressions for what you refer to... Kreachure (talk) 17:29, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Observer-expectancy effect, Therapeutic effect or Expectation? Think outside the box 19:28, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fiction? --Nicknack009 (talk) 23:09, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You might be looking for spontaneous remission. The confluence or merging of elements making up the circumstances is usually said to be serendipitous. Julia Rossi (talk) 23:23, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Um, yeah, what she said. Thanks for making me feel irrelevant, Julia! :P Kreachure (talk) 23:36, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No way is that! I'm going to have fun clicking through your answer next chance I get. : ) Julia Rossi (talk) 01:29, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You might like to watch to the end of the episode, where a medically sounds explanation for the healing is given (due, if I remember, to some sort of virus transmission from the contact). So in the context of the show it is neither Autosuggestion, Psychosomatic, or any of the other of the subconscious effects. DJ Clayworth (talk) 15:53, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IPA for Oier Olazábal

Hi, can someone transcribe the Spanish pronunciation of Oier Olazábal for me? Thank you. --Kjoonlee 21:41, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

/ɒiɛr ɒlæ'θæbæl/ (the á represents stress vowel in that case). I'm a native Spanish speaker, but I'm not too familiarized with IPA; still, I think it's very accurate. Kreachure (talk) 23:26, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. By /æ/ do you mean the near-open front unrounded vowel as in English "trap"? Audio sample. --Kjoonlee 23:57, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Following the orthography, in Castellano it would be Spanish pronunciation: [oiˈer olaˈθaβal]. Or do you want Catalan? kwami (talk) 00:16, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, kwami's is much better. Forget mine. T_T Still, I think the Help:IPA for Spanish page is pretty confusing for English speakers, so if you need help hearing it, I recommend checking Help:IPA's audio samples. Kreachure (talk) 00:30, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

grammar

Is this literary piece 'as good as I could write', 'as well as I could write', both or neither? (the question is not about literary pieces but English grammar) ----Seans Potato Business 21:54, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I assume "right" is a typo for "write." I'd say "as good as" in such cases. --Kjoonlee 21:59, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's right, I meant 'write'! ----Seans Potato Business 22:56, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If the literary piece is as good as I could have written it, the author must have done it as well as I could have done it. --Kjoonlee 22:00, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both! ----Seans Potato Business 22:57, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If Seans gives a **** about my opinion, you can say both and get away with it. Ericthebrainiac (talk) 23:40, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt that, Eric. We're talking about the quality of the text (good/bad), not how the writer wrote it (well/badly). -- JackofOz (talk) 22:11, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"As well as I could write" is correct written English, the use of the word "good" in this context is colloquial and rather informal. "Good" is also an over-used word, much like the word "nice".Katana Geldar 23:00, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect you're getting that exactly backwards, Katana, and that's my job around here. Please provide us with the complete sentence that you are referring to when you say that the use of "good" in it is colloquial. Also, I don't think it's possible for a basic core word like "good" to become hackneyed. --Milkbreath (talk) 23:13, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shawshank Redemption (film), "I don't spell so good." Quote not verbatim. --Kjoonlee 18:36, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see what you're getting at, Milkbreath. I'd never say "This literary piece is as well as I could write." --Kjoonlee 18:39, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Compare the difference: "This piece is as good as I could write it" vs. "I wrote this piece as well as I could (write it)". -- JackofOz (talk) 22:28, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Compare that difference to some other difference, or what? :P —Tamfang (talk) 01:48, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

May 26

Hindi and Bengali: mutually understandable

If you speak one of them, can you understand the other? At least halfway? 217.168.1.95 (talk) 12:16, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article on Mutual intelligibility would suggest that you couldn't. Some different dialects of Bengali aren't even mutually intelligible. Fribbler (talk) 18:48, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pronounciation on the pinyin "zh"

How is the pinyin "zh" pronounced? I've tried to search for the answer but different sources have different answers and my very limited knowledge of IPA is no help. --RMFan1 (talk) 15:23, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Roughly like the English "j" in "jerk". The exact articulation is slightly different, and it's devoiced in Chinese, but using the English "j" sound will get you very close to Mandarin "zh". —An gr 15:49, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As to articulation, according to our article on retroflex consonants, you should keep your tongue flat (i.e. not curl up the tip), with the blade of the tongue (the top surface of the tongue near the tip) touching the roof of the mouth behind the alveolar ridge. To practice the sound as unvoiced, whisper words like "jerk" and "merger". --Lambiam 16:03, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rather like the ch of Spanish (which I see you speak), as opposed to "ch", which is rather like the ch of English. kwami (talk) 09:45, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

May 27

Where to put "from"?

Hello there, since English is my second language, so I'm having trouble with asking question by using "from". Which is the correct:

From which universities you are calling?
Which universities you are calling from?

Any reply? Thank you--202.168.229.243 (talk) 07:49, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In theory (1) is correct English, but (2) is perfectly acceptable in conversation. By the way, are you sure it should be "universities", not "university"? I would have thought a caller would only be calling from one university. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 08:07, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In both examples, it should say "are you", not "you are". Clarityfiend (talk) 08:12, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, in the above examples, the correct word order would be "are you calling", rather than "you are calling". Gwinva (talk) 08:13, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, sorry, I missed that. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 08:21, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not to worry: two of us didn't! :) Gwinva (talk) 08:29, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand what 202 is trying to say. How do you call from more than one university? Clarityfiend (talk) 08:23, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering that as well, see above. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 08:35, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(1) is not correct "in theory". It's just a shibboleth based on Latin grammar. (2) always has been normal English. kwami (talk) 09:43, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, according to Preposition stranding, "some grammarians frown upon" it, which indicates that there is at least some disagreement over it. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 09:50, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, but in the interests of helping ESLers everywhere, let's step on "some grammarians" right here and now. Those grammarians are just plain wrong, and the entire rest of the English-speaking world is right. "From which universities are you calling?" in the ordinary sense is an abomination, a deformed structure, an especially egregious example of prescriptivism taken too far. It's like a wrong note on the piano and offends anyone with an ear for English. There just might be a place for that construction if a special meaning is meant, but I can't think of one. --Milkbreath (talk) 10:37, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The weasel words of the Preposition stranding article should not be taken seriously. It's a shibboleth, pure and simple: a pretentious attempt by upwardly-mobile people of the ?th century to display how educated they were, and by implication, how they were a better class of people than those who didn't know (or didn't care) to speak that way. It's never been taken seriously by anyone else. kwami (talk) 11:00, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd use "what" – What university are you calling from? Julia Rossi (talk) 23:18, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarification. I think I should have used "are you" instead of "you are". BTW, Julia, why did you say would use "what" instead of "which"? are they both right? if so then why?--202.168.229.243 (talk) 05:36, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would use "what" too, presuming the answer can include any number of universities. Fribbler (talk) 10:05, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the nuance intended here is that "which university?" implies that the asker has a short list in mind ("Oxford or Cambridge?"), while "what university?" acknowledges the possibility that it may be one of which the asker is ignorant. And yet I think I'd say "which university?" (but "what company?"). —Tamfang (talk) 02:25, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[the?] Westermarkt, Amsterdam

The sentence I'm editing describes the location of a certain statue of Anne Frank (by Mari Andriessen)as "Westermarkt." The Amsterdam page describes this as an "open-air market" but I don't know whether this is also the name of a street. Choices of preposition, with or without the definite article:

"...in [the] Westermarkt"
"...on [the] Westermarkt"

What would you advise? Do I need a better description of the statue's setting? '-- Thanks, Deborahjay (talk) 09:21, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"in the" if it's a market, "on" if it's a street. kwami (talk) 09:41, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

nl:Westermarkt (Amsterdam) calls it a "plein" which translates to "square" as far as I know. According to the article no market is held there, but the "Westerstraat-markt" is held on "Westerstraat" nearby. On this map, Westermarkt is a short street-shaped thingy (lower right quadrant). ---Sluzzelin talk 10:06, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't our British cousins say in either way? —Tamfang (talk) 02:27, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Further: Related pages indicate the statue's "in front of" the nearby Westerkerk, and checking further web citations via Google, got this description: "The statue is located at the Westermarkt in front of the Westerkerk..." [Emphases mine.] My source text doesn't mention the church. So, that reads well, if "Westermarkt" is a tourist site, and I'll have to trust "VirtualTourist" for knowing the facts in situ. -- Thanks, Deborahjay (talk) 10:17, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Dutch article also says that the statue is located on the Prinsengracht side (west side of the square), and I saw several sites saying it stands "outside the Westerkerk in Amsterdam" which lies to the Westermarkt's south. So far it looks like the statue is somewhere in the southwest corner of Westermarkt. I'm sure the exact location can be found on a map, I just haven't found it yet. ---Sluzzelin

This map might give you an idea of church, square, and grachten. (but the statue's location isn't given). I just noticed that Westermarkt goes both to the north and to the south of the Westerkerk. Is Westermarkt the entire block? I also noticed there was a pale grey horizontal way parallel to and between the two Westermarkt ways. I guess someone familiar with the location should step in now. I visited the Anne Frank House in 1987. ---Sluzzelin talk 10:22, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On this photograph you can see that the statue is right in front of the church tower (known as Westertoren), which is at the Prinsengracht side of the church. You can easily spot the tower on this Google map image. --Lambiam 16:33, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As Sluzzelin says, the Westermarkt is a square ("plein"), but it is kind of U-shaped, with the Westerkerk in the middle. On this map, the statue would be near the "W" of the blue text "Westermarkt". I (imagine I) can see it in the shadows of the trees here. I wouldn't say that the statue is in front of the church, because I'm not completely sure what to call the front, I think the church entrance is on the side of the Keizersgracht; instead I would simply write "it is located on the Westermarkt", it's not a very large square. DAVID ŠENEK 16:43, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That fits with what you see on this photograph. The corner of the building you see can only be the southwest corner of the church, and the statue is then just south of the church. --Lambiam 16:57, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comanche

Anyone know of a good place, book, etc. to learn the Comanche language? I would prefer a free website, but any source will work. Thanks, Ζρς ι'β' ^¡hábleme! 13:18, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[3] would probably be a good place to start. "Numinu" or "Numunu" are English transliteration used. Be aware that there is some criticism going around saying that the language is taught in a "bastardized" form, following English more closely to make translating easier. Male/female language division, grammar and concept basis are not preserved. (For an idea how the latter is meant, get an artist, a chemist and a physicist together and have them describe a red dot to you, or imagine discussing colors with a blind person.) Some preservation is much better than losing everything, though. There's no one identifying as Comanche at the Wikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America from what I could see, but if it were me I'd try posting there and see if someone is there or can get you a reference to someone who might be willing to voice-mail or something. Good luck with your studies. Lisa4edit (talk) 18:13, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

From SSILA website: linguistlist.org/ssila/Learning/comanche.cfm (has grammar & dictionary reference). – ishwar (speak) 12:12, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Other things from Marianne Mithun's book:

857-word vocabulary collected in 1860s by a Spanish-speaking Mexican with commentary by the editor:

Gelo, Daniel J. (Ed.). (1995). Comanche vocabulary (Trilingual ed.). Texas archaeology and ethnohistory series. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Discussion of how to form words:

Osborn, Henry; & Smalley, William. (1949). Formulae for Comanche stem and word formation. International Journal of American Linguistics, 15, 93-99.

Text collections:

Canonge, Elliott D. (1958). Comanche texts. Summer Institute of Linguistics publications in linguistics and related fields (No. 1). Norman, OK: Summer Institute of Linguistics of the University of Oklahoma.

Another text is in:

Anderton, Alice. (1997). Kaawosa plays a trick on a soldier: A Comanche coyote story. In Jane Hill, P.J. Mistry, & Lyle Campbell (Eds.), The life of language: Papers in linguistics in honor of William Bright (pp. 243-255). Trends in linguistics: Studies and monographs (No. 108). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

Discussion of Comanche discourse (i.e. how the language works in large chunks of speech):

Armagost, James. (1982). Comanche deictic roots in narrative texts. Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics, 7, 5-14. (Online: kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/handle/1808/3611
Armagost, James. (1982). The temporal relationship between telling and happening in Comanche narrative. Anthropological Linguistics, 24, 193-200.
Armagost, James. (1983). Comanche narrative: Some general remarks and a selected text. Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics, 8 (2), 1-30. (Online: kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/handle/1808/477
Armagost, James. (1985). Comanche ma-: Undistinguished deictic, narrative obviative. International Journal of American Linguistics, 51, 302-310. (Available from JSTOR: www.jstor.org/pss/1265433).
Armagost, James. (1990). Interpreting St. Clair's Comanche texts: Objective case marking and the 'same subject' dependent clauses. Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics, 15 (2), 1-17. (Online: kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/handle/1808/435

Discussion of vowel pronunciation:

Canonge, Elliott D. (1957). Voiceless vowels in Comanche. International Journal of American Linguistics, 23, 63-67. (Available from JSTOR: www.jstor.org/pss/1264055).
Hamp, Eric. (1958). Prosodic notes: On Comanche voiceless vowels. International Journal of American Linguistics, 24, 321. (Available from JSTOR: www.jstor.org/pss/1263980).
Armagost, James. (1985). On predicting voiceless vowels in Comanche. Kansas Working Papers in Linguistics, 10 (2), 1-15. (Online: kuscholarworks.ku.edu/dspace/handle/1808/499
Armagost, James. (1986). Three exceptions to vowel devoicing in Comanche. Anthropological Linguistics, 28, 3.

Discussion of baby talk (caretaker speech):

Casagrande, Joseph. (1948). Comanche baby language. International Journal of American Linguistics, 14, 11-14. (Available from JSTOR: www.jstor.org/pss/1263088).

Discussion of rhythm (stress, intonation, vowel length, etc.):

Smalley, William. (1953). Phonemic rhythm in Comanche. International Journal of American Linguistics, 19, 297-301. (Available from JSTOR: www.jstor.org/pss/1263132).

Discussion of loanwords:

Casagrande, Joseph B. (1954). Comanche linguistic acculturation: I. International Journal of American Linguistics, 20 (2), 140-151. (Available from JSTOR: www.jstor.org/pss/1263388).
Casagrande, Joseph B. (1954). Comanche linguistic acculturation: II. International Journal of American Linguistics, 20 (3), 217-237. (Available from JSTOR: www.jstor.org/pss/1263347).
Casagrande, Joseph B. (1955). Comanche linguistic acculturation: III. International Journal of American Linguistics, 21 (1), 8-25. (Available from JSTOR: www.jstor.org/pss/1263210).
Troike, Rudolph C. (1956). Comanche linguistic acculturation: A critique. International Journal of American Linguistics, 22 (3), 213-215. (Available from JSTOR: www.jstor.org/pss/1264018).

Some of the above may be difficult to understand as they are written for a linguist audience. There doesnt seem to be much pedagogical material unfortunately. It may be best to contact the tribe for pedagogical material. – ishwar (speak) 13:36, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for a specific term

I frequently have this problem: I'll be having an argument and come up with a really bad comeback. Of course, it's not until later that I think of something really cutting to say. I know there's a term for this and that it's French. I would appreciate it if someone would provide me with the Wikipedia article for this. THANK YOU for your time! Nolarboot (talk) 14:18, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

L'esprit de l'escalier. Deor (talk) 14:21, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. You've assisted me with at least two things now. ^_^ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nolarboot (talk • contribs) 14:32, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And, although the article won't say so until a few minutes from now when I change it, a rarely-used English translation exists: "staircase wit". (If more of us use it, it won't be so rare, by the way.) --Milkbreath (talk) 14:49, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If I may ask, why add this to the article when it says the literal translation is "stairway wit"? Sandman30s (talk) 18:38, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Although the notion is (rightly) discounted in our article, I still can't help thinking of the esprit de l'escalier as a veritable spirit, who hangs out on staircases and takes delight in whispering to people the devastating ripostes that they were unable to come up with on the spur of the moment. Deor (talk) 18:33, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation of Greek gods/goddesses

My friend and I are having a squabble over how one pronounces the names of various gods and goddesses of Greek mythology such as Aphrodite, Dionysus, and -oh my- Hephaestus. If someone could please give a small list of names and idiots' pronunciations, I'd be truly grateful. Nolarboot (talk) 16:18, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

From our articles, Aphrodite is pronounced /afɾoˈðiti/ and Hephaestus is /hɪˈfεstəs/. Thomprod (talk) 16:41, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to the article, Template:PronEng or /hɪˈfεstəs/. --Lambiam 17:04, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And Aphrodite may be pronounced /afɾoˈðiti/ in Modern Greek, but in English she's pronounced /ˈæfɾəˌdaɪti/. —An gr 17:18, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Angr is correct. I copied the wrong pronounciation from our article. Thomprod (talk) 17:22, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh and Dionysus is /ˌdaɪəˈnaɪsəs/. —An gr 17:53, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Idiots' pronunciations": AF-ruh-DY-tee, DY-uh-NY-suhs, hih-FEE-stuhs (or hih-FEHS-tuhs). Deor (talk) 18:42, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd pronounce "Hephaestus" in your "idiots'" pronounciation heh-FY-stuhs, but agree with the rest. D aniel (‽) 18:51, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was merely transposing the pronunciations given by Lambiam above (and in the WP article) to the system used in The World Book Encyclopedia. If you think those pronunciations are incorrect, and you can source yours, perhaps you should make a change in the article. Deor (talk) 19:13, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

May 28

Translation from German to English

I would be very grateful if a user could please translate into English the following extract from a marriage registration:

Col 3 - Ort, wo die Trauung vollzogen wurde: II, Tempelg.[asse 3]. im Gemeindetempel Col 4 - Angabe der beigebrachten Zeugnisse und Documente: Ehe-Einwilligung der mj. [minderjהhrigen] Braut von ihrem Vater Wien, 14. Feber 1887; Ehe-Licenz der Braut Ministerium Budapest, den 26.2.1887 Z. 8465

Thank you. Simonschaim (talk) 04:33, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know about "Col" it may be an old form. The German word for column would be "Spalte". You'll have to see if someone else knows or leave it.

Col 3 - Site of the ceremony: II, Tempelgasse 3, in the parish/community temple Col 4 - Record of the certificates and documents submitted: father's parental consent to the wedding for the underage bride, Vienna, February 14, 1887, marriage license of/for the bride Budapest ministry, Feb. 26, 1887 record number 8465

(The expressions / are alternatives, since I don't know enough of the facts to be sure). Hope this helps. --Lisa4edit (talk) 05:00, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Kolumne" (in 19th century spelling also "Columne") can also be used for a column on a printed page, just like "Spalte". "Parish" isn't usually in English to refer to Jewish congregations. I'd say "community temple" or "congregation temple". I'd say "bride's marriage license" for "Ehe-Licenz der Braut". —An gr 05:25, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Simonschaim (talk) 04:30, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I found the following: Col 3 - Place, where the wedding was carried out: II, Tempelg. [asse 3]. in the municipality temple Col 4 - indication of the taught certifications and Documente: Marriage consent mj. [minderj ה hrigen] bride of its father Vienna, 14. Feber 1887; Marriage Licenz of the bride Ministry Budapest, 26.2.1887 Z. 8465 Hope this helps............Katrina —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.83.40.36 (talk) 18:02, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

El resto de/The rest of/La reste de

Is there a Latin cognate for the phrase "the rest of," which appears in English, Spanish, and French (at least)? Theshibboleth (talk) 05:02, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One possibility is reliquus/a/um, which is the root of the English "relic", as it was also used for the remains of a dead body (holy or not). Another possibility, which requires a different construction than "the rest of" in English but has a similar meaning, is "huiusmodi" (or separated as "huius modi") which means "of this sort"; you could have a bunch of nouns, "et huiusmodi". I guess the actual cognate would be "restare", which turned into Old French and Modern French "rester" ("rest" as in relaxation is a completely different Germanic word). But "restare" apparently doesn't have a past participle to use as a noun. Adam Bishop (talk) 05:24, 28 May 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.210.170.49 (talk) [reply]

So does that mean a phrase like "the rest of" may have existed in Latin that is cognate to the word rest also? Theshibboleth (talk) 05:40, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, sort of - but you would have to use "restare" with some other nouns, since there is no noun that can be made from "restare". So if you want to stay "the rest of the books", for example, you can say "reliqui libri", or "libri qui restant" ("the books that remain"). Adam Bishop (talk) 05:59, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could the present participle be used (like restans/restantia)? --Lambiam 06:01, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, there is one example of the present participle being used like that by Vergil in Lewis and Short, but otherwise all the examples are finite verbs. Adam Bishop (talk) 06:23, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A little online searching turned up a passage in Ammianus Marcellinus: "hactenus super Alpibus. nunc ad restantia veniamus" (second passage here). So restantia could clearly be used to mean "the rest," but I'm not sure whether it was ever used (with the genitive?) in a construction corresponding to "the rest of …"

The Medieval Latin Word List from British and Irish Sources contains an entry for a noun resta (or restum) with the meaning "remainder, residue," but that may be a formation based on the vernacular rather than a direct development from restare. Deor (talk) 13:15, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My little dictionary (Collins Gem) translates both residue and rest with reliqua pars. —Tamfang (talk) 02:32, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

burrstone

In the book it is written that "the soil consists of burrstone pebbles". I learned that synonim to the word "burrstone" is "buhrstone" of which millstones are made. But I can't translate it into Russian as there is no such geological term (I presume)in Russian language. Is there any other name of burrstone in English to approach the term to Russian and find in in the dictionary? Thank you.--88.84.200.1 (talk) 10:02, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Petrologically speaking, "buhrstone" (the usual spelling, it seems) can refer to many different types of rock, all suitable for the making of millstones. With this in mind, we can call any of these rocks "millstone" as well, according to the Dictionary of Mining, Mineral, and Related Terms. So, it would be all right to write "the soil consists of millstone pebbles" in English, and I suppose that if Russian also refers to any type of rock that makes good millstones as "millstone", we're in business. --Milkbreath (talk) 10:40, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Or maybe you can find something that says "a rough hard quartz rock" in Russian. --71.236.23.111 (talk) 10:45, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've never heard of the word "buhrstone" before, but it does appear in my Russian dictionary as жёрнов, which does in fact mean "millstone". Macnas (talk) 09:44, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doe? What does 'does mean here? If it is a misspell of what word?

Russia should ‘’show greater tolerance doe political dissent, and none for immunity on human rights abuses in Chechnya.” (from cnn.com) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.168.3.246 (talk) 12:36, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a link? Fribbler (talk) 12:40, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a typo - F and R are right beside D and E, someone's left hand must not have been aligned with the keyboard properly. Adam Bishop (talk) 12:49, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, it was not CNN but the NYTimes. here is the link. "for" sounds plausible.217.168.3.246 (talk) 13:02, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just to put this to bed: here is the original Amnesty International source with "for" in place of "doe". Fribbler (talk) 13:16, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That raises another question: how can someone misspell a citation? Wouldn't it be much logical to just copy and paste it? 217.168.3.246 (talk) 14:20, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(outdent) I'd reckon they were working form a print version of either the press release, or the full report, since as you pointed out, a copy-and-paste from another electronic source couldn't result in a typo. Fribbler (talk) 14:25, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What I find disturbing is that the New York Times is using a spellchecker instead of an editor. That would never have gotten past a human being. --Milkbreath (talk) 15:44, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lots of publishers think they don't need to hire proofreaders anymore since spellcheckers were invented. —An gr 17:22, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And even a person writing their very first professional piece, or an examination piece, knows not to rely totally on spell checkers. They're useful, but only up to a point. We see far more spelling errors appearing in print since the advent of spell checkers than was the case before. Publishers could not possibly not be aware of this, but many of them don't really seem to care. Progress has definitely been retrograde in this area. I lie awake at nights worrying about it. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:22, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Meanwhile: I have contacted the NYT and they have corrected the spell. 217.168.3.246 (talk) 19:07, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Subject headline

Hi there, which one is correct form:

Application for the position of "Part time job"
Application for the "Part time job" position

Thanks in advance--202.56.7.162 (talk) 16:51, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The second is better than the first, but it is correct only if it refers to a position advertised precisely as "Part time job". Otherwise, there should be no quotation marks, you need a hyphen to link the compound modifier, and you should eliminate "job", since "job" and "position" are synonymous and therefore redundant:

Application for the part-time position

Marco polo (talk) 17:26, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure you would not rather like to mention the job that you are applying for rather than the work hour conditions. To me this sounds as if you don't know or don't care what the job is as long as you can work part time. Unless they have openings for both a part time and a full time whatchmaydoer, just mentioning the job title would work better for me. --71.236.23.111 (talk) 22:03, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Needing substitute for trite cliché

While LOCE'ing an article, I came across the phrase "... a popular aftermarket addition to cars among the Beverly Hills rich and famous." If I'm not mistaken, "rich and famous" is an oft-used, banal phrase for the famous, high-income movie or television stars. Is there any more creative phrase to replace this...er...chestnut? --^La Pianista! 17:34, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"In-crowd" but I think that would possibly be even worse. --Lisa4edit (talk) 19:41, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"among the chichi of Beverly Hills." "among Beverly Hills celebrities." "among the Beverly Hills nouveaux riches." Not knowing what it is makes it impossible to gauge the right amount of sneer to put into it. --Milkbreath (talk) 21:46, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"The affluent few" would be a bit more neutral. It would also lose a lot of meaning for most users. --71.236.23.111 (talk) 22:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think the original should stand. It's a well-known phrase, and Wikipedia's not supposed to be particularly a place for creative writing. (I thought there was something in the Manual of Style specifically saying that, even, but if there is, I can't find it.) --Anonymous, 23:55 UTC, May 28, 2008.

Glitterati is a nice, concise term.--Eriastrum (talk) 16:44, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone use that word seriously? —Tamfang (talk) 17:48, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jianhe River

Our Tangjiashan Lake lists this as the name of the river causing the lake. It isn't on our List of rivers of China and as far as I can tell it translates to "river river" river. Do we have something wrong here? Rmhermen (talk) 20:59, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. If I remember correctly, "Jianghe" river would be "river-river" river, but I don't think the same is true for "Jianhe". Also, if the ending already has "he" (river), I don't see why should add another "river" to the end. Also, if I remember correctly, "Jiang" is often used for larger rivers, such as the Chang Jiang. Thanks. ~A H 1^(TCU) 22:12, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CNN had Jinahe but some German sites only had "Jian" river. The whole thing reminds me of a Discworld novel where they had mountains called "another mountain" and "who's this idiot who doesn't know what a mountain is" in the local language, due to the fact that visiting cartographers had pointed at a geographic feature and ask a local guide what it was called :-)--71.236.23.111 (talk) 23:21, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's closer to Hillhillhill Hill. Algebraist 23:27, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The translation on this bulletin ([4]) board says that it is 剑河, 建河 and 涧河 in different posts. The 'he' is 'river', and the 'jian' means 'sword', 'build' or 'mountain stream'. Rivers and mountains often get doubled nomenclature between Chinese and English translations (Tangjiashan lake means 'Tangjia mountain lake'唐家山湖). Steewi (talk) 00:28, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the river involved is properly called 湔江. This name appears in this Baidu article on Beichuan Qiang Autonomous County where the barrier lake is located. You can also see the name in this Xinhua story about the lake. The name would be transliterated as Jian Jiang, but since Jiang here means river, you could call it the Jian River. --Cam (talk) 05:49, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

May 29

foreigner or alien

When you say foreigner and when alien (refering to people)?217.168.0.4 (talk) 04:04, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Foreigner would tend to imply a legit immigration status while alien would not. Of course these aren't hard and fast definitions as neither would be classified as a positive way to describe people and as such resist solid definitions. Leftus (talk) 04:17, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say "foreigner" is the generic term and "alien" is only used when legal status is an issue. After all, an Englishman in New York can still be a "legal alien". And resident aliens are certainly legal. —An gr 04:23, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you have been naturalized you're not an alien, but if you're not assimilated I might still call you a foreigner; one is legalistic, the other more informal. —Tamfang (talk) 05:08, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, and answering the question: "are you from here"? No, I am alien/an alien/foreigner? Alien sound for me - not native speaker of English - like a film. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.168.4.118 (talk) 16:44, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, in ordinary usage "alien" means from another planet. —Tamfang (talk) 17:49, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In Japan, every foreigner is required to carry an I.D. card, called 外国人登録証明書, which is translated on the card as 'Alien Registration Card'. Whether you have legal status or not in Japan, you are always called by the one word 「外国人」, or the shortened form 「外人」, which are both variously translated as 'foreigner' or 'alien'.--ChokinBako (talk) 21:44, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dutch Translation

What does "Weer een pezzo da novanta" mean?

(Context: I was watching The Godfather with Dutch subtitles, and in the scene towards the end, where Michael and his father talk, the son says something I can't understand--it's Italian--and this is what the subtitles translate it as. But I don't speak Dutch. The line comes right after the father says (don't read on if you haven't seen the movie and dislike spoilers...) "I didn't want this for you. I wanted you to be the one who pulls the strings. Senator Corleone. Governor Corleone.")

96.233.8.220 (talk)Wasurenaide —Preceding comment was added at 08:31, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Only the first two words are Dutch. "Weer" means "again" and "een" is the indefinite article "a"/"an". "Pezzo da novanta" is Italian. It literally means a 90mm artillery gun ("piece of ninety"), but is used also for a powerful man (a "big shot"). "I wanted you to be the one who pulls the strings. Senator Corleone. Governor Corleone." "Another big shot." DAVID ŠENEK 10:18, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! ^_^ 96.233.8.220 (talk)Wasurenaide —Preceding comment was added at 16:12, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Origin of Mickey

origin of term "mickey" when referring to one of Roman Catholic faith —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.7.198.72 (talk) 14:28, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it usually means an Irish person, rather than Roman Catholic ... from St Michael, the patron saint of Ireland.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:38, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've only heard us referred to as "Micks", not Mickeys. St. Michael is, amongst other things, patron saint of England, but not Ireland. It simply was a very common name here. Same as "Paddys". And in Scotland "Tims". Fribbler (talk) 15:22, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have always heard the Mick name comes from the abundance of Irish McSomething surnames. See also Mick and Mickey Finn#Other possible origins Rmhermen (talk) 16:08, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard the Mac- etymology as a possibility, but I would be a bit surprised since Mac- names are more common in Scotland. Though, I suppose ethnic slurs know no demographics :-) Fribbler (talk) 16:30, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say Mac-, I said Mc- which is sometimes perceived as a Scottish/Irish distinction. Rmhermen (talk) 16:42, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's probably worth pointing out at this point that England's patron saint is in fact St George, regardless of what Fribbler might think. St Michael is, inter alia, the patron saint of Marks and Spencer. Malcolm XIV (talk) 19:08, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

internet language: smilies

Although the internet is famous for bad language, I think that at least in one point it has developed something of value: smilies like :( :). Normally, plain texts are prone to hide any emotions of the writer. If we use smilies we have a way to communicate that. Are there other phenomena like this in internet language? Will it become mainstream some day?217.168.4.118 (talk) 16:46, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Use of typographic symbols to indicate emotions had been proposed long and often before the internet as you can see in Emoticon. There are lots of trends that are currently being promoted by online communications. (Not capitalizing I (pronoun)immediately comes to mind.) As with all fads, some will stick, some will fade, some will be deemed "out" by the next generation and some will be revived. --71.236.23.111 (talk) 21:47, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen people use them in handwriting for many years, (presumably where the :) came from in the first place). I have recently come across printed letters (i.e. on paper) using them as well. I doubt it will become accepted punctuation for a very long time, though, but it might. I can't imagine the T.V. Licensing people sending you a letter saying "We see that this address has not registered for a T.V. License :( If you have already paid, then disregard this letter, LOL" or something.--ChokinBako (talk) 21:36, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Definite article usage

Should a definite article be used in front of "Iowa Lottery"? The official name does not include an article, and google search results are inconclusive. The Iowa Lottery article starts with a definite article, but is such usage correct from the grammatical point of view? If so (or if not), which grammatical rule is applied here? Thanks much!--204.193.71.9 (talk) 17:05, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Omitting the article seems appropriate for the entity that operates the lottery, but not for the lottery itself. —Tamfang (talk) 17:54, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but what grammatical rule would regulate this usage, do you know? That is, why is the definite article appropriate for the lottery, but not for the entity?--204.193.68.21 (talk) 18:21, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a matter of grammar so much as of English idiom. We say and write "the Grateful Dead" and "the Empire State Building" and "the Central Intelligence Agency" even though the definite article is not part of those entities' capitalized proper names, and "the Iowa Lottery" seems to be in the same class. Deor (talk) 18:35, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; I appriciate your help, folks!--204.193.68.21 (talk) 19:10, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eddie Izzard

You remarked:

A year after his birth, Izzard's family moved to Britain, where his mother died of cancer in March 1968.

Don't you move to England? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.83.40.36 (talk) 17:56, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Britain is synonymous (at least in American usage) with the United Kingdom. According to this source, Izzard's family actually moved to Northern Ireland, which is part of the United Kingdom, or Britain. It isn't particularly important to Izzard's biography that his family moved from Yemen first to Northern Ireland then to Wales (not England), where his mother died of cancer. I think it's fine that the article says they moved to Britain, where his mother died of cancer, without going into excessive detail about the family's various moves. Marco polo (talk) 18:51, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well actually, Northern Ireland is the one part of the UK that can't be called "Britain". It should really say that Izzard's family moved to the UK, which will cover both NI and Wales. —An gr 19:36, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not true. Britain is a perfectly valid synonym for the UK, as you will see by looking at the articles Britain, United Kingdom and Terminology of the British Isles. Northern Ireland is not a part of Great Britain, but it is a part of Britain. Malcolm XIV (talk) 20:01, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shipoopi

I've heard the Buddy Hackett version of the song Shipoopi from The Music Man a few times recently and was wondering where the word "shipoopi" came from. I can't find it listed as a word on onelook.com , but the song makes it sound like it's actual word. Is it really a word or slang, and if so what does it mean and what is its etymology? Thanks! 63.95.36.13 (talk) 19:42, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find any evidence one way or the other, but I'm pretty sure Meredith Willson made it up as a kind of nonsense word with the right sort of rhythmic and onomatopoeic qualities for the song. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 21:15, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]