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

July 15

John Smith in Chinese

What is the Mandarin language equivalent of John Smith, or say, John Q. Public, Mr. Everyman, etc.

Thanks

Duomillia (talk) 01:13, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Technically, there's no "equivalent". There's no literal translation, so you might want to ask for something that sounds somewhat similar. IceUnshattered (talk) 01:41, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

I had a friend in China called 张磊 (Zhang Lei, or in Taiwan, Chang Lei), who said his name was one of the most common names. See Chinese name for more. Steewi (talk) 01:41, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

The rough equivalent would be the expression 張三李四 Aas217 (talk) 01:48, 15 July 2008 (UTC) (talk) 01:47, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Not sure about John Smith, but the Chinese equivalent of "Junior" would be 小宝 or 宝宝 (xiao bao or bao bao). bibliomaniac15 01:51, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

The John Doe article lists equivalents in numerous languages, including several Chinese ones. (I can't vouch for any.) jnestorius^(talk) 08:18, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

John the Baptist is 聖若翰洗者, don't know about smith. english names are not usually translated though, but you'll find John its biblica.^MY♥_INchile 02:16, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

王涛(wang tao, masculine) and 王红(wang hong, feminine) are quite common. Also, 小明(xiao ming) is a common boy's name used by primary school students when they are asked to write a story.--Faizaguo 08:57, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Latin vs. Ancient Greek

What are the similarities and differences between the two languages? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.168.2.59 (talk) 01:37, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

For starters, there's the alphabet. They each use different characters. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 02:06, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Other than the facts that they're both Indo-European languages, with the consequent similarities (along with differences) in roots and inflections, and that some Greek words were adopted into Latin, there's not a whole lot of similarities. Deor (talk) 02:57, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you -- is there anything else? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.168.2.59 (talk) 19:51, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Do you speak/read any lnaguage of India?

If you do, please help me find out the translation of the english word hoopoe in the indian language you speak/read (Sanskrit, Hindi, Marathi, Gujarathi, Bengali, Punjabi, Tamil, Telugu, Urdu, Malayalam, Assamese, etc.). In english alphabet please. Thank you in advance. Eliko (talk) 16:12, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

As that page shows the bird's range includes India, you'd do well to contact an ornithological association there, or perhaps a university zoological department. These folks seem to have a handle on international birding; perhaps contact them for advice? -- Deborahjay (talk) 01:49, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I think zoologists are not supposed to have that kind of information I'm looking for, so I should probably contact people who speak/read indian languages. Anyways, thank you for your effort. I'm still looking for indian language speakers who may help me. Eliko (talk) 11:40, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

this page seems to think it's called "hudhud". ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 02:07, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

hudhud is the arabic word, and Haryana inhabitants seem to have been influenced by Arabic, whereas I'm looking for original indian languages. Anyways, thank you for your effort. I'm still looking for indian language speakers who may help me. Eliko (talk) 11:40, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi User:Eliko; if you don't get enough response here, you could try looking through Category:Wikipedians by language for active users who speak the languages you are interested in and contact them directly. It's slower, but at least you'll get someone who knows the language! --_{tiny plastic} Grey Knight ⊖ 13:50, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

It's really much slower and exceedingly exhaustive, what a pity! Anyway, thank you for your new advice. Eliko (talk) 21:04, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

July 16

Signatures

Most signatures at the end of letters have a form like this

Sincerely,
Jon Doe

I'd like to know if there is a formal name for the "Sincerely," part or any of the words that precede the name (Goodbye, Love, etc...)

♫Deathgleaner 03:56, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

It is usually called the closing. See business letter for the names for the other parts of a letter. Michael Slone (talk) 04:06, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

We have articles at Complimentary close and at Valediction. Deor (talk) 04:08, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

What kinds of nouns are these?

In English, why are the names of the four seasons not considered proper nouns, but names of the months of the year and days of the week are considered proper nouns? Also, into what category do names of sports and games such as "poker" and "baseball" belong? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.134.228.23 (talk) 07:48, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

To your second question, I'd say "poker" and "baseball" are definitely common nouns. To your first, I'd say it's a good question, and indeed I've seen people capitalize the names of the seasons probably more often than almost any other common noun, because there's a strong intuition they "should" be proper nouns. Your question is only answerable if we have an adequate definition of "common noun" and "proper noun", and I'm not sure we do. I always felt like the definition was sort of circular: "Why don't season names get capitalized? Because they aren't proper nouns. — What is a proper noun? A noun that gets capitalized." In French, day names, months, and languages do not get capitalized (i.e. they're considered common nouns), while in English they do (i.e. they're considered proper nouns), so there doesn't even seem to be a universal semantic criterion that can be applied. German makes things easier by simply capitalizing all nouns (but makes things harder by considering adjectives to be nouns in some circumstances, like "good" in the phrase "something good"). Languages written in other writing systems than the Latin, Greek, Cyrillic, and Armenian alphabets make things easier still by not having a distinction between capital and lower case letters. Maybe we should just start writing English in katakana... —Angr 08:36, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Related info: Capitalization rules for days, months, demonyms and language-names in many languages from [[Wikimedia] jnestorius^(talk) 08:46, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

It is a good question.. the answers may be historical/etymological

The days and months are mostly named after people eg Thursday Thor, Wednesday Odin, similarily the months August, Augustus the other months are mostly numerical in origin eg September from septem - so maybe it's because they are named after things, and are relatively modern that they are capitalised..

The seasons are so old and entrenched that it seems meaningless to capitalise them, I'd expect the months to go the same way in many years to come..87.102.86.73 (talk) 10:46, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I dont think etymology is the way to go.

R. Quirk and folks (in their big English grammar) have a definition of proper noun that is both semantic and grammatical. For the semantic criterion, proper nouns have unique reference. For the grammatical criteria, proper nouns lack (indefinite/definite) article contrast and number contrast. For example, Louisiana refers to only one thing and *a Louisiana & *the Louisiana and *Louisianas are ungrammatical. The same grammar applies to the West Indies (which has an obligatory the: you cant say *West Indy, *West Indies (with no article), *a West Indy, *the West Indy. Since English is flexible, you can use a proper noun like Louisiana as a count noun, in which case it loses unique reference and gains article & number contrast. (E.g. Lousiana is no longer the Louisiana that she once knew or Did he buy a Rembrandt at the auction last week? or How many George Bushes does it take to screw in a light bulb?). This noun category conversion makes the analysis harder. Anyway, for fun, you can put the seasons through these tests and try to come up with an answer.

The capitalization issue is something somewhat connected to proper noun status, but it is not directly correlated. Another thing to mention about capitalization in proper nouns is that you capitalize t in The Hague but not in the United States. Both are proper nouns. There doesnt seem to be any predictability here. I think that generally proper nouns will be capitalized and will retain their capitalization after noun category conversion. Maybe the variable capitalization is connected to nouns that are have membership in both proper noun and non-proper noun categories? (To elaborate, some nouns like cake, brick can be either count or mass nouns. One analysis would be that they dual membership in both count and mass noun categories). – ishwar  (speak) 15:13, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, by those criteria, days of the week at least should be common nouns and uncapitalized: "Monday" does not refer to only one thing, and "a Monday", "the Monday", and "Mondays" are all grammatical. For months it's less clear-cut: "July" does not refer to only one thing either, but "a July", "the July" and "Julys" are starting to sound (to me at least) like transferred usages along the lines of "a Remembrandt", "the Louisiana she once knew" and "George Bushes". The seasons still sound like common nouns: "a summer", "the summer", and "summers" are all okay. Languages are proper nouns too by those criteria, so either French has different linguistic criteria for the distinction or it spells them wrong. —Angr 15:24, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

It seems clearer to me now that 'summer','winter' etc has entered human conciousness as the name (small n) for those seasons, whereas the weeks and months still have titular associations (see http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/titular)..

It's also worth noting that weeks/months are not always capitalised (many don't) but it remains convention to do so for instance when marking a date in a letter..87.102.86.73 (talk) 01:51, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Do weeks have names? I've never seen a style guide that permits the names of months not to be capitalised. Anyone who writes, for example, "13 february" is probably from the same school that writes "i do alot of writing and im a good speller". -- JackofOz (talk) 07:13, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Decimate

For the past few decades, Lake Superior State University has issued an annual “List of Words Banished from the Queen’s English for Misuse, Overuse and General Uselessness.” …..In general, the list is most informative as a barometer of pet peeves about language: what is it that gets under people’s skin, so much so that they think words (or particularly disliked senses of words) should be removed from the lexicon forthwith? One of the entries on the 2008 list is the beleaguered word decimate, which originally referred to the ancient Roman practice of executing every tenth soldier in a mutinous army regiment. “Word-watchers have been calling for the annihilation of this one for several years,” the press release states. .....And by 1663 the usage of decimate had already expanded to mean “to destroy or remove a large proportion of,” according to citations collected in the Oxford English Dictionary. For nearly three and a half centuries, then, virtually every use of the word decimate has been in this extended sense, except when referring to the harsh old Roman practice. And these days such references seem limited to complaints about the word itself. However, even though there is scant evidence in the history of standard English usage to support the idea that the “one-tenth” meaning is the “real” one, some questions of usage have lingered. From: Should “Decimate” be Annihilated? Lexicography on January 3, 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.121.206.124 (talk) 19:02, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

I would like a ruling on the use of decimate or decimation. In your definitions it includes both to eliminate "nearly all," and the obsolete roman/tax use of the form, to remove a decime (10%). For taxes and discipline a decime was a fairly minor amount.

In general usage and in older unabridged dictionaries, to decimate means to move the decimal point to the left (100.0 to 10.00) or to be left with a tenth....a loss of an order of magnitude.

In short, the decimation of the Irish potato crop did not mean that 90% of the potatoes were fine.

If you have a dollar and spend a dime, have you decimated your resources?

And no modern military commander would send in a squad of 10 if the injury of one person would decimate their chances of victory.

A one million, one hundred thousand dollar fortune decimated in the Great Depression did not mean they kept a $Million.

My vote, as you see, is that decimate is (roughly) the loss of a resource in the range of an order of magnitude, a decimal. While a decime, is a dime. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.121.206.124 (talk) 12:38, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree -LambaJan (talk) 12:50, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I'd be inclined to agree too, for general purposes. For writing about taxation or Roman history, perhaps it's better to reserve the word for the reducing-by-a-tenth sense - these seem to be the places where the word could cause most confusion. In any case, in a Wikipedia article it might be a good idea to link the word to the article for the sense that's intended (Decimation (Roman army) for reducing by a tenth, Decimation (Roman army)#Current usage of the word for reducing by a large proportion). AJHW (talk) 14:39, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

We do not do "rulings" of the sort you are asking for. It's clear from the article that the formal meaning is reduction by 10%, and that the "reduction by a large amount" use is not universally accepted, not least since it pays no heed to what the word actually, as opposed to colloquially, means. Yes, the word is, like all others, on a language treadmill which sees the meaning shift. but we should certainly not elect to use the word in the clumsy not-universally-accepted wrong but colloquial sense, since we purport to be writing an encyclopedia which depends on people being able to understand what we mean. The easiest solution is, do not use the word except in its formal sense - reduction by 10%. Choose another word or phrase if you mean something else (like "reduce by an order of magnitude"). --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:32, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

And while we're at it, quantum leap. I mean, WTF? Why not just stick a label on your forehead stating "I have not got a clue what the words I use actually mean".--Tagishsimon (talk) 17:34, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm with Humpty Dumpty on this. 'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone,' it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.' -- Q Chris (talk) 07:19, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. I am going to look into this further, including the Roman practice. The simple notion (clumsy or not) that because the word contains a "dec," it means to reduce by 10% is a recent (since WWII) shift in use.....perhaps technically correct, or perhaps due to a superficial interpretation and conclusion. The leap seems flawed to me. While dec linguistically equals ten....it is not always percent. And while the Roman military practice operated on the principal of random selection by sequential lots of tens (1000 warriors divided into 100 groups of ten men, of which ten groups are chosen, of which 1 in 10 men were killed...) ten out of a thousand is a reduction of 1 percent of the legion...not ten percent. But this practice is said to have destroyed (decimated) 100 percent of the morale. Kathryn (original poser of the question).

We reduced our development databases at work to 10% of the production size. We were quite proud of the phrase we used to describe this immense project - "database decimation". I thought decimation was a coined, off-the-cuff word, without bothering to research usage at the time. I found it quite interesting to read the discussion above! Sandman30s (talk) 22:12, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Kathryn, I'm not quite clear what windmill you're tilting at right now with your "look into this further" and your "perhaps due to a superficial interpretation and conclusion". The OED finds examples of decimate meaning "To kill, destroy, or remove one in every ten of" from 1663. Where you get the idea that this is a "since WWII shift" from is beyond me. Equally the OED states that the word is used rhetorically or loosely to mean "to destroy or remove a large proportion of". --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:24, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Joshin ya

Where did the term, "I was just Joshin ya," come from? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.207.198.130 (talk) 16:52, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Moved from Miscellaneous Desk. There's a definition in wikt:josh but no etymology. -- Coneslayer (talk) 17:00, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Merriam-Webster dates the verb form from 1845, but says "origin unknown". The Online Etymology Dictionary (aka the other OED) says probably from the name Joshua, but doesn't have a lot to back that up. --LarryMac | Talk 17:34, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Merriam-Webster-Shebster. The OED says of the etymology "Cf. Josh Billings, pseudonym of an American humorist." From our article we find "Josh Billings was the pen name of humorist born Henry Wheeler Shaw (20 April 1818 – 14 October 1885). He was perhaps the second most famous humor writer and lecturer in the United States in the second half of the 19th century after Mark Twain." The inference is that to josh is derived from his assumed forename. The earliest use is confirmed at 1845, so he'd have had to have been a reasonably precocious talent. Or else there was something else going on that the OED has not picked up on, such as that josh, to joke, originated prior to Shaw assuming his pen-name and indeed guided him towards the choice of forename. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:32, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't see the need to denigrate one of my sources, I simply reported what it said. And if you had bothered to read my other link, you'd have seen "The word was in use earlier than the career of U.S. humorist "John [sic] Billings," pseudonym of Henry Wheeler Shaw (1818-85), who did not begin to write and lecture until 1860; but his popularity after 1869 may have influence [sic] that of the word." --LarryMac | Talk 19:47, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh dear. Sense of humour failure. Ah well. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:49, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

"Humor". This is Amerkin stuff we's discussin. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 20:19, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Gosh, U've shawly taken the "me" out of humour with that josh against Mark mark against josh. Seriously though, why would you "shebster" Merriam-Webster and then confirm its answer to the questioner? Zain Ebrahim (talk) 14:45, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

July 17

IPA of Advaita Vedanta

I have asked this in the talk page of the article, but it needs the expertise of someone who knows sanskrit pronunciation and IPA. I figure that if anyone has such broad knowledge it will be here. The Article gives the pronunciation as IPA: [əd̪vait̪ə veːd̪ɑːnt̪ə]. Shouldn't it be IPA: [əd̪vɛt̪ə veːd̪ɑːnt̪ə]? I am not nearly confident enough to change the article myself. -- Q Chris (talk) 07:26, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

No, /ai/ is right for Sanskrit. I'd use [ʋ] instead of [v] in both instances, though, and the /n/ before the dental /t/ is itself dental, so I'd go for IPA: [əd̪ʋait̪ə ʋeːd̪ɑːn̪t̪ə]. —Angr 07:39, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Is the pronunciation of ऐ different is Sanskrit to in Hindi because I checked what I thought was right against [this site]? The devenagari अद्वैत would have lead me to think that it should be an ɛ sound. I am not a fluent Hindi speaker so I could have that pronunciation wrong too! -- Q Chris (talk) 08:18, 17 July 2008 (UTC).

I don't know much about Hindi but I think /ai/ has been monophthongized to /ɛ/ in it. —Angr 08:26, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, that would explain why I got it wrong! -- Q Chris (talk) 08:35, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Old meaning of "leet"

In a Scottish church document from 1835, I read that a church asked "permission to put an ordained minister upon the leet". What does this mean? I don't have access to the OED right now, and I know without looking that it's going to be impossible to find this meaning of leet on Google :-) 71.182.134.18 (talk) 07:45, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Take your pick from meaning 1:

• "A special kind of court of record which the lords of certain manors were empowered by charter or prescription to hold annually or semi-annually"

or the more general meaning 2:

• "A list of persons designated as eligible for some office." --Richardrj ^{talk email} 08:55, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Um, you do know that the OED isn't the only dictionary on the web, right? --Kreachure (talk) 13:19, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

It has an entry in the Wiktionary here. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 20:54, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Alexei (sic) Fyodorov

The page spells his first name Олексій and Алексей in Ukrainian and Russian, respectively. Why would this not be transliterated "Aleksei" in English? That's how it appears in the English-language edition of the Encyclopedia of the Holocaust. Is this a rule for this, or is it a matter of convention or preference? -- Deborahjay (talk) 08:15, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

It's probably just convention, like Alexander Solzhenitsyn or Peter Tchaikovsky. (On the other hand, I notice our articles on the two of them call them Aleksandr and Pyotr.) —Angr 08:30, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Angr, the examples you give are anglicized first names, such as with the Russian war hero Joseph Trumpeldor whose name appears thus in the (English-only) Encyclopedia Judaica. My query is about transliteration in cases where the original Cyrillic has to be romanized. -- Thanks, Deborahjay (talk) 09:11, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, Alexei is sort of a borderline case. I've known English-speakers who weren't even of Russian heritage named Alexei, but the name was clearly borrowed into English from Russian. So it's sort of an anglicized name itself. In a formal romanization I would of course write Aleksei or Aleksey or Aleksej or Alekseĭ (depending on the romanization system being used), but I wouldn't be surprised if whoever started our article on Fyodorov wasn't being that scientificky about the spelling of the first name. I notice "Alexei Fyodorov" -wikipedia gets a lot more Google hits than "Aleksei Fyodorov" -wikipedia, so the anglicized spelling seems to be well entrenched. —Angr 09:56, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

In turn, Alexei was borrowed from the Latin Alexius (similarly for Sergius > Sergei etc). So it's really going back to its roots, and using x instead of ks is understandable. This sort of thing also happens with names that Russian borrowed from German. The German Lehmanstein became, in (strictly transliterated) Russian, Leymanshteyn, but to render it in English as "Leymanshteyn" would look, well, wrong, so it usually comes out as Lehmanstein. Then there's Alexandre Benois, whose name was originally French. In Russian it became Бэнуа, which is strictly transliterated "Benua" in English, but can anyone be blamed for spelling it "Benois"? -- JackofOz (talk) 11:58, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

The source language was Greek (Alexios, Sergios) rather than Latin (Alexius, Sergius), of course. The name's popularity in Russia may be traced to a medieval ecclesiast who became Moscow's patron saint. --Ghirla^-трёп- 12:52, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Similarly, there's Togliatti, Russia, so spelled on National Geographic maps, although Wikipedia spells it Tolyatti. —Angr 12:18, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Hmmm... what you two are describing touches on a related matter: the reliance on phonologic elements rather than strict letter-based equivalencies when transliterating. For example, vowel-poor Hebrew is quite inadequate to render the nuances of French pronunciation, let alone the complexities of French orthography: silent consonants aren't represented, so that accurate back-transcribing to romanize requires actual knowledge of the French original. For quite some time, I was unaware that the ubiquitous biscuits I called "Patty bar" (פטי בר) were none other than the classic Petit Beurre...! And with all due respect to the German/Russian axis (linguistically), I tend to regard the Jewish surnames, at least, as having been filtered through Yiddish which has its own orthography using Hebrew letters. -- Deborahjay (talk) 13:02, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

As WP:RUS guides us, Alexei, Alexey, Aleksei, and Aleksey are all acceptable transliterations, although I'd prefer the latter. --Ghirla^-трёп- 12:50, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it was Greek, my error. However, whichever spelling you choose, please don't pronounce it a-LEK-sy, but a-lek-SAY. -- JackofOz (talk) 13:20, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

But Sexy a-lek-SAY doesn't rhyme! —Angr 14:37, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

"virtuoso concerto

What does "virtuoso concerto" mean? I could not find it in wiktionary or wikipedia (though if you search for it, you'll see articles with the word).68.148.164.166 (talk) 09:32, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

That sounds like a typographical error to me. Virtuoso (meaning highly skilled) is applied to a performer or group of performers, or to their performance. It would not be applied to the word concerto, which is a musical composition for a solo instrument and orchestra. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 09:40, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it's a typographical error; what is meant is a concerto that demands great virtuosity from the soloist, or that gives the soloist the opportunity to show off his or her virtuosity. DAVID ŠENEK 09:56, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it's a typographical error at all, it is probably meant to indicate a solo concerto, as opposed to a concerto grosso. Both of these musical compositions are called concerti, but a soloist plays the primary melodic component in the former while the latter has a group of musicians playing the prominent role in a piece. Aas217 (talk) 18:18, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Etymology of the names of medical subspecialties

Why is an orthopaedic surgeon not an orthopaediatrician? Why do some specialties use -ology as a suffix, and others -iatrics? My first question on Wikipedia so I hope it's phrased properly and my apologies for rather rudely asking two questions at once! Thanks, Od6600 (talk) 12:14, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Regarding your first question, orthopaedic is the adjective for orthopod, which is a completely different structure from paediatrics... which leads to your second question. "iatrics" is a suffix derived from greek "iatros" which means doctor or healer or physician so this is used for medical specialties. "ology" is the "study of" so it could have be used interchangeably, over the years as these words came into being, for medical specialties; probably the suffix that sounded better was adopted. There is also the suffix "dontist" eg. orthodontist, periodontist for different specialties of dentistry. And don't forget the good old physician. Sandman30s (talk) 14:29, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I would have to disagree about orthopod being the origin of orthopaedic; in my experience orthopod is an affectionately dismissive slang term used, by physicians, to refer to our surgical colleagues. A Greek colleague of mine has suggested it derives from the origins of the profession which was at first about correcting abnormalities in childhood posture. I think you're probably spot on that -ology/-iatrics are chosen according to the sound of the resulting word; onciatrics and paediology just sound wrong! Thanks, Od6600 (talk) 09:56, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Paed- comes from a Greek word meaning "child", pod- (as in podiatry) comes from a Greek word meaning "foot", and (o)dont- comes from a Greek word meaning "tooth". These are the oblique stems (the nominative singular forms listed in dictionaries were different). AnonMoos (talk) 12:08, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Greek origins for "ortho" mean straight and for "pod" mean foot for literal translation of straightening or correcting the foot......

Uknown phrase in unknown language

What does "Kak vi poivaete" mean? I don't know what language it's in, and I'm unsure about the third word. The first two are right, I think. It sounds Slavic. Thanks in advance. 80.123.210.172 (talk) 19:16, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes it's certainly slavic. the first two words mean "How are you..."? Are you sure you use the appropriate alphabet? Most of the slavic languages usualy use the Cyrillic alphabet, except for Croatian (and other few slavic languages) which use the Latin alphabet, so if you've used the appropriate alphabet then it's probably Croatian. Hope it helps. Eliko (talk) 19:25, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

It looks like a miss-spelled transliteration of "как вы поживаете?" - Russian for "how are you?" (lit: how do you live?), but I suppose it could be from another Slavic language altogether. Koolbreez (talk) 19:34, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

(snigger) - you mis-spelled mis-spelled as miss-spelled (couldn't resist this one). -- JackofOz (talk) 05:42, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

If a young woman had done it you could have said "miss mis-spelled mis-spelled as miss-spelled, but being English I preferred mis-spelt". -- Q Chris (talk) 11:44, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

By the way, if the latin alphabet in which the sentence is written is the original one, then the sentence is supposed to be Croatian, and then the first two words mean: "How do I create more". Eliko (talk) 23:04, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

"Most of the Slavic languages usually use the Cyrillic alphabet" ... except Polish, Czech, Slovak, Slovenian, Croatian, Kashubian. i.e. about half of them. And are you saying that 'vi' is a Croatian verb form meaning 'I create more'? --ColinFine (talk) 23:51, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't think that they are about half of them.

"Kak" means: how do I create; "vi" means: more.

Eliko (talk) 03:27, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Eliko, in which language do these words mean these things? -- JackofOz (talk) 05:42, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Croatian. Eliko (talk) 13:35, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

There are 15 modern Slavic languages with a non-deprecated ISO 639-2 code, which seems to be as neutral a definition of what counts as a language (as opposed to a dialect) as anything. Of these, 9 are usually written in the Latin alphabet, 5 usually in the Cyrillic alphabet, and 1 (Serbian) can be written in either.

Latin

1. Bosnian
2. Croatian
3. Czech
4. Kashubian
5. Polish
6. Slovak
7. Slovenian
8. Sorbian, Upper
9. Sorbian, Lower

Cyrillic

1. Belarusian
2. Bulgarian
3. Macedonian
4. Russian
5. Ukrainian

Either

1. Serbian

So if each language gets an equal "vote", well more than half of the Slavic languages are written in the Latin alphabet. Even if we wanted to be more conservative in our definition of language and lump Croatian and Bosnian in with Serbian, Kashubian in with Polish, and Upper and Lower Sorbian together, the score would still be 5-5-1, i.e. half Latin, half Cyrillic. However, if each language's "vote" is proportionate to its number of speakers, then of course Cyrillic wins because there are so many Russian speakers and so few Sorbian and Kashubian speakers. —Angr 05:34, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

It's Russian.^MY♥_INchile 01:56, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Swedish translation

Is this a name of a book? Uträkning huru Stämplade Pappers-afgiften bör betalas år 1777 och de följande åren. -and- Kongl. Nummer-Lotterie Directionens Kungörelse, Angående Någre Författningar, som wid detta Kongl. Lotterie komma at i akt tagas.__Christie the puppy lover (talk) 21:57, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

No, it's a set of instructions. the first and fifth words are unidentifiable, and the same is with the "Kongl." which is probably a brief spelling of a longer word.

Here is the translation (while leaving the unidentifiable words at their original positions):

Uträkning whether Stamps Paper afgiften should be paid for years 1777 and the following years. - and-Kongl. Number-Lottery Direction Order, Subject Some Statutes, which with this Kongl. Lottery come at the opportunity attendance.

Eliko (talk) 22:51, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Üträkning = calculation, afgiften = tax / duty, Kongl. = (guess) an abbreviation for royal. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 23:14, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Isn't the last word a passive/reflexive verb, 'be taken'? --ColinFine (talk) 23:57, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it is. The last part would be better as which at this Royal Lottery will be into use taken. The word use in my translation isn't great either. The phrasing is obviously a bit archaic. /Coffeeshivers (talk) 10:27, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Correcting myself here: The combination of the last the words can be found in contemporary modern swedish as the single word iakttagas, which basically means be observed. With that in mind, the last part should be interpreted as which at this Royal Lottery will be adhered to. ColinFine's interpretation of the word tagas is still correct. /Coffeeshivers (talk) 10:33, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Wouldn't "Kongl", in this sense, mean something like "Royal"? I know Norwegian for "king" is "Kong", and "Königlich" is German for "Royal". Nyttend (talk) 20:56, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Now I see Cookatoo's comment...at least I'm not the only one to have this guess :-) Nyttend (talk) 20:56, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

It may very well be book titles - or pamphlets, or whatever, some set of instructions for these things may well be published in book form, especially if the Stamp Tax was hard to calculate. "Calculation of how the Stamp Tax should be paid in 1777 and the following years" - and - "Royal Number Lottery Direction Announcement, Concerning Some regulations (not sure of this word) that will be observed in relation to this Royal Lottery." Seems like slightly archaic Swedish, may well be around 1777-ish (I'm not a native speaker though). Jørgen (talk) 22:16, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Visitor Center

Hello. While working on Laie Hawaii Temple‎, I came across four different forms of "Visitor Center":

1. Visitor Center
2. Visitors Center
3. Visitor's Center
4. Visitors' Center

I want to use the spelling favored by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but even that is hard to find out. They seem to favor "Visitors' Center" in many sources, but the other three are commonly used. Can anyone find out the standard term for the LDS visitor center? Thanks! Viriditas (talk) 03:08, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

This page has "Visitors' Center". Gary King (talk) 08:29, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Gary. I'll go ahead and make the change. And of course, when people complain about it, I'll give them your name. :-) Viriditas (talk) 13:20, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

The section of Private Eye's letters pages dealing with readers' corrections—"Pedants Corner"—has recently entertained such a volume of correspondence on whether an apostrophe was necessary for the title of the section, and if so, where it should appear, that the editors took to moving an apostrophe about the letters of pedants at random every issue for several months, before renaming the section "Pedantry Corner" and declaring correspondence closed. 86.44.28.16 (talk) 08:34, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Heh. Not a bad solution. Viriditas (talk) 13:20, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Gernerally speaking none are incorrect because all have arguments to support them. With LDS specifically try contacting the LDS Newsroom. Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 17:12, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Visitor Center

Hello. While working on Laie Hawaii Temple‎, I came across four different forms of "Visitor Center":

1. Visitor Center
2. Visitors Center
3. Visitor's Center
4. Visitors' Center

I want to use the spelling favored by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but even that is hard to find out. They seem to favor "Visitors' Center" in many sources, but the other three are commonly used. Can anyone find out the standard term for the LDS visitor center? Thanks! Viriditas (talk) 03:08, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

This page has "Visitors' Center". Gary King (talk) 08:29, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Gary. I'll go ahead and make the change. And of course, when people complain about it, I'll give them your name. :-) Viriditas (talk) 13:20, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

The section of Private Eye's letters pages dealing with readers' corrections—"Pedants Corner"—has recently entertained such a volume of correspondence on whether an apostrophe was necessary for the title of the section, and if so, where it should appear, that the editors took to moving an apostrophe about the letters of pedants at random every issue for several months, before renaming the section "Pedantry Corner" and declaring correspondence closed. 86.44.28.16 (talk) 08:34, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Heh. Not a bad solution. Viriditas (talk) 13:20, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Gernerally speaking none are incorrect because all have arguments to support them. With LDS specifically try contacting the LDS Newsroom. Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 17:12, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

July 18

Is the following sentence grammatically correct?

During epidemics, quarantine is a common prophylactic measure. --Bowlhover (talk) 07:48, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Sounds fine to me. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 08:15, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I think it's acceptable, also. Gary King (talk) 08:28, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

The grammar is fine, but you might want to reconsider the use of the word "prophylactic". While correct, many people may think it means a condom, and thus be confused. I suggest "preventative" instead, which conveys the same meaning but is understood by a wider audience. (Note that there are some people who would argue that you should use the most complicated words possible in any given situation. While this may be true if your goal is to impress people with your genius, or perhaps to humiliate those with a lesser knowledge of English, I consider being understood by all to be the more important goal.) StuRat (talk) 15:51, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

No wish for a war but I think the word 'prophylaxis' can safely stand. It is used in this context in its original sense, preventative. The word prophylaxis has been recently hijacked as almost a euphemism for 'prevention of pregnancy and catching of STDs' and has taken on a sort of exclusivity in this sense. I reckon a wider use of the word - as occasioned here - would help to highlight its original, or at least an alternative, meaning. Additionally we must respect the author's way of expressing himself, he originally asked if the sentence is correct, and indeed it is, although there may be alternative ways of expressing the idea. Richard Avery (talk) 19:27, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Many people are stupid, don't dumb yourself down for perceptual ignorance, in fact people dumb enough to think you are referring to a condom are too stupid to wear them and will likely die from some horrible disease.^MY♥_INchile 01:53, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I think you need to figure out how semantics works. --Kjoonlee 02:45, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Gee, do they still call them prophylactics? Certainly when I was young, they had to be referred to as prophylactics rather than contraceptives, because contraception was in many places illegal. "Sold for the prevention of disease only", said the machines. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 01:57, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Offensive term

I came across the term "picaninny light" which is obviously derived from pickaninny. Does anyone know what the term means? CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 08:18, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Are you sure that's the correct phrase? It only returns two hits on Google. Gary King (talk) 08:28, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

The OEDgives "Piccaninny: Very small; tiny, baby. spec. piccaninny dawn, piccaninny daylight (chiefly Austral.), earliest dawn, first light."--Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:26, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I forgot to mention that I found it in a book by Alan John (Jock) Marshall.

CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 16:36, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Picaninny (day)light is an Australian term meaning first light. It is probably dervived from the defintion of piccaninny "very young" thus "very young light" The OED does not list this term as obsolete so it is believable that you will find newer works with the term being used. Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 16:51, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

"Piccaninny" is understood as a reference to a young indigenous Australian, but I can tell you it is never used these days (at least not in the circles I move in). I've never heard or seen the term "piccaninny (day)light" before now. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:50, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Piccaninny daylight is a term still used by my extended family and friends around Sydney, Australia, but perhaps they are outdoors people. One can barely see piccaninny daylight in urban areas. It is a wonderful time of day if one is sailing, hiking or well away from city lights. It refers to the period when the sky just begins to lighten, when night starts to turn into day. I understood from my grandparents that in the 1890s aborigines taught them this concept. Piccaninnies were their toddlers, so piccaninny daylight is the infant stage of day. The term piccaninny was used affectionately, never offensively in my experience.

i think what they mean't was someone that was very wattered down black, whos parents may be seens as piccaninies.^MY♥_INchile 01:51, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks to all who replied. Mirriam-Websters 3rd (Webster's Dictionary#Webster's Third New International Dictionary) has "picaninny" but not "picaninny light" and does not say that the word would be considered offensive. It also indicates that the word can refer to "otter brown" or "loutre". I went and got the book back from the airport and checked the date. It's the 1966 Sun Books edition but was originally published in 1962 and does not appear to indicate when they made their trip. It was Marshall who used the term and does not appear to be quoting anybody. CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 08:32, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Piccaninny has several definitions. The orginal really was "a black child" and probably developed as a Caribbean pidgin word; from there it developed more broader meanings. However in this case look at what Shantavira and I noted those are the definitions being used here. Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 20:08, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

A little more information - picaninny is (probably) derived from Portuguese pequeninho. The word is common to both Caribbean and Pacific pidgins and creoles. 130.56.65.24 (talk) 00:05, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Britic/britic

Should the article Britic be presented as lowercase? In britic, the name is apparently not capitalised, however I can see no reason in English as to why a title/name such as this would not be capitalised having read WP:MOS, Wikipedia:MOSCAPS#Mixed_or_non-capitalization, Wikipedia:Manual of Style (trademarks) etc. When used mid-sentence, obviously it will not be capitalised, however as a title and as the encyclopedia is written in English, should the title of the page not be Britic (capitalised)? Cheers Nouse4aname (talk) 09:13, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

It should not be capitalized, considering that the iPhone, which is branded in non-caps, is spelt like that on Wikipedia, and since britic is marketed without a capital letter, this should also be reflected. MinYinChao (talk) 09:18, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

It should be capitalised. iPhone is only allowed the lower case i because it has a capital as its second letter. MoS is clear on the subject For proper names and trademarks that are given in mixed or non-capitalization by their owners (such as k.d. lang, adidas and others), follow standard English text formatting and capitalization rules.

Nouse4aname you can make article start with a capital by removing the {{lowercase}} tag at the top of the article. - X201 (talk) 09:43, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually, per an issue raised on the talkpage, britic now has a capital as its second letter, placing it in exactly the same position as iPhone. MinYinChao (talk) 09:52, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, just noticed. All but one of the stylised ʀ 's will have to go though, the first one is allowed to show the normal trademarked representation of the name but all other occurrences of it should be in standard lettering i.e. bRitic. - X201 (talk) 10:03, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Done. MinYinChao (talk) 13:34, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

cleanliness is next to godliness

can u tell me about the proverb cleanliness is next to godliness in about 100 words 122.167.50.37 (talk) 13:30, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia will not do your homework. Stifle (talk) 13:34, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Try asking Google (especially the http://phrases.org.uk link). Don't copy-and-paste it, your teacher will find out :-P ; take the information and write it in your own words. --_{tiny plastic} Grey Knight ⊖ 13:50, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I've always found that "cleanliness is next to impossible". :-) StuRat (talk) 14:40, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

That's deep. ;-) -LambaJan (talk) 17:59, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

For that matter, so is godliness. That's why they're next to each other. —Angr 18:15, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

No go ahead and copy and paste it i'm sure you won't get caught! turning in plagiarism is better than not turning in anything at all, just switch around some of the words and throw in a sentence or two that you have written yourself, poorly.^MY♥_INchile 01:48, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Even better, paste it into Word and use the inbuilt thesaurus to blindly change words without bothering to pick words you're familiar with. Thesauruses pick synonyms, right? 79.66.90.252 (talk) 08:25, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

What planet are you folks on? We draw the line at doing homework (fair enough), but we're quite happy to volunteer ideas on how to cheat (or, to put it in its best possible reframe: to get away with doing as little actual thinking or actual work as possible)? Come on. -- JackofOz (talk) 11:32, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

This thread seems to have been on planet sarcasm for a while now. Algebraist 11:43, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

<sarcasm>Yeah sarcasm is really helpful. The Refdesk has certainly equipped the OP with all the tools necessary to do his/her homework.</sarcasm>Zain Ebrahim (talk) 11:46, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

The idea being that it is really bad advice to follow if you actually want to avoid trouble. Sorry if that wasn't clear. 79.66.90.252 (talk) 19:37, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Fuck it, here it is in 190-somthing words:

• From time to time we have come to encounter the term, "Cleanliness is close to godliness", but what does this truly mean? To explain what truly embodies this idiom both "god" and "clean" must be defined and agreed upon by the target demographic. For example, god must be defined as something other than a higher power for an atheist and similarly an individual with habits resembling that of a filthy swine must be defferenciated from an obsessive-compulsed "neat freak". Once this has been done it must be determined why people veneterate their higher philsophical beliefs and how this may translate to organizational abilities and sucess. Cleanliness is though of as close to godliness or godessliness since in the Arbamaic religion's "god" "allah" and "yahwe" (respectively Christian, Muslim, and Jewish names for the same deity) their supreme being is infallable. Therefore since cleanliness is seen as ideal, and something typically accomplished by a perfectionist, god would naturally be clean due his inherant infallability. People wish to be clean for logical health reasons but are seen as aspiring to a higher purpose when they excel at it due to this religious undertone.

for the lazy at heart.^MY♥_INchile 23:22, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Looking to form a plurality...

Resolved

 – StuRat (talk) 00:37, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

What's the plural of noria ? The caption for the pic in that article seems to just use "noria" as the plural, while the caption on the same pic in our article on Hama, renowned for having more than one noria, uses "norias". Are both correct or does one of our articles need a fix ? StuRat (talk) 14:40, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

According to http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Noria, its origin is in Spanish, from Aramaic nā’urā, Aramaic n’ar "to shake, roar"; Semitic root נער (n’r). So looks like "noria" is singular, and I'd give it a Spanish-style plural, which I think just works out as "norias". --_{tiny plastic} Grey Knight ⊖ 16:09, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

The OED lists this as the earist reference to noria in English "1696 P. AYRES Revengeful Mistress 24 Their usual Recreation in the Evenings, was..to view the Norias or admirable Water-works, with which the Spaniards industriously water their Gardens, or supply their Fountains" Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 16:59, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks all, it looks like it's "norias". I see the caption in question has already been fixed. StuRat (talk) 00:37, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Another random French question ...

A few weeks ago, I asked a couple of questions about French, and the folks who responded were very helpful. So, thanks for that, first of all!

Now I have another random French question ... I've been practicing my French by watching various French shows/movies. One thing I've heard a couple of times is when person A is trying to get person B to stop doing something, if person B doesn't stop, person A will emphatically say, "J'ai dit stop!" (literally, "I said stop!"). I found it a little odd that a French speaker would slip into English to make a point or a demand more emphatically ... What's up with that? Is it common for French speakers to slip into English (or other languages) to make a point? I suppose English speakers do stuff like that occasionally, but it just struck me as odd that it would be done at a moment of heightened emotional tension; I'd think one would prefer to stick with one's native tongue in those situations.

Thanks in advance for your thoughts ... Dgcopter (talk) 18:16, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I'd say they're not so much slipping into English as using an English loanword while speaking French. It gives what you have to say a certain je ne sais quoi, n'est-ce pas? —Angr 18:38, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I believe "stop!" is a french exclaimation. My french is a little rusty but this might help French Wikitionary Stop Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 19:01, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, the dictionary articles are enlightening ... according to the definition there, "stop" in French refers exclusively to mechanical things. The stop signs in France apparently say "stop", which makes sense in that context. Although, apparently the Québecois also have "Arrêt" on their signs. The definition of "stopper" (the verb form) seems to indicate that it's only used in reference to machines (trains and boats are provided as exmaples). Very interesting ... Dgcopter (talk) 19:32, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

In the shows do you know if they are using "stop" or "stoppe" (a form of stopper)? Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 19:48, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah, that's a good point ... I imagine it would be "stoppe", since that would be imperative, wouldn't it? Dgcopter (talk) 19:50, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

The homophone changes things a bit; possibly since stopper means to "stop motion" (of a vechile), it could be used to mean to stop motion of a person. I don't know enough french to tell you more. Best of luck Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 20:05, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I've been kind of amused lately watching a German soap opera and find it funny how they slip into and out of English. There was one scene where there were two guys arguing over a girl, and she found out about it and yelled at them to stop, and one of them said, "Sorry" and the other said "Enschuldegung". I'd love some insight into when and how someone chooses to use English when it isn't their native language, and they're conversing in their native language. Corvus cornix_talk 23:53, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, you should bear in mind that just because they use a word that sounds like English and means the same thing as it does in English, that doesn't necessarily mean that they are using English as such -- it's entirely possible that they are using a loanword or engaging in slang. In Finnish slang, for example, it's common to say "sori" instead of "anteeksi" when you're apologizing for something minor. It comes from English, of course, but no one considers it an English word in that context, or really even associates it with any language other than Finnish. "Sori" and "sorry" are pretty much two different words, even though they are pronounced just about the same way and mean the same thing. English does much of the same thing, of course -- words like "sauna" (from Finnish), "entrepreneur" (from French), "calamari" (from Italian) and "aficionado" (from Spanish) are used in daily speech by people who speak English and aren't considered to be foreign words, even though their origins are in other languages. It's just the way languages grow and develop over time. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 01:48, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Bravo. :) --Kjoonlee 02:43, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

The Japanese use 'stop', too, specifically when a mother is talking to a naughty child. This probably caught on through spending most of the day pickling their brains on mindless childrens' TV programs where English is chic. --ChokinBako (talk) 11:11, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Bah. :( --Kjoonlee 07:45, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Stop has been introduced in French probably a century ago and is now fully part of the French language. Road signs spelt "Stop" are all over the country. --Lgriot (talk) 02:10, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

First use of Stop in French in 1792 as an interjection. The verb stopper was first introduced as navy slang and thus refers refers more to the end of a movement whereas arrêter refers to the end of a process, but there significant overlapse in everyday french. For example, at a "Stop" road sign, a french car marque l'arrêt ! Something like english to stop and to halt. 88.178.189.194 (talk) 14:59, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

German questions

1) Could someone explain why "Mir ist kalt" is more proper than "Ich bin kalt"?

2) Could someone explain the use of the article "dem" in simple terms that a layman can understand?

thanks Dismas|^(talk) 18:20, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

1) Because you're describing how something feels to you, not a property of your body. You can say "Ich bin kalt", but then it means that the surface temperature of your skin is cold, not that you feel cold. (Okay, the two phenomena often go hand in hand, but it's still a distinction.) "Ich bin kalt" can also mean emotionally cold. 2) Well, it's the dative singular form of the article in the masculine and neuter. You use it before masculine and neuter singular nouns anywhere the dative case is called for: after prepositions that take the dative, with indirect objects (Ich gab dem Jungen das Buch = "I gave the boy the book"), and in other expressions that take the dative (e.g. Dem Mann ist kalt = "The man is (i.e. feels) cold". —Angr 18:33, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I guess that the confusing bit in "Mir ist kalt" / "Dem Mann ist kalt" is the absence of a subject / nominative case in the syntax. Angr may explain if it is an implied or expletive subject (I am not a multilinguist), as it occurs in "It rains". Basically the full sentence reads "ES ist mir kalt", where "ES" is the implied subject, translated to "It feels cold to me". The objective "to me" is then rendered in the dative and the useless subject "es" is dropped.

Kind regards to the chap on your right (or was it the left?) Always look at the bright side of, well, whatever --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 21:45, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

The English word "methinks" is a remnant of a similar phrase construction in earlier English... AnonMoos (talk) 16:05, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia has an article about the quirky subject. -- Wavelength (talk) 17:28, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the responses. I think I get it. Although "Mir ist kalt" sounds to me as if I'm saying "Me is cold" which doesn't make grammatical sense in modern English. Thanks again, Dismas|^(talk) 17:42, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

This helps me, maybe it will help you, too: dative case implies motion toward the object. "I gave the boy the book: --> I gave the book TO the boy." The same in German: "Mir ist kalt --> TO ME [it] is cold." You can also use this mental crutch backwards. If you're trying to figure out if something ought to be dative or accusative, try to rephrase it with a "TO" in it. If works, it's indirect, and thus dative. --Danh, 70.59.115.205 (talk) 23:53, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I never heard the term "quirky subject" until now, but I suppose this is the same as the more technical "ethic dative", isn't it? Adam Bishop (talk) 01:31, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

sago palm

how often do you water sago palm trees? --71.136.63.234 (talk) 18:26, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

We don't know, we're the language desk. You might ask at the science desk or the the miscellaneous desk. —Angr 18:35, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll answer here and someone who knows how can move the question if they want. There are two kinds of plants called Sago. The more common houseplant known as a Sago Palm is actually a cycad, Cycas revoluta, which requires "sandy, well-drained soil". I have one that I water approximately every week in the summer (northern USA, outdoors), and every two weeks in the winter (indoors). The other plant is the actual Sago Palm, Metroxylon sagu, which doesn't seem to be a common houseplant, and which our article doesn't have any mention of water requirements. jeffjon (talk) 18:37, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Try this website for care Cycas revoluta - "KING SAGO PALM TREE". Watering is about halfway through the article (just under a picture of a guy in a yellow shirt) Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 18:42, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

If you answer questions in the wrong desks, aren't you motivating people to just ask wherever they feel like instead of asking where they're supposed to? Kreachure (talk) 20:24, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Teaching people a lesson is a lower priority than helping them out by answering questions. It would have been fine to move the question, but willfully ignoring it because the questioner made a mistake would not. -Elmer Clark (talk) 01:09, 20 July 2008 (UTC) here

July 19

what does the last name "Cervantes" mean

I think it might mean 'son of cerves' or 'son of...' if it follows the pattern of pervez/son of pedro, gonzales/son of gonzalo, sanchez/son of santos etc. could anybody help me out with this one?^MY♥_INchile 01:45, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

According to this site, it was "most probably a [patronymic] name from a medieval given name SERVANTO, arising of a result of a cross between the Latin SERVIENS meaning 'The servant of the Lord' and SERVANDUS 'He who shall be saved'. There seems to have been some further confusion in the spelling with the Spanish CIERVO (stag)". Further reading at that external link. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 08:52, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

PYNAEI

Why do people say "picking your nose and eating it" when that is clearly wrong? Saying it like that makes it sound like the nose is being eaten. 124.176.160.46 (talk) 01:54, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Pragmatics (I think) rather than syntax occasionally helps determine the referent of a pronoun in English. With this construction, the "it" of the second clause clearly refers to what was produced in the first clause rather than the noun that explicitly appears, since we all know you don't eat noses, but rather the contents of noses (myself excluded, naturally). A similar construction might be "open the bottle and drink it" or even "pour in the batter, bake for 10 minutes, and enjoy". Paul Davidson (talk) 09:39, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

One of my favurites of this type is "take the cake out of the oven and stand for ten minutes". And there's the old joke about "drink 10ml of the prescription after a warm bath." Grutness...wha? 10:11, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

and if we go back to Paddington Bear there is an incident where he is helping Mr Brown with some household job. Mr Brown gives Paddington a hammer and says ". . .I'll hold the nail and when I nod my head you hit it." Richard Avery (talk) 14:48, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree, "picking your nose and eating it" is wrong, on many levels. StuRat (talk) 00:21, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Icelandic question

Hi, what does Kubbur á hlaupum mean in Icelandic? Does it have anything to do with retro-gaming or cute hamsters? --Kjoonlee 02:40, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Have you already tried icelandic-chinese / chinese-english dictionary?

Seems kubbur means 'chip', 'pug'?, 'block'

hlaupum could mean : running, run, jelly, gumdrop, gel, coagulation, barrel, avalanche, aspic

'a hlaupum' probably means running?

That should keep you guessing whilst you learn icelandic.87.102.86.73 (talk) 12:59, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

It means "Kubbur on the run". Kubbur can be used as a nickname for something cute (my grandfather called me Kubbur when I was small) and is a plausible name for a hamster. Haukur (talk) 18:20, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

The hamster connection seems plausible.. but is there a reason why you think it might be linked to retro gaming?? gives us a clue..87.102.86.73 (talk) 01:45, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah thanks. There was a video on YouTube, where a hamster was crawling around some retro-themed stages. It's been deleted now. :( --Kjoonlee 07:48, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

It's a shame that it was deleted - my sympathies are with you.87.102.86.73 (talk) 10:41, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah, you can see it here.[1] It's a version of the C64 game Monty on the Run starring a live hamster. The hamster is named Kubbur. Haukur (talk) 11:33, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

"Rubber" as slang?

What does "rubber" refer to in the context of this quote from the book I'm currently reading?

"Still, I confess that I miss my rubber. It is the first Saturday night for seven-and-twenty years that I have not had my rubber."

"I think you will find," said Sherlock Holmes, "that you will play for a higher stake to-night than you have ever done yet, and that the play will be more exciting."''

71.174.26.247 (talk) 08:50, 19 July 2008 (UTC)Kurage

It refers to a game of rubber bridge, or, according to Rubber (disambiguation), two 100-point games of contract bridge. —Angr 09:00, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Wrong, wrong, wrong! The story was published in 1891. And contract bridge was invented in 1925 -- everyone knows that! :-) They didn't even have auction bridge in 1891. And since Merryweather says he's been playing for 27 years, it's not the original form of bridge (also called biritch, and later straight bridge or bridge-whist) either. The game he's obviously talking about is whist. --Anonymous, 14:03 UTC, July 19, 2008.

According to the OED rubber has been a term in cards far longer at least since the 18th century. Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 19:44, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Actually the 16th century it seems. The definition "In various games of skill or chance, a set of (usually) three games, the last of which is played to decide between the parties when each has gained one; hence, two games out of three won by the same side. Sometimes, a set of five games, or the winning of three of these by one side" seems to be first referenced as being used back in 1599. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Omahapubliclibrary (talk • contribs) 19:47, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Ahh, a card game. Now it makes sense. :-) Thank you for the prompt reply! 71.174.26.247 (talk) 09:19, 19 July 2008 (UTC)Kurage

Note also where Holmes says that he brought along a pack of cards and hoped that he and Watson and Jones and Merryweather could have a rubber after all, since they made up were a partie carrée — a square party, i.e. four people, as needed for whist (or bridge). But this turned out to be impossible: "the enemy's preparations have gone so far that we cannot risk the presence of a light." --Anon, 14:03 UTC, July 19, 2008.

Yes, he is not talking about condoms. --ChokinBako (talk) 10:57, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

But, taken out of context, it's rather funny if you imagine he is! Kreachure (talk) 15:18, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but Sherlock is from England. The English word does not include that meaning, merely the American and Canadian English versions do. --Cameron* 15:38, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I said out of context, damn you! :P Kreachure (talk) 18:06, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Lol actually Oxford marks it as slang not american slang. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Omahapubliclibrary (talk • contribs) 19:50, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Wiktionary Worries

I just used Wiktionary for the first time and got a page saying the word I looked up had no entry for it. Fair enough, but the page[2] had a table below of different parts of speech, showing, in particular how the word 'cross' can be used in different ways. I was very surprised to see 'crosser' used in the Comparative box, where I would normally say 'more cross' (if I ever used the word 'cross', which I would not normally as it is not in my dialect). 'Crosser' just sounds ridiculous to me. Any ideas? --ChokinBako (talk) 10:55, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

It seems to get a fair number of hits on GoogleBooks. (I searched for the phrase "was crosser" because "crosser" by itself mostly got the last name.) A lot of the hits seem to be from the 19th and early 20th century, though I don't know if that tells us something about the nature of the word "crosser" or something about the nature of the books searched at GoogleBooks. —Angr 11:18, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Quote from This interesting survey talks about comparison of monosyllabic adjectives:

Apart from tired, participles such as worn do not take endings, whatever the number of syllables. Most grammars say that right, wrong, real and like never take endings and one grammar (Huddleston & Pullum 2002: 1583) includes mono-syllabic adjectives such as cross, fake, ill, loath, prime and worth.

And later, just to illustrate that grammars are not definitive:

Huddleston and Pullum (2002: 1584) ‘allow’ synthetic comparison of demure but not of secure. I found four examples of inflected comparisons for secure, but none for demure and hardly any analytic forms of that word either.

To me, "crosser" sounds better than "more cross", though neither sounds very likely. But that's just my opinion (and presumably that of the Wiktionary editor). It is certainly not an opinion held widely or strongly enough to merit a dogmatic dictionary statement that implies "more cross" is incorrect. jnestorius^(talk) 13:30, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

"More fun" seems to be preferred to "funner"... AnonMoos (talk) 16:00, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Technically crosser is a noun not a verb but it does exist. It means one who makes the sign of the cross (christian ritual); it can also mean a small lamp. Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 19:54, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Did you mean "a noun, not an adjective"? (Cross, crosser and crossest are adjectives). -- JackofOz (talk) 23:02, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

No, he means there is a noun form (one who crosses) whose existence is attested, by the OED for example. Algebraist 23:13, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

The OED is where I got the noun definitions. Sorry I forgot to cite that. Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 02:02, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Obnoxious points aside this word really is confusing me. According to the OED it is not crosser but Dictionary.com lists it as the forms of cross while the M-W redirects crossest to cross. Thus the wiktionary actually conforms with other online dictionaries Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 02:37, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

It is not only a comparative form of the verb cross, but can also mean one who crosses, e.g. "double-crosser." Multiple usage may have effected the google hits. Also, remember that wiktionary is collaborative. Something that sounds strange to your ear may be common in other areas (also, wiktionary could just be wrong). There are 54 countries (plus 25 non-soveriegn states) that list English as an official language. Conseuqently, there are many dialects of English. --Shaggorama (talk) 15:15, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Grossed out and weirded out

Today, I am interested in the slang construction "[x]ed out" where x = an adjective (i.e., I'm not talking about "freaked out"). Are there more examples, and what are their earliest usages?--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 15:07, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

OED cites the eariest reference to freaked out as occuring in 1966 (it also notes that it is often connected to drugs). Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 19:58, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

That's not what I'm asking about. Freak is a noun (or a verb).--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 20:08, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Whoops silly me. Can you give a specific example? Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 20:18, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Um, the two in the section heading. But I would like to know if there are more.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 20:24, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Hum it looks like both entered english slang around the late 60s early 70s. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Omahapubliclibrary (talk • contribs) 22:30, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I trawled through this list of "X out" expressions and the only one with adjective X I spotted was "to tough it out" There are others like "blank out" or "black out" where the root could be seen as a verb/noun or an adjective. Feel free to re-trawl for any I missed. jnestorius^(talk) 23:24, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Very, very useful link; thank you. I couldn't find any phrases that fit my criteria, which leads to me believe that this sort of construction is rare indeed.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 23:31, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Your question is not entirely clear. Are you looking for a past participle adjective that is derived from an adjective. (That is gross and weird are adjectives which have been converted into a verb with out => gross out, weird out. And these verbs are then used in the past participle (passive) form.) And you are not interested in nouns like freak, bum which are converted to verbs with out (freak out, bum out) which are then used in the past participle form? It is fairly easy to find nouns converted to verbs, but it may be harder to find adjectives converted to verbs. – ishwar  (speak) 02:56, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for not being clear. Definitely only looking for adjectives that have been converted into a verb which, as we have established, are harder to find.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 05:41, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok. Here are some. They are rather informal: dried out, sexied out, dizzied out, poshed out, queered out, goofied out. Actually, I think that this is pretty productive, so anyone can create several new examples that may not be attested in a corpus (e.g. a google search). For example, I'll creatively generate a new one: mousy (she's looking very mousy today) => mousied out (how'd he get all mousied out today?). – ishwar  (speak) 15:04, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Nicely done--with the exception of "dried out," which comes from the verb "to dry". These are obscure (and amusing) phrases, to be sure, but they each each generate a significant number of ghits. I suppose this guy, then, is all fatted out:--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 15:15, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

I think dry is originally an adjective. But that is based on etymology, maybe in a speaker's mind the word dry is in both categories. Anyway, if a word is underlying an adjective, it must be converted into a verb to get the past participle form. That is adj => vb => vb-past.part. If it's a verb underlying, then it would be just vb => vb-past.part. And noun: n => vb => vb-past.part.. – ishwar  (speak) 19:23, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

cousin éloigné?

What would the equivalent of "cousin once removed" (see recent misc.refdesk question ) be in French. Please I don't want a literal translation, I want to know the French term for the concept if there is one. Thank you. 190.190.224.115 (talk) 19:55, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Maybe this helps. -- Wavelength (talk) 20:06, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

All right! I guess it would be "Cousins germains éloigné au 1e degré" then. Thank you. 190.190.224.115 (talk) 20:30, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Doesn't cousin au premier degré do the trick? Xn4 (talk) 01:42, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

What word?

The sentence 'That story might illicit the response...' is clearly wrong because illicit is an adjective meaning illegal. However, I am sure that there is a word that sounds like it that will make the sentence correct. I think, in this context, 'warrant' would be a good synonym of the word I'm thinking of. Any ideas? 92.2.122.213 (talk) 23:42, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Elicit. Algebraist 23:43, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

And no, 'warrant' probably wouldn't be correct. To 'elicit the response' is to cause it, whereas if the story 'warranted the response' it would mean the response was appropriate/justifiable. Cherry Red Toenails (talk) 06:00, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

July 20

non-jargon word

I have tried several thersaurses (sp?) including on-line. No luck. Can anyone give me another word (or short phrase)for "maladaptive" that is non-jargon? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.154.23.125 (talk) 02:08, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

inadequately adjusted Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 02:18, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

AKA maladjusted ? StuRat (talk) 00:15, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

When you have this type of trouble with a compound or complex word break it down into its parts. Mal- (prefix) and adaptive. Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 02:21, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

How about dysfunctional? CambridgeBayWeather Have a gorilla 06:32, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

german definition

I am trying to find the meaning to the following... "Einheit rer Sinn- der beste gewinn" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.223.18.217 (talk) 02:54, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

I assume this is supposed to say "Einheit der Sinn — der beste Gewinn," which means something like "The unity of sense [sense as in the meaning of something] is the greatest prize/profit." Strad (talk) 04:13, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Not quite - assuming it is really "Einheit der Sinn", it rather means "Unity is the meaning/sense". "The unity of sense" would be "Einheit des Sinns". -- Ferkelparade π 14:32, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

anti-Islam?

I am not Muslim but have many Muslim friends. One of topics in General Paper is Prejudice and Discrimination. Americans seem to be virulently Islamophobic - and racist. For example, Wikipedia is owned by an American organisation and your article on "Islamic terrorism" has anti-Islam bias, even in the title. Anyway, my question is about terms for terrorism conducted by Muslims. Which imply that Islam is the cause or that Muslims are terrorists (e.g. Islamic terrorism) and which do not imply that (Islamic extremist terrorism)? Hopefully using terms that do not blame Islam will lead to a decrease in American Islamophobia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.186.12.10 (talk) 03:53, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Is this a complaint about the way Wikipedia presents these articles, or are you asking whether the use of such language helps to further anti-Muslim prejudice in the United States? If it is the first, this is not the place to ask. Anyway, we also have articles called Christian terrorism and Jewish religious terrorism—the second is obviously not called "Jewish terrorism" because it might imply something by members of the ethnic group, not members of the religious group. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 04:09, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Are there Jews who are not Jewish?--ChokinBako (talk) 17:37, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

That might depend on what you mean by Jewish. Many Americans who do not practice Judaism (do not hold its religious beliefs, do not attend religious services) identify culturally with Judaism. OtherDave (talk) 18:18, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, it is just that I was didn't know there was an 'ethnic group' called 'Jews', which were distinct from the religious group. Are we talking the same distinction as Catholics who do not go to church or practice Catholicism still saying they are Catholics? In any case, they would not be an ethnic group. They would be people whose ancestors were Jews, but they would not actually be Jews, in the sense that they didn't actually do anything to confirm their religion, which is, after all, Judaism.ChokinBako (talk) 20:09, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

There most definitely is an ethnic group called Jews. That's what much of the Holocaust was all about. People whose families had been Christians for many generations were still very much at risk of being sent to the gas chambers merely because of their DNA. Who is a Jew? might help here. -- JackofOz (talk) 00:29, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Americans seem to be virulently Islamophobic - and racist. Well Muslims seem to be intolerant zealots - and terrorists. Or perhaps both of these statements apply only to very, very small subsets of the groups they claim to describe. Strad (talk) 04:21, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

My question is, of the terms for terrorism conducted by Muslims, which terms are Islamophobic and blame Islam (like Islamic terrorism) and which are not Islamophobic and do not really blame Islam (like Islamic extremist terrorism)? Of course, using non-Islamophobic terms helps fight Islamophobia, but we need examples of Islamophobic and non-Islamophobic terms first. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.186.13.1 (talk) 13:30, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Have you read Islamic terrorism#"Islamic" terrorism? There are some neutral terms mentioned there. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 13:41, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

The term "Islamic terrorism" simply refers to terrorism commited by those claiming they are doing so for Muslim religous reasons. The term does not imply that all, most, or even many Muslims are terrorists. As for the US being intolerant of Muslims, that's simply not true. I happen to live near a rather large Muslim community in Dearborn, Michigan and can attest that they are quite widely accepted. There was, as could be expected, some backlash after the 9-11 attacks, but that has mostly faded away by now. If you compare the situation with other western nations, like France, Muslims are treated far better in the US. Also, there seems to be a fundamental flaw in your argument that Wikipedia is owned by Americans, so reflects the American POV. Wikipedia is edited by people from around the world. I would expect a bias towards English-speaking people in English Wikipedia, but that's not the same thing at all. StuRat (talk) 00:12, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Missing Hebrew renditions

Most articles on angels give the rendition of the names in Hebrew (e.g. גַּבְרִיאֵל Gabriel, מיכאל‎ Michael, רפאל Raphael, אוּרִיאֵל Uriel), but the articles Azrael, Israfel, and Sandalphon are missing that information. What are the Hebrew names of those angels I mentioned for which the Hebrew names are missing in the articles?

Also, the article Uzziel is missing Hebrew.

The article Son of God contains Greek renditions but not Hebrew, which is another omission that could use some correction.

A related question: the prefix "Mc-" in Gaelic means "son of"; in Arabic, "ibn" has a similar meaning and usage; in English, this is usually done with the construction "-son" as in, for example, "Johnson". Is there a similar construction in Hebrew that is used in personal names?

—Lowellian (reply) 05:50, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

To your last query: in Jewish religious rites, a man is known as [first name] ben (בן) [father's first name]. This sometimes but not often appears as a Hebrew surname. The basics are described and explained in Jewish name. -- Deborahjay (talk) 06:11, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

I doubt that there are Hebrew names for those angels: they come from an Arabic/Muslim tradition, except for Sandalphon-- and the article does give the latter's Hebrew name. Rhinoracer (talk) 10:50, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

meaning of "Short-waisted"?

What is the meaning of "short waist" or "long waist" when describing a woman's body type?

Does it mean the distance from the floor to the waist is higher or lower than average? Or does it mean that the waistline is thinner or fatter than average? etc? I'm not sure.

For example: http://www.omiru.com/index.php/2005/05/17/womens-figure-flattery-guide-short-waisted/

--206.248.172.247 (talk) 07:17, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

It refers to the height of the waist above the floor rather than the width. Richard Avery (talk) 07:37, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

So really it's talking about leg length, one could say? Or is there more to it?--206.248.172.247 (talk) 07:45, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

I can't confirm Richard Avery's response (above) from any English usage with which I'm familiar. In dressmaking, "waist length" is the measurement take from the prominent bone at the nape of the neck in a vertical line to the natural waistline. Comparison to a standard pattern size yields "short-waisted" or "long-waisted," proportional to a standardized figure type. In couture, a dress design may be "dropped-waist" in relation to the natural waistline. -- Deborahjay (talk) 08:49, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Relating to leg length: a long-waisted woman with relatively short legs and a (taller) man with long legs, may be at the same eye level when seated, and when they stand up he'll be a head taller than she. (Testimonial evidence submitted by Deborahjay (talk) 09:07, 20 July 2008 (UTC))

My information concurs with that of Deborahjay, rather than that of Richard Avery. A "short-waisted" person (usually spoken of women) is one who is short from shoulder to waist, or whose waist is close to (or "high") in respect of her bosom. ៛ Bielle (talk) 00:21, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I would agree. It seems to be a dress-making term, but I normally (colloquially) would say they have a 'short body/torso' (with long legs) or 'long body/torso' (with short legs). In other words, two women who are both 5 ft 5 may have very different proportions. One may have long legs and a short body (they would be 'short-waisted') and the other short legs and a long body (they would be 'long-waisted') and yet be the same height. That link you provided would seem to be advice for short-waisted women (women with a short body and long legs for their height) on how to create the illusion of a longer body and more equal proportions. She'sGotSpies (talk) 10:47, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Having now asked my wife, who is a competent dressmaker, she tells me I am incorrect and Deborah is right. Ho hum.. Richard Avery (talk) 17:55, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

As opposed to 'shortarse' (does that exist across the pond as 'shortass'?) which definitely refers to length of leg. --ColinFine (talk) 22:31, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Mit den besten Wünschen!

What would be an accurate, idiomatic translation to English of the above phrase in the following context: a underground drawing by artist Leo Haas in the Terezin (Theresienstadt) concentration camp. It depicts a small group of Jews—two elderly and infirm, two little children, one a laboring man shouldering several long-handled work implements (spade, shovel, etc.)—encircled by a giant hand pointing to their destination: "Wüst" (which I'll translate as "wilderness"). Lettered above (in small caps): "Zum 4 März 1944, Mit den besten Wünschen!" I don't have any details about what transpired on that date; am presuming it was a transport. -- Deborahjay (talk) 12:28, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Mit den besten Wünschen literally means "with best wishes"; it's a slightly old-fashioned (but probably not so in the 1940s) standard greeting phrase you'd write on a present or a greeting card. I'm not so sure about "Wüst", though; as a noun, it would be "Wüste" (desert), "wüst" is an adjective and sounds a bit strange when used as a destination. Without context, it's hard to tell what it means - it might also be the name of a place, or of a person. -- Ferkelparade π 14:27, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Here's a photo image of the drawing. The word "Wüst" [sic] seems to be printed on a sort of tag (note the protuberance at the top) that the giant hand grips between two fingers. The letter "W" is stylized so perhaps is some sort of icon, and the tag itself has a particular shape, possibly significant. Also, in my description above I omitted mentioning a third, shadowy figure (note the legs) behind the two elderly ones at the front of the group, and that two figures wear Star of David badges (so at least these two depict Jews). Does this shed any further light? -- Deborahjay (talk) 07:23, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah, now I see. The "Wüst" looks very much like a company logo, I would interpret the whole thing as an ironic greeting card to the company who presumably received a number of Jewish concentration camp inmates as forced labor on that date. Unfortunately, I have found no references to a company named Wüst using forced labor (a quick google search brought up some promising candidates in the metalworking and aeronautics industries, but they all have been founded much later) - I guess this goes beyond the scope of the language desk (and cetrainly beyond the scope of my expertise), I suppose a check of relevant archives is in order to find out who the Wüst company was -- Ferkelparade π 09:25, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

de:Wüst provides nothing useful as far as I can tell. Fritz Wüst was an expert on ironworks and founded the Max Planck Institute for Iron Research GmbH, but doesn't seem to have had a company called Wüst. —Angr 10:08, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Evaluating the direction suggested by Ferkelparade and checked out by Angr, I'd say the presence of one laborer in a group of over- or underage persons doesn't make a labor camp a likely destination. Moreover, if I'm allowed a bit of history for the sake of context: Of the 140,000 Jews sent to the Theresienstadt concentration camp during its 52 months of operation, "33,000 died there, 88,000 were deported to extermination camps [emphasis mine], and 19,000 survived in the camp or were transferred to Switzerland or Sweden." (Encyclopedia of the Holocaust, vol.4, p.1463; the EH is quite scrupulous in what it terms an extermination camp as distinct from other types.) Seems to me the mysterious "W üst" may be a euphemism for a bad end. Does üst alone have any significance? Does Wüst rhyme with anything likely? Or shall we let it go for now?-- Deborahjay (talk) 12:32, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Though I find Fp and Angr's trail more promising (the tag does indeed look like a company logo), I have a more far-fetched speculation to add: "jemanden in die Wüste schicken" is a common German phrase, literally meaning "to send someone into the desert", figuratively meaning something like "to give someone the boot". The phrase probably originates from Leviticus where the scapegoat is ritually driven off into the wilderness. To apostrophize the word "Wüste" into "Wüst' " is not very common, however, and this might just be an eerie coincidence, whether intended by the artist or not. ---Sluzzelin talk 17:53, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Taking all of the above into account, I've belatedly remembered a possible twist: the artist's use of language may reflect his Slovakian origins and his having passed through a number of Nazi camps before his lengthy stay in Theresienstadt. I've viewed a scant two dozen drawings by Leo Haas (1900-1983), and several have inscriptions quite likely sardonic in tone (e.g. Nisko being the setting for the not-quite-straightforward use of "Die Kultusgemeinde" plus the rest of that inscription I've yet to puzzle out.) Thanks for your input! -- Deborahjay (talk) 18:42, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Just for completeness sake) Two other prominent Wüsts during the Third Reich: Walther Wüst (1901-1993), professor of Oriental Studies, ideologist of Nazi race theory. Among other, he was appointed as president of the Forschungsgemeinschaft Deutsches Ahnenerbe in 1937, the year Haas was imprisoned, and as deacon of the University of Munich in 1941, where he was personally involved in quashing the White Rose. And there was Ida Wüst (1884-1958), a theatre and movie actress, popular in the 20s and 30s, who, in 1946, was accused of having denounced actor colleagues to the Gestapo.

I'm wondering whether there were metal luggage tags ("Gepäckmarken") at the time shaped something like the one in the illustration, but I wasn't able to find anything similar on eBay or other sites. ---Sluzzelin talk 19:22, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Not related to the initial question, but the inscription on the second picture you said you'd need to puzzle out reads Die Kultusgemeinde u. Aerzte, i.e. und Ärzte (meaning "and medical doctors") -- Ferkelparade π 18:13, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Great! That was my provisional translation (I call 'em "physicians"), but my first encounter with the abbreviated und so I appreciate the confirmation. Thanks again! --Cheers, Deborahjay (talk) 06:14, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Nietzsche

Is it pronounced Neat-chuh,
Neat-chee,
Nee-chuh,
Nee-chee,
Nee-cher,
or something else? 71.174.26.247 (talk) 18:25, 20 July 2008 (UTC)Stingray

The article gives [ˈniːtsʃə]. That's something like neats-shuh, if you don't know IPA. Algebraist 18:30, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Wow, I've never heard anyone say it that way. Thanks! 71.174.26.247 (talk) 18:42, 20 July 2008 (UTC)Stingray

It rhymes with "nice to meetcha", although English speakers often pronounce it to rhyme with "peachy". —Angr 20:15, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

While 'Neachee' makes me wince a bit, English has always angicized foreign names. It'll be a sad day when we have to pronounce Paris as the French do, Berlin as Berliners say it, or Don Quixote on the lines of the best Castilian! Xn4 (talk) 20:25, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Is the article wrong, then? Algebraist 21:08, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

No, it's not wrong. Those who know their Nietzsche have a moral responsiblity to set the world right (and I'm sure he'd approve). As Monty Python said "There's nothing Nietzsche couldn't teach ya 'bout the raising of the wrist". -- JackofOz (talk) 23:19, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it is wrong. It gives [ˈniːtsʃə], i.e. NEETS-sha. It's [ˈniːtʃə], i.e. NEE-cha. —Angr 07:38, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I just fixed it. —Angr 07:42, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Nice to know I've been getting it right all my life after all. Algebraist 11:04, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, I have heard "Nee-chuh" (or "Nee-cha") but never "Neats-shuh"... 71.174.26.247 (talk) 09:16, 21 July 2008 (UTC)Stingray

Why couldn't it be "neetch", "neach"? Why does it have to end on that "uh", "a" sound? The only bad analogies I can think of are "niche" and "quiche", although they are from French and don't have the "t" they both end in "eesh". 190.244.186.234 (talk) 22:59, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Because that's how the German language is pronounced? Algebraist 00:26, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

"Neetch"? Hmm, never heard that one either... Anyone speak German? That's probably the best way to find a definitive pronunciation. I think some of the Monty Python folks spoke German, so now I'm inclined towards saying it to rhyme with "teach ya" (that's a lovely quote btw, JackofOz :-) )71.174.26.247 (talk) 00:10, 22 July 2008 (UTC)StingRay

Yeah, I speak German and I answered above. The Monty Python quote is fun, but "meetcha" is a better rhyme than "teach ya" because Nietzsche doesn't have the y-sound that "teach ya" does. If you speak a non-rhotic accent like most of England and all of Australia, it also rhymes with "teacher". —Angr 04:34, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

In my "teach ya" example, I failed to take into account that people who don't known Monty would pronounce it as separate words. In this case it is of course meant to be pronounced exactly like non-rhotic "teacher", to make it rhyme with .. well, Nietzsche of all things. :) -- JackofOz (talk) 05:02, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, "Neetcha", got it. Thank you all so much! 71.174.26.247 (talk) 07:10, 23 July 2008 (UTC)Stingray

Not only did the Pythons speak some German, they actually recreated some of their sketches for German TV-- in German. Rhinoracer (talk) 10:57, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Pronunciation of Italian "giovane"

How do you pronounce "giovane". To be specific, Im not sure whether the "i" is pronounced but if someone could give me the IPA for the entire word that would be great. --212.120.246.239 (talk) 22:53, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

This is one of my all-time bugbears. The "gio" is pronounced virtually the same as the English "jo". The "i" is simply there to soften the "g" from a hard sound (as in gutter) to a "j" sound (as in, well, Jack), and is not separately pronounced. I spend my life cringing when I hear sports broadcasters referring to men named Giovanni (pronounced jo-VAH-nni) as "JEE-o-varny", or Giacomo (JAH-ko-mo) as "JEE-a-como". (Sorry about my IPA ineptitude.) -- JackofOz (talk) 23:13, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks and don't worry about the IPA as you explained it well anyway. However, I have one other question about the word: is the "e" at the end pronounced? --212.120.246.239 (talk) 23:16, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh yes indeed - jo-VAH-neh. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:20, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Or possibly JO-va-neh - an Italian expert can confirm. -- JackofOz (talk) 00:27, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

You can listen to it here. -- Wavelength (talk) 01:09, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

And in case your speakers are down, the clip (and experts) confirm that Jack's second pronunciation is correct: The emphasis is on the first syllable. ---Sluzzelin talk 17:58, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

July 21

Possessive case for inanimate objects

When you have an animate object (human), you use the word "who" ... and when you have an inanimate object (thing), you use the word "that" (or "which") as a relative pronoun. For inanimate objects, in the subjective case, you would say: "This is the car that gets the best mileage" ... and you would never say "This is the car who gets the best mileage". In the objective case, you would say: "This is the car that I want to purchase" ... and you would never say "This is the car whom I want to purchase". So, what happens with the possessive case? What is the correct way to complete this sentence, when you want to indicate the possessive case for the inanimate car: "This is the car ____ windshield is broken." ...? The only word I can think of -- or have seen in similar sentences -- is "whose". Is that correct? Is "whose" the correct possessive case relative pronoun for "that" or for inanimate objects? In light of the other examples, "whose" seems incorrect. Any input? Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 02:59, 21 July 2008 (UTC))

Is there something wrong with "that's"? ៛ Bielle (talk) 03:06, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes; "that" is a conjunction (strictly speaking, a complementizer), not a pronoun, so it doesn't get put into the genitive. "That's" is only a contraction of "that is" or "that has". "Whose" is the genitive not only of "who(m)" but also of "which", so Joseph's instinct of "This is the car whose windshield is broken" is correct. —Angr 04:07, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, Angr! I’ve just spent a lovely half hour, in the midst of a violent thunderstorm, searching through my C.O.D. and my Fowler, looking for something at least vaguely pronominal about “that”. It is a relative pronoun, of course, but you are perfectly correct about its genitive. (What you just know some of the rest of us have to go searching for.) Fowler, in the second edition of Modern English Usage, page 625. says:

We find again that while who has two possessives (whose and of whom), and which one (of which), that has none of its own, though it often needs it, and has to borrow of which or whose.

Thanks for today's lesson. ៛ Bielle (talk) 16:15, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Traditional grammarians like Fowler might consider it a relative pronoun, but modern linguists don't. For modern linguists, the that in "the car that I want to purchase" is the same as the that in "I know that the sky is blue". The difference is that in "the car that I want to purchase" there is any empty relative pronoun slot in addition to "that", while in "I know that the sky is blue" there is no relative pronoun slot. —Angr 19:32, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

In English, that is true, but is it the case in other languages? I recall from my far-away lessons in English grammar other languages which (heh, or that :)) have not got this problem?doktorb _words^deeds 20:17, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

You can go to http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/whose and show translations of the relative pronoun meaning "of which". -- Wavelength (talk) 20:35, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Angr, I had no idea so much had changed in the world of grammar. As you might have guessed, my pre-university schooling was finished before Fowler's Second Edition was published (1968). What desk reference book should I have now to replace it? (I need to find out, among many other things, what an "empty relative pronoun slot" looks like when it is home of a Sunday afternoon.) Thanks for your help. ៛ Bielle (talk) 23:03, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Doktorb, I don't think many other languages use the complementizer "that" in places where a relative pronoun would be expected, but there are probably a few. Munster Irish springs to mind (though the other dialects of Irish don't do it). Bielle, I don't know if there are desk reference books for advanced syntactic theory, but empty positions don't look like anything because they're invisible. The empty relative pronoun slot is also invisibly present in "The car I want to purchase", showing that that is optional in this construction, just as it is in "I know (that) the sky is blue". —Angr 04:31, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

A type of doughnut called "buht"??

Is there something that resembles a doughnut with plum, jam, cheese curds or sweetened poppy called "bukht" or "buht" or something like that in any world language or tradition? --206.248.172.247 (talk) 03:05, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I can't make anything of the name, but going by the desription of the fillings—if this is not fried (like a doughnut) but boiled or steamed—I'd say it's a Hungarian dessert dumpling. (This is lamentably lacking from the "Cuisine of Hungary" list of sweets.) Don't know the name, but if no one else chimes in, I'll phone the Hungarian restaurant in town and get back to you. -- Deborahjay (talk) 07:36, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

There is a thing called "Buchtel" in Austria / Vienna. It is, sort of, an unholey doughnut, but I can´t remember it to have a filling. I think they are baked, though. The "ch" is pronounced like the Scottish "ch" in loch. It is not to be confused with "Krapfen" (WP thinks es ist ein Berliner), which are quite similar to doughnuts and are filled, typically with jam. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 08:18, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

We even have an article on Buchteln. The text says they're filled with plum jam, but in the photograph they aren't. What is filled with plum jam and sprinkled with poppyseeds, and is so tasty it ought to be illegal, is Germknödel. —Angr 10:12, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Technically, the photograph doesn't show a cross-section of one, so we don't know if they're filled or not. --Random832 (contribs) 18:27, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Do you have any good recipes for this illegally delicious desert? :) Buchtel seems to be the cognate I was looking for. --206.248.172.247 (talk) 18:10, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

A recipe for Germknödel? Sure:

1. Travel to Vienna
2. Go to a good traditional Viennese restaurant
3. Order Germknödel
4. Enjoy Germknödel
5. Repeat steps 3 and 4 until you can't move any more

That's the best way to eat Germknödel! —Angr 18:22, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

It truly is :). Viennese Germknödel is inhumanly delicious. IceUnshattered^{[ t | c ]} 23:43, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Clearly I need to get out and find some of this stuff! --Richardrj ^{talk email} 05:42, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Dude! How long have you lived in Vienna now? You've never tried Germknödel? It was almost single-handedly responsible for the fact that I had gained so much weight during the 6 weeks I visited Austria at the age of 12 that my parents almost didn't recognize me at the airport when I came home. —Angr 06:18, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Yep, I've been here 2½ years without a germ of Germknödel passing my lips. I will rectify this serious omission ASAP. This is the kind of original research I like. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 12:36, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

See also Mr Creosote´s Germknödelian epitaph. Would Monsieur like a bucket? Clearly, maths does not go down well with Knödel, as proposed in his Incompleteness Theorem. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 20:41, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Several cultures have a sweetroll or pastry similer to what you discribe though I don't know any specific recipies that use plum and cheese. Omahapubliclibrary (talk) 18:59, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Italian Proverb

Dio ci salvi dal povero arricchito e dal ricco impoverito. English translation: God save us from the enriched poor and from the impoverished rich.

What is the explanation of the above Italian proverb? It does not make sense to me. 66.239.75.243 (talk) 23:35, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

It means that the rich know how to be rich, and the poor know how to be poor, but if you move them one way or the other they are unhappy and cause trouble. Hasn't it got some grains of truth in it? Xn4 (talk) 23:43, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Here are some related topics.

Parable of the Prodigal Son

The Prince and the Pauper

Rags to Riches

-- Wavelength (talk) 00:37, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

You might add social mobility and economic mobility; but we've moved away from language issues now... jnestorius^(talk) 08:39, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

July 22

Merged vowels -- how to know if /ɑ/, /ɔ/ or /ɒ/?

"For merged speakers in Canada and most of the United States, the two sounds [ɑ] and [ɔ] are allophones; they often do not perceive differences in their usage, hear neither of them as a separate phoneme, and hear the distinct vowels used by speakers whose dialects do distinguish them as variations on the same vowel." Phonological_history_of_English_low_back_vowels#Cot-caught_merger

That's me. I pronounce everything with /ɑ/. How can I learn to tell from a word's spelling alone whether it would be /ɑ/, /ɔ/ or /ɒ/ in a dialect that does distinguish them?--206.248.172.247 (talk) 12:46, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Generally speaking, words spelled with "a" have /ɑ/ in such dialects (e.g. palm, father), words spelled with "au"/"aw"/"ough" have /ɔ/ (e.g. taut, thought, brawn), words spelled with "o" have /ɒ/ (e.g. lot, top, hot). Words with "wa" and "qua" often have /ɒ/ (e.g. wasp, quality), although "water" and "wash" frequently have /ɔ/. However, there is a class of words called "CLOTH" words that have /ɔ/ in North American accents that distinguish cot/caught but have /ɒ/ outside North America. These are mostly spelled with "o" before a voiceless fricative (e.g. cloth, cross, office); other examples are "chocolate", "dog", and "gone", and in some varieties of American English "on" (in stressed position). Generally it can be really hard to learn which word takes which vowel for people who don't make the distinction naturally. I recommend consulting a dictionary (or better yet three to five dictionaries from different publishers!) when in doubt. —Angr 13:05, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Abbreviations

Its NYPD but FDNY. Why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.76.214.50 (talk) 13:20, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

As per the article, that's how the name was chartered. — Lomn 14:20, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

(ec)Here's an explanation from Yahoo! Answers from someone whose source is "Firefighter/Instructor 21 years". Zain Ebrahim (talk) 14:23, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

To be honest, neither of those references really address why the names are different, they just touch on why they haven't been changed. If the original name of the fire department was The Fire Department of the City of New York, why wasn't the police department called The Police Department of the City of New York? The title of the FDNY actually came after the NYPD was in place, if I'm reading the article correctly (the FD is actually older, but wasn't named as the FDNY until the Tweed Charter, again assuming I understand the article). Matt Deres (talk) 17:06, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

There's no law that says government agencies have to use a consistent naming practice. There's the Veterans' Administration, various "departments", various "authorities", various "offices", various "agencies", various "services", and various other types of names. They all mean basically the same thing. The titles chosen, and the order of the words, are at the whim of those currently in power, under the principle of NGC (Nomenclature by Gubernatorial Caprice). -- JackofOz (talk) 17:20, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict) One of the references on the FDNY article (look right at the bottom of the link) explains that the name was just taken directly from the Tweed Charter which established that the Metropolitan Fire Department would no longer have any jurisdiction over New York City and that it would instead be the 'Fire Department of the City of New York' that would deal with the city. The website tells us that the Tweed Charter was indirectly 'responsible for the "F.D.N.Y." logo on apparatus instead of "N.Y.F.D.". Most departments place the city or town initials prior to "F.D." but as a direct carry over of the provision to create the "Fire Department of the City of New York", "F.D." was placed before "N.Y." on the apparatus, a tradition which lasts today.' So, in other words, it's just one of those things :) She'sGotSpies (talk) 17:30, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

There could be an advantage. NYFD and NYPD look rather similar, so could be confused with one another, say on a 911 emergency phone call log stating who was requested to respond to the call. StuRat (talk) 08:22, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

But that's the case virtually everywhere. Were similar appearance a motivating factor, I'd expect to see NYC's differentiation as the predominant form rather than the outlier. — Lomn 17:36, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

July 23

Explaining Indo-European syllables to Japanese people

How do they teach the concepts of Indo-European syllables to Japanese people? Japanese syllables all end in vowels or "n." When Indo-European names are transcribed into Japanese, their syllables are all Japanified -- thus, Frank Sinatra becomes Furanka Shinatora. It's one thing to explain to an American how to make a French "r" sound. But is it possible to explain, using Japanese words, how to pronounce the syllable "nat?" Can the average Japanese person easily grasp the concept of a syllable ending in a consonant other than "n?" -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:41, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

The article Syllable has a link to the corresponding Japanese article [3]. At the bottom of the page of the latter, there is even a link to an article about the Czech and Slovak tongue-twister "Strč prst skrz krk". (Incidentally, if you see a link in a Japanese article, you can go to that linked Japanese article, and then look in the left-hand column for a link to the corresponding English article, to find out the meaning of the link in the Japanese article.)

-- Wavelength (talk) 02:20, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

"Furanku Shinatora" (not "Furanka") doesn't sound as different from "Frank Sinatra" as the romanization might suggest. The two us and the o are hard to hear. An English speaker listening to the Japanese pronunciation would notice the rolled rs, /a/ instead of /æ/ in Frank, and possibly shi instead of si, but they probably wouldn't notice the extra vowels. A few Japanese people use nonstandard romanizations of their names with vowels omitted to match the pronunciation more closely, e.g. Toshihide Maskawa. -- BenRG (talk) 09:58, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I only have experience with some sounds, but here goes. Japanese has cases where other consonants end syllables. The /n/ sound can become either [n], [m] or [ŋ] depending on adjacent sounds. Thus you can get words like Namba or manga. The first step is to get the speakers to recognize the differences in the place of articulation. The next step is to try stopping the following sounds before they come out. Also, final "su" might be devoiced so that only [s] may be audible. --Kjoonlee 12:44, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Nat would be pretty easy, since there are words like chatta. The "little tsu" should be familiar to Japanese people. --Kjoonlee 14:01, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

formulating a name for a School Paper

I am looking for a word that would best describe our community which is surrounded by canning factories. I am intending to use that word as the name of our school newspaper which will be published this school year. Our school is surrounded by canning factories. The name of it is Talisayan National High School. What do you think is the proper word that would describe such place? Thank you and hope to hear from your website soon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amqtan 20 (talk • contribs) 11:04, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

You could call your newspaper Cannery Row, with a nice literary allusion. —Angr 11:24, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

But don't call it Canned News. That would mean prepared ahead of time, not fresh, not current. If the name is going to be in English, though, why stick too close to the canning process? The Opening could have many meanings -- not only in relation to cans, but in relation to what you hope your school and your publication will do to young minds. OtherDave (talk) 15:55, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

You could have a movie review section called "In The Can" (with a picture of a film strip so readers don't think it's some kind of bathroom review :-)) Astronaut (talk) 16:05, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

"The Can Opener" ? As in opening up stories to the public ? StuRat (talk) 16:15, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

"The Talis Spin", as in tailspin, "Talis" from the school name, and "Spin" from telling a story from one POV ? StuRat (talk) 16:18, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Which Indo-European syllables for Japanese

An earlier question today explained something about the handling of Indo-European syllables in Japanese. I'm curious to find out if there is a rule that dictates which "extra" vowel should be added. For example: Frank Sinatra becomes Furanku Shinatora, but are Faranku Shinatara or Feranku Shinatura also "valid" spellings, or are there is a set of rules saying which is correct? Astronaut (talk) 16:03, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

You can start by looking at Romanization of Japanese. -- Wavelength (talk) 16:15, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, you have misunderstood my question. I was not asking about the Romanization of Japanese, but about the Japanization of English syllables. For example is the English letter "K" always represented by "ku" (ク) in Japanese, or can "ka" (カ), "ke" (ケ), etc also be used? Astronaut (talk) 16:28, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

You may find b:Transwiki:Transcribing English to Japanese#Step 4: Add epenthetic vowels helpful. --Kusunose 17:13, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

u is added after every consonant (where required to fit into Japanese syllable structure) except for ch, j, t, d. ch, j require i (i.e. chi, ji); t, d require o (i.e. to, do). So, faranku or feranku and shinatara and shinatura are not found. Another thing to mention about English loanword phonology is that the words are borrowed from an r-less dialect of English (like standard British), so the word car is not karu (as an American speaker might expect) but rather kaa with a long aa. And some words are borrowed from what seem to be plurals so peanut butter is not piinatto bataa but rather piinattsu bataa as if the borrowed word was peanuts butter. There are other loanword issues but they have to do with consonants not vowels – ishwar  (speak) 17:06, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

That link reminds of an interesting thing about i and u insertion. After k and sh (and possibly also g?) there is variation between inserting i and u. The older pattern is to add a i, but the new pattern is to add the general u. For some words the i vowel is standardized, so you get cake > keeki (but not keeku). For others, you get variation: ink > iNki (older) ~ iNku (newer), text > tekisuto (older) ~ tekusuto (newer), brush > burashi (older) ~ burashu (newer).

The issue with Truman is that there are again three variant patterns. One older pattern is to insert o after the t as usual, which gives Truman > toruumaN, trunk > toraNku. The other pattern is to use u in which the t turns in to a ts (i.e. tsu), which gives tree > tsurii, cutlet > katsuretsu. However, in more recent loanwords you can get a u without t > ts, which gives turuumaN. So, President Truman (an older borrowing) is toruumaN but the movie name is turuumaN. Another example is two > tsuu (older) ~ tuu (newer). Older Japanese may not be able say tu very easily though.

Since your example only V insertion in English clusters, here are some examples of those:

• fr > fur : friend > fureNdo
• gr > gur : green > guriin
• kl > kur : tackle > takkuru, clean > kuriin
• ks > kus : box > bokkusu
• ld > rud : bulldog > burudokku (or burudoggu),
• pl > pur : couple > kappuru, plan > puraN
• pn > puN : happen > happuN
• ps > pus : chips, chippusu
• sf > suf : sphinx > sufiNkusu
• sl > sur : hustle > hassuru, slacks > surakkusu
• sk > suk : skate > sukeeto, mascot > masukotto
• sn > suN : lesson > ressuN
• st > sut : test > tesuto, step > suteppu
• zn > zun : season > siizuN
• skr > sukur : script > sukuriputo
• spr > supur : sprint > supuriNto
• θr > sur : throw > suroo (= slow > suroo)
• str > sutor : street > sutoriito, stress > sutoresu
• tl > tor : little > rittoru
• tr > tor : trick > torikku, trouble > toraburu
• dr > dor : dry > dorai

– ishwar  (speak) 19:08, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Welsh and Greek

Are Welsh and Greek the oldest in use languages in Europe? 82.43.88.87 (talk) 16:03, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Saying one language is older than another is very problematic since all languages evolve over time. Welsh and Greek both grew from different dialects of Proto-Indo-European, as did all the other Indo-European languages, so in one sense they are all exactly the same age. However, sometimes people say one language is older than other to mean that one language has been written down (and is thus attested) earlier than another. We have a list of languages by first written accounts, according to which the oldest-attested European languages that have living descendants are Greek and Latin. The Germanic languages, Irish, Basque, and Georgian (if you want to consider that in Europe) are all also attested from earlier than Welsh. —Angr 19:10, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

There is a sense in which Greek is the oldest surviving language in Europe, but it is not a very useful sense. Greek is the only example I can think of in Europe where we use the same name for a language spoken two and a half thousand years ago and its descendant spoken today. The fact that they use the same script, used by no other language in the modern world, encourages this view. But in fact, Modern Greek is no closer to Classical Greek than Italian is to Latin.

Welsh on the other hand has no great antiquity: the earliest writings that we can reasonably call Welsh (as opposed to P-Celtic) are roughly the same age as the earliest writings we can call English. --ColinFine (talk) 22:53, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Yep. "Welsh" as clearly distinct from the common ancestor of Welsh, Breton, and Cornish only begins to emerge around the time as those three groups of Celts were isolated from each other by the westward expansion of the Anglo-Saxons (about the 7th century AD). Strad (talk) 05:05, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

From what language is Latin derived?

OK, so we all know the Romance languages (French, Spanish, Italian, etc.) derive from Latin, but my question is, what language is Latin derived from? 16:18, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

See history of Latin. Algebraist 16:22, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I did, but I still can't find a direct, clear-cut answer. 16:28, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I've seen the forerunner of Latin called 'Proto-Latin', which doesn't seem to be mentioned there. Xn4 (talk) 16:29, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Well Italic languages (Latin is an Italic language) says 'the Italic languages themselves show minor influence from the Etruscan and somewhat more from the Ancient Greek languages'. So I suppose Greek and Etruscan? She'sGotSpies (talk) 16:39, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Tore Janson's A Natural History of Latin (Oxford University Press, new edition 2007) seems to say nothing on how Latin may relate to Etruscan and/or Proto-Indo-European. I suspect it's still more obscure than you might think. Xn4 (talk) 16:56, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Languages can be influenced by sister languages or neighbour languages as well. I think we can rule those out. --Kjoonlee 18:45, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

On the direct language descent tree, Italian is part of the Italic language group (like Oscan, Umbrian, etc.), and the Italic language group is often claimed to be part of an Italo-Celtic language grouping, and the Italo-Celtic languages are centum branches within Indo-European. Etruscan influenced Latin, but Etruscan was a non-Indo-European language, and so was not a direct ancestor language to Latin, and did not share any known direct ancestor language with Latin... AnonMoos (talk) 20:17, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

So to summarise, in case the OP is still confused, Latin descends from Proto-Italic, which descends from Proto-Italo-Celtic, which descends from Proto-Indo-European. (You could say it descends from Italic, which descends from Italo-Celtic, which descends from Indo-European, but some scholars might (will?) point out that these languages are not attested, and no-one can be 100% sure they existed.) Etruscan is just a neighbouring language from which words might have been borrowed by the Latin-speaking people. --Lgriot (talk) 23:55, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

To summarise even further (and to elaborate a bit on the Italic/Proto-Italic distinction mentioned by Lgriot), nobody knows. In the absence of surviving native speakers and any kind of audio recording techniques, we have no audio record to work with, and the written record is extremely sparse even for early Latin, let alone for any possible predecessor languages. Everything we know about what happened before Latin is based on comparisons of known languages and conjectures about possible predecessors. Long established, widely accepted and for the most part very plausible conjectures, yes, but if you want a direct, clear-cut answer, I'm afraid the only one we can give is "we don't know". -- Ferkelparade π 00:37, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Wow, thanks for all the help everyone. This definitely has brought much insight to me. :) 74.12.21.169 (talk) 00:53, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Translating a phrase to Latin

Having struggled to translate this and failed, I throw myself on the mercy of the reference desk. I want a phrase that roughly translates as 'Make sure you find time to chill out mentally with a game of draughts occasionally.' or 'Don't forget to occasionally chill out mentally with a game of draughts.' or... you get the idea. Because I want it to be referring to the specific latin quote 'laxare animum lusu calculorum', I want to include these particular words (or at least their stems) as far as possible.

I suck at this. Help? 79.66.124.253 (talk) 19:45, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

"Chill out" is a highly-colloquial slang phrase, which would almost certainly have to be replaced by a much more general expression (which probably wouldn't make any reference to temperature at all) in order to be very meaningful in Latin... AnonMoos (talk) 20:09, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

The English I provided is deliberately very colloquial in hopes of getting a rough Latin translation that preserves the spirit. The 'chilling out mentally' is already in the Latin anyway ('laxare animum') although not in the right form. 79.66.124.253 (talk) 21:05, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Something like: velim animum laxes quandoque lusu calculorum? Maid Marion (talk) 14:26, 24 July 2008 (UTC) Or: memento animum laxare quandoque lusu calculorum

Or "cura ut animum laxes..." Adam Bishop (talk) 15:48, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

July 24

Speech communication speed of various languages

Are there any major differences in how fast information can be vocally communicated in one spoken language versus another? For example, one language may use speech that makes use of delayed sounds consisting of drawl, long words, or phrases while another may use much simpler vocal sounds to communicate the same information or idea. I know that this may depend a lot on the speaker, but on average it may seem that some languages are simply "faster" vocally than others in this way. So which well known language would be considered to have the highest vocal "throughput" and speed of conveying ideas and communicating? 24.193.28.27 (talk) 00:24, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Seems to me it'd depend much more on what the speaker was trying to say, and on why he was trying to say it. I recall a tongue-in-cheek statement by a man to his significant other, paraphrased as "Nothing in the vast sweep of interpersonal carnal relationships could ever surpass the thorough going-over which I intend vis-a-vis your good self." In other circumstances, that might be shortened to, "Ready?" You might try browsing the linguistic archives at Language Log blog, which can shake your preconceptions of things like "a word." OtherDave (talk) 01:28, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I recall reading somewhere that on average, English requires fewer words to convey the same meaning than French (too many of those le, la, les, etc.). Clarityfiend (talk) 03:33, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I think, generally, an Irishman speaking English will have a much higher throughput than a Texan speaking English. Between languages it's much more difficult to measure because, depending on the topic and the grammar of the language, one can take more words to convey the same idea (where one language has a specific word for that idea and the other has a 2 or 3 word phrase for the same idea), or more time to say one word in an agglutinative language but that word takes less time than the several (roughly equivalent) words in a non-agglutinative language. -LambaJan (talk) 13:55, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Pronunciation of Italian "portafoglio"

In particular, do you pronounce the l? --212.120.246.239 (talk) 15:00, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

You can listen to it here. -- Wavelength (talk) 20:26, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

The pronunciation of the gl involves a palatal lateral approximant. -- Wavelength (talk) 21:54, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

-que ending

1. How did it form in Latin? 2. What was its significative function? 3. Does it still have it in Latin-based languages? Tough questions, I know. Many thanks for any comment. --Omidinist (talk) 16:09, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I assume you're talking about the Latin enclitic -que that means "and". It's inherited from Proto-Indo-European *k^we, which also followed the second word to be connected (i.e. "A and B" was "A B k^we"). It has parallels in Sanskrit ca and Ancient Greek te, which use the same syntax. If by "What was its significative function?" you mean "What did it mean?" the answer is "and". As far as I know it does not survive in any modern Romance language, at least not directly. In Latin, it became permanently attached to some words, and those words may survive in modern languages. For example, dumque became French donc. —Angr 16:33, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

All right. Thanks so far. But, how about words like burlesque? What is -que doing here? --Omidinist (talk) 19:02, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

In that case, the suffix isn't -que, it's -esque, which is a French suffix that was borrowed from Italian -esco (Bergamesco, Tedesco, etc.), which in turn was probably borrowed from Germanic and so is related to English -ish, German -isch, and Scandinavian -sk. It's just a generic suffix for turning a noun into an adjective. —Angr 19:43, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Such words are not unique.  :) -- JackofOz (talk) 23:10, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

What language is this?

I found this written in a stone near my house in what appeared to be Hebrew and I transliterated it (using the Hebrew alphabet provided in a Webster's dictionary (so it may not be 100% accurate)). Although it was written in Hebrew, I don't think this is Hebrew at all (unless I transliterated incorrectly??). I also can't provide the original Hebrew text, because it's not an available script on my computer. I see some similarities--like 'Atonai and Adonai', and 'ory and ori' and 'irel and ira', also some semitic languages use "Al" like 'the', I believe??

"Al-Atonai eloe et-ory ydh et-iashai ; zadh l’irel el ilqu ?

Al-Atonai eloe al-azaiq aka et-ihlafai ; aka zadh l’irel’rra el ilqu ?

Zal al-ashtan’rra ailqu, ev et-shinaiqyn ydh et-shaqvaryn,

ventulum l’et kronch’l et-matar, ai-el um’as io kchsharlum ydh nafchshpirlum."

And another part was also written, but lacked vowels (except for the aleph)-- "shrcharhrt l yhaw shl gvyta slh"

Does anyone know what language this is in, and why Hebrew was used for it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kharshayarta-shah Amritatvi (talk • contribs) 19:02, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

It does look temptingly like Hebrew, doesn't it? Could it be Aramaic? Can you take a photo of the stone and upload it? —Angr 19:37, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll try to upload it when I get access to a camera. I'm pretty far away from a place where I can get one, but I'll try. I also don't think it's Aramaic, because I'm pretty sure Aramaic and Hebrew are mutually intelligible to a certain extent, especially when Aramaic is written using Hebrew. And the plethora of 'l' seems to have a function, as it's in almost every other word, which doesn't look very semitic. By looking at it from a strictly semitic meaning, it roughly seems like it says "The-Lord [eloe] together-light [ydh] together-[ia]present; [zadh][l']fear[of God] [ilqu]?" I can't really make out the rest, but I think 'el' and 'lum' and' l' ' associate action, since eloe comes after the subject and before the objects (assuming the meaning and if the order is SVO) and 'ydh' seems to connect the two objects (including et-shinaiqyn et-shaqvaryn and kchsharlum nafchshpirlum), so it may function as 'and'. If it helps, I'm near Neve Ativ, Israel for vacation and 2 native Hebrew speakers said they have no idea what it says, except for what I attempted to translate. I'll search for a camera —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kharshayarta-shah Amritatvi (talk • contribs) 20:22, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

It means "The-Lord is my-light and my-savior; at whom shall my fear be directed? The-Lord is the-strength of my-life; of whom shall afraidness be directed? When the adverse direct, even my-enemies and my-foes[demons], come[they] to me to devour my-flesh, it-is they that stumble and fall."

I believe that this is an excerpt from the Bible: Psalm 27 it looks like. And the language is a sort of hodgepodge mutation of either an Indo-European (possibly Italic) language that had Hebrew/Aramaic loan words or a North/Western Semitic language that uses Indo-European loan words and form... and it looks like it uses liaison and elision (which is why I'm assuming it is Italic, esp. with the use of ventu[lum] for 'come' as in venare/venir and the different forms of 'l' indicate action, making 'lum' [indicating they] 'el'[indicating I am and to be] 'l [apostrophe]'[indicating to-] all forms of verbs. If you find any more of this language, please share. It's really interesting and mysterious. I was able to find out the meaning by your attempt at translating it and then went on my knowledge of other languages. But then again, I may be wrong, but it all appears to coincide. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.224.248.45 (talk) 21:28, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

This is really interesting! I agree with all the above sleuthing. I'm going to take a wild guess here; we've got some Italic loan-words, some Indo-European, some Semitic structure... Could it possibly be Maltese? I don't think Maltese was ever written in Hebrew letters... I'm really stumped for now - I'll do some research and see what I can find. Try and upload a picture, if you can! СПУТНИК^{CCC P} 21:54, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

If you do a Google search for "language guesser" or "language identifier", then you can choose from a number of programs to identify the language. -- Wavelength (talk) 22:11, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

How old does that incription look? Could it be that you have discovered the first writing of a Latin-hebrew creole language from Roman times? Or an Italian-Arabic creole from the time of the crusades? Either of those would be really amazing! --Lgriot (talk) 00:12, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

'Billion' in UK and US

Considering 'One Billion' is 1,000,000,000,000 in the UK and merely 1,000,000,000 in the US, how does this affect monetary exchange? $1bn could either be £500mn or £500,000mn (approx., given the exchange rate of $2=£1) depending on the understanding of the user of the word. As a side note, it's really misleading to use the word 'billion' these days, as we have no idea of which number the user is talking about. Is the world's population 6,000,000,000,000+ or is it 6,000,000,000+?--ChokinBako (talk) 19:46, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

As of the now, almost no-one in the UK uses 'billion' for a million million. The so-called short scale is now standard in the UK, and I believe in most of the English-speaking world. Algebraist 19:48, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Certainly in the realm of finance, billion means the same thing on both sides of the Atlantic. Marco polo (talk) 20:23, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

July 25

To speak the truth....

While looking up the etymology of the word "truth", it came to my attention that there was no verb form of "to speak the truth." This interested me since there is a verb to express the act of being dishonest - "to lie." I noticed the same situation in Spanish, and my friend told me that it was also the same in French and Dutch. Is there any language in which there is a verb form of "to speak the truth" as there is one to express the act of being dishonest? 65.9.238.124 (talk) 01:06, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't think this is exactly what you're looking for, but many languages, like Classical (but not modern) Chinese could use a noun or adjective as a verb. Thus you could say "Person X is truthing". I don't know a modern Chinese word for "speaking the truth", but the existence of one wouldn't surprise me. Perhaps a reason that there isn't a common word for "speaking the truth" is that there is an assumption that one speaks the truth most of the time, and lying is something less common, and requires a more specific phrase.

A side note - English has a sort of word to talk about speaking the truth: soothsaying. Sooth has similar origins to truth. The soo bit comes from the Indo-European root of the verb 'to be' (like Latin sum/es/est/sumus/estis/sunt and so on), and the same -th suffix as truth (and width and length). Steewi (talk) 01:40, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Oops, forgot to finish the thought. The point is, that soothsaying is "speaking what is" (as opposed to "speaking what is not") in an etymological sense, although the meaning these days is more mystical. Steewi (talk) 01:42, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Galore

This has bugged me for a while, and having read some of the excellent responses and discussions on this page, I thought I might pose the question here.

What part of speech is the word "galore"? As in "I have apples galore". The dictionary.com definitions are split between whether it's an adjective or an adverb. To me it makes more sense as an adjective (you're quantifying the apples, a noun, right?). If it is indeed an adjective, then are there any other adjectives which, in English, come after the noun? "Aplenty" may be one. What about adjectives which don't describe quantity? Thanks in advance. Willnz0 (talk) 02:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

This is a nice question. There are only a few words which can only occur after the noun ("postmodification" of the noun head) like galore and aplenty. Others are just mostly idiomaticish things like elect in the president elect, designate in the president designate, and public in a notary public. They are usually called adjectives although they are weird adjectives as normal adjectives can be used attributively in pre-modifying positions (i.e. the _____ NOUN) or in predicates (i.e. SUBJECT is _______).

There are adverbial type things that can postmodify as well. Like out in the way out or X-ward in the way southward, the way homeward.

Several postmodifiers can also occur in premodifying position. Like the only decision possible or the only possible decision. Note how only is required in order to get the postmodification, you cant say *the decision possible.

Some of these have distinct meanings when occurring in the different positions. Compare the following: the country proper vs. the proper country, the citizens concerned vs. the concerned citizen, the citizens present vs. the present citizens.

Some adjectives like asleep have a different pattern. They can be used in predicates like The children were asleep but not in attributive premodifying position *the asleep children. They can occur in postmodifying position: the children now asleep, the house currently ablaze.

A special case are constructions with words like somebody, anyone, everything as in somebody new, anyone young, everything big, etc.

You might be able to analyze some of these as ellipted clauses. That is, the only day suitable = the only day (that is) suitable.

I also find this to be a pretty interesting area of English grammar. – ishwar  (speak) 05:01, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

And a very nice reply, Ish ishwar. My only quibble is words like president elect etc. I see this as an example of inappropriate dehyphenisation. To me, president-elect is one word, and a different word from either president or elect. The whole word is a noun, a compound noun admittedly, but still a noun, so there should be no need to consider what part of speech elect is because in this context it's only part of a word. Same for governor-general-designate - although that presents a slightly different case because in some countries governor general is not hyphenated. In Australia it is; as is attorney-general. I guess that means that in Australia governor-general-designate is counted as one (compound) word, but in other countries governor general designate would be counted as three words. Hyphenating the parts makes the job of analysis less burdensome because you have fewer words to analyse. Mind you, my cunning plan falls apart with Prime Minister-elect. There, Prime Minister is conceptualised as a single title to which -elect is appended, rather than a Minister-elect who happens to be primus inter pares. -- JackofOz (talk) 05:25, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

A good reply indeed. Particularly interesting to me is the words that have different meanings in different positions. I'd encountered this in French. "Ma propre voiture" means "my own car" whereas "ma voiture propre" means "my clean car". In the case of French, the meanings are entirely different - there seems to be no logic to the meanings. Whereas in English they are closely related, usually just with different emphasis. Is that fair?

Secondly, to return to the original question, any ideas why galore is often said to be an adverb? How can it possibly be mistaken for an adverb? Willnz0 (talk) 07:47, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

I have a rather large instrument here...

In the context of an auction, what is "the instrument". I'm thinking it may be either the appraised value of the item or the estimated auction sale price. StuRat (talk) 07:00, 25 July 2008 (UTC)