Jump to content

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 79.76.154.239 (talk) at 03:24, 9 September 2008 (Verb: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome to the language section
of the Wikipedia reference desk.
Select a section:
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.



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:


September 3

"Case" in ancient languages

In Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Language#Per_aspera_ad_confusion above, and in Greek_alphabet there is the mention of the notion of letter "case". Upper and lower case refers to the location of the pieces of type in a typesetter's type case, that is, his compartmented tray. The capitals were on top and the, uhh, squiglier ones were below. As type didn't move until much later the terms seem anachronistic. Majuscule and minuscule seem a trifle pedantic. Is there a common-usage compliment to "capital" (which, of course, only has meaning post-minuscule) other than "lower case"? Saintrain (talk) 01:28, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The common-usage alternative to "lower case" is "small". However, in relation to Greek in particular, I have seen the two styles of letters called "print" (upper case) and "script" (lower case). --Anonymous, 05:59 UTC, September 3, 2008.
Real typographers dislike "small" used as a synonym for lower-case, since they generally use "small" to refer to small caps (which are not lower-case). There are a whole series of technical terms to describe various medieval handwriting styles (i.e. "uncials", "half-uncials", "Carolingian", "Insular", "miniscules" etc.), some of which were on the line of development of the modern lower-case letters... AnonMoos (talk) 11:33, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Possibly this will be a stupid question, but did classical languages have what we would recognise as a case distinction at all? Uppercase letters were the ones they used in stonemasonry, and lowercase were the cursive ones. Did anyone, before the Middle Ages anyway, ever use both kinds in the same document? Marnanel (talk) 20:06, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not in Latin or Greek, at least. They didn't have minuscule forms until the 9th or 10th century. Do any other classical languages even have case distinctions today? Adam Bishop (talk) 20:12, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The modern lowercase letters grew out of medieval "hands" (as I said), so ancient Romans didn't have anything closely resembling lowercase letters in form or function. They did have cursive and shorthand. AnonMoos (talk) 23:02, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nynorsk grammar

anyone knows where to find a NORWEGIAN NYNORSK GRAMMARBOOK? i repeat, a NYNORSK(=NewNorwegian) grammarbook where i get lists that are bending the words..

like this:

A song - the song - songs - songs


i relaize I might be asking on the wrong place, but it seems impossible to find anywhere... I need a list of all words being bendt and shaped into different forms. in order to learn the lanuage i must have one... and a common wordbook is not what i am looking for..

Have a look here, especially here and on all the subpages that start with substantiv. In general, nynorsk is very regular - the main thing you have to know is whether a noun is male masculine, female feminine or neutrum (which will be mentioned in any good dictionary, along with a possible irregular plural form) -- Ferkelparade π 11:42, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nouns may be masculine or feminine (or neuter), but they are never male or female. —Angr 11:49, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, of course. I hang my head in shame at my involuntary sexualisation of language -- Ferkelparade π 14:00, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
And people inside Berlin need to remember that not everything that's characteristic of German English is an ignorant solecism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talkcontribs) 16:18, 3 September 2008
A full dictionary of Nynorsk (and Bokmål) is here: http://www.dokpro.uio.no/ordboksoek.html . After each word there's a code (like n1 for noun, neuter, type 1) and you click on "oversyn over grammatiske koder" to get the pattern for that word. Jørgen (talk) 20:05, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ashkenazic pronunciation in Israeli Hebrew?

When Sholem Aleichem is discussed in Israeli Hebrew, is the Ashkenazic pronunciation [ˈʃolem aˈleixem] used, or is it "Sephardified" to [ʃaˈlom aleiˈxem]? Are there any other Yiddish words of Hebrew origin that have been borrowed into Israeli Hebrew from Yiddish that retain their Ashkenazic pronunciation? —Angr 11:08, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In contemporary Hebrew spoken by the mainstream Israeli population, the author's first name is pronounced SHAlom rather than the Yiddish SHOlem, the accent on the first syllable being typical of Hebrew words (nouns, adjectives) used as personal names; the surname is virtually the same in both pronunciations. For your second question: it's actually Yiddish words used in Hebrew with their Yiddish pronunciation (of vowels, certain consonants, and syllabic stress), which is essentially equivalent to the "Ashkenazic" pronunciation of Hebrew (e.g. SHAbos rather than the "Sephardic"=mainstream shaBAT, TOYre vs. toRAH, BRIS vs. BREET, mishPUche vs. mishpaCHA, EMes vs. eMET, etc.). The insertion of Yiddish words and phrases in Hebrew (regardless of the Yiddish being of Hebrew origin or otherwise), as with their usage in English, is considered jocular. -- Deborahjay (talk) 02:01, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whoever thought that one up? —Preceding unsigned comment added by FrontdoorFreddie (talkcontribs) 13:46, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it's after Cristóbal Colón? -- Coneslayer (talk) 13:57, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
According to this source, it was named because the adjacent river and lake form the shape of a colon (punctuation). Marco polo (talk) 16:55, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
He said "exactly". Judge for yourselves. Looks more like a reflected map of New Zealand to me. Marnanel (talk) 20:03, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Was it like that because of irrigation?--ChokinBako (talk) 19:05, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
ChokinBako - go to your room. Wanderer57 (talk) 03:28, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I notice that one of the local lakes is Sturgeon. Or to give it its full title: Colonic Sturgeon lake —Preceding unsigned comment added by TrapdoorTrevor (talkcontribs) 21:41, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's otherwise known as the a***hole of the world.  :) -- JackofOz (talk) 21:50, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Other word

Hi, what's other word for harmful? It starts with the letter N? I'm not from English-speaking country and don't have a dictionary now, so I really need your help. thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Atacamadesert12 (talkcontribs) 16:34, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Noxious? Fribbler (talk) 16:36, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Noisome? DuncanHill (talk) 16:37, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Nixon? — OtherDave (talk) 17:26, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Noxious or maybe Narcotic —Preceding unsigned comment added by FrontdoorFreddie (talkcontribs) 17:54, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nasty. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.142.11.251 (talk) 21:18, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

D sounding like j and t sounding like tch

What do you call the process in which the d in graduate, becomes j when spoken. For example, it would be pronounced like- gra-jew-ate. It may be the same process, but what do you call it when the first t in flatulate, becomes a tch, like this- fla-tchoo-late. This can also be seen in congratulate and constituate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.86.0.130 (talk) 18:54, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Palatalization --ChokinBako (talk) 18:58, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Constituate? Does any such word exist? -- JackofOz (talk) 21:48, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think so. Algebraist 22:12, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in mind that there are a number of processes (both historical and phonological) referred to as "palatalization." In this instance, the alveolar stop (/t/ or /d/) assimilates properties from a following "y" (palatal approximant) sound; I've heard this attributed to the fact that a single articulation tool (the tongue) is compromising between the two target points of articulation. The "ch" and "j" sounds are postalveolar, which is indeed an area between alveolar and palatal. I suspect, however, that for many speakers that this is no longer a phonetic or phonological feature and instead the "y" sound has been altogether deleted in the process so that in speakers' underlying representations, flatulate is /ˈflæ.tʃu.leːt/ rather than /ˈflæ.tju.leːt/. — Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 06:19, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the word we are looking for is affricate? Duomillia (talk) 19:27, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Affricate is the name of sounds like "ch" and "j", it's not the name for the process of changing "d" to "j". —Angr 20:16, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You could turn affricate into a verb, but that doesn't fully describe the process. turning /t/ to [ts] and /d/ to [dz] would be accurately described as affrication. — Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 20:23, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It always gets me how it's often assumed that everything that can be described must have a name. I looked up 'affrication' and most sites listed something identical or nearly identical to 'The conversion of a simple stop consonant into an affricate,' which doesn't mention anything about POA, so while Ƶ§œš¹'s thought on the subject is understandable, this phenomenon would also fit the definition. I suppose if you wanted to differentiate the two phenomena, you could maybe call this 'retractified affrication' or 'affricated centralization' or whatever. I hope you get my point. In my old phonology class we would simply make a rule that defines the behavior and the environment it occurs in. In this case, just going on our limited examples (excuse my text editor shorthand):

Alveolar Stop [α voiced] -> Postalveolar Affricate [α voiced] / æ(n)_u

Actually, that vowel environment doesn't work because '-ation' brings an /eɪ/ and '-entiate' brings an /ɛ/ and an /i/. Actually, this could turn into quite a project and we might find out that in some or all cases the affricate is actually the underlying phoneme and the orthography just doesn't represent it. I don't have a compelling reason to go through this exercise myself and find out which is the case, but unless you can persuade me somehow then I hope I gave you enough to go on. - Lambajan 20:43, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Americans

Why do they talk through their noses? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.142.11.251 (talk) 21:04, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Previous offensive reply deleted -- SGB
The question is probably an attempt to be offensive to Americans. However if the question is treated seriously then the answer is that they mostly don't, they use their lungs to push air through their vocal cords and the sound mostly passes through their mouth where it is shaped and processed to form words and other sounds. Some of the sound will pass through the nose. A blocked nose obviously causes a differnt type of sound to be made. As for "Why", generally folk learn to speak by mimicing those around them, so if those around speak with a particular dialect or patois then the individual will tend to do the same. -- SGBailey (talk) 22:08, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Because we haven't mastered the art of sounding like we have a hot potato in our mouth? -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:28, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This is from the book "Deutsch heute: Grundstufe" (1974), page xxxii.
"To make these long German vowels sound right, pronounce them with a lot more energy than the corresponding English vowel sounds. Our English vowels sound lackadaisical and funny to Germans. They say we talk as if we had a hot potato in our mouths--because we pronounce our vowels with so little energy."
-- Wavelength (talk) 18:33, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
A Frenchman I know says Brits talk like they have a hot potato in the mouth and Americans sound like the adults in the Charlie Brown animated cartoons. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:05, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Whether the question was intended to be offensive or not, it is true that some American accents (e.g. Western New York State) nasalize some vowels (especially /æ/) spontaneously (i.e. even when they're not next to nasal consonants). I remember hearing a local TV news reporter from Binghamton, New York, pronounce his own surname, Catlin, in such a way that I thought he was saying "Cantlin". And I've heard someone else pronounce the name "Patsy" so it sounds like "Pantsy". But it would be a tremendous overgeneralization to say all Americans do that. —Angr 06:28, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
See Nasalization, Nasal consonant, and Nasal vowel. This is common in many, even most languages. Some perhaps more than others, though I don't think English or even American English is all that extreme compared to all other languages. Probably somewhere in the middle. Pfly (talk) 10:03, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Detailed information about nasalization in different languages is available at WALS - Feature/Chapter 10: Vowel Nasalization.
-- 18:41, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
(I made the last comment, but my username did not appear. [1] -- Wavelength (talk) 18:30, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to take this question at face value, and comment on it in a serious vein. I am an American, and while in my youth I lived in Finland for a while. I hardly ever heard English spoken, and very rarely American English. However, I could be walking down a busy crowded street in, say, Helsinki, and if someone were speaking American English a block away, I would be able to easily hear it above the babel and noise of the crowd. The reason for this is precisely what the op was talking about - Americans tend to "talk through their nose", so that their speech is "twangy" sounding. This sort of sound, because it is unique and high-pitched, can easily carry through a crowd of people speaking in other languages. I'll leave it to others to go into the finer details about why Americans speak this way (I have a personal theory that we get it from the Scots Irish), but I do have to say that this is indeed a noticeable phenomenon. Saukkomies 08:47, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Results" speak

I have observed that if someone enters 5 events, wins 3 and loses 2 that an American (USA) will say "3 and 2" whilst an Englishman will say "3 out of 5". Is my observation accurate? How did it arise? What do other countries do (even non English speaking ones)? Is there a wikipedia article about any of this? -- SGBailey (talk) 22:02, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My experience of collectable card game tournaments in the UK is that one speaks of someone as being '3 and 2'. This may be a result of American dominance of the industry though. Algebraist 22:07, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
After Umteen decades, the first time I ever came across "3 and 2" and understood what it meant was this summer. I had heard it before but never realised that it was a report of some results. (I'm UKish.) -- SGBailey (talk) 22:11, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"3 and 2" sounds like a matchplay score. DuncanHill (talk) 22:13, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think the term for the "3 and 2"-type scoring is Win-Loss Record, although that page currently points to an article on Baseball, which could explain why it is prevalent in the US vs. the UK. You'll also sometimes see the number of tie (draw) results given as a third number, which leads to the pun in the gameshow title Win, Lose or Draw. -- 128.104.112.147 (talk) 00:15, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There are a couple of reasons why this form would be more common in the U.S. First, soccer ranks teams using "points" rather than strictly by a won-loss record. So while a baseball fan may say the team is 3-2, a soccer fan is more likely to say the team has 9 points through five games. Second, British sports standings use the form wins-draws-losses, so the team in question would actually be 3-0-2. Baseball and basketball have no ties (draws), while hockey and American football put draws at the end: 3-2-0. Ties are so rare in American football that they're usually left out. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:26, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Mwalcoff. See also Group tournament ranking system. I think soccer usage has influenced British usage in sports like rugby and boxing where draws are rarer. jnestorius(talk) 13:23, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Filipino

What are some Filipino words that were included in the International English Dictionary? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.224.52.44 (talk) 23:14, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dunno about that dictionary, but we have an article List of English words of Tagalog origin. Fribbler (talk) 10:02, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


September 4

French translation

In music, what would the word dehors mean, as in trés en dehors or fort et trés en dehors? 220.244.104.23 (talk) 10:11, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A google search for "en dehors" suggests it means "emphasised". Fribbler (talk) 11:19, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Our article Musical terminology says en dehors means "prominently" (Musical terminology#E). DuncanHill (talk) 12:39, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I believe it means "outside". In a musical context, a line or part marked "en dehors" should stand outside of the the other parts, which should be inside, or in the background. Thomprod (talk) 02:22, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

learning french

does anyone know a good teach yourself course/book or anything for learning french from scratch that is based on learning and understanding the grammatical structure of the language as opposed to the seemingly popular system of just rote learning? thank you. Philc 0780 20:20, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure if I know what you mean by "rote learning," but the best French program I've ever encountered is French in Action. It's all in French—no English comparisons, but it's clear and thorough and rarely gets frustrating. The workbook of the program discusses grammar in detail, and there is no rote memorization because each lessons expands off of the last and there is enough repetition that you memorize words naturally..--El aprendelenguas (talk) 00:28, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Rote learning is often used where I come from to describe learning from repetition as opposed to learning from understanding. Sorry, I didn't realise it may not be in common circulation. 92.21.120.224 (talk) 10:23, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
People learn in different ways, and often misjudge the difficulty of learning another language, especially after adolescence. One issue is what you mean by "learn a language." Learn to read it? Learn to write it? Understand it when spoken? Speak it? And for each of those: in what context?
So I'll respond to the question with a question: what do you want to learn French for? Do you want to read literature? Understand French films without subtitles? Feel comfortable on vacation? Get a job in a francophone environment?
You might take a look at online offerings like Frenchpod or Coffee Break French. If you already speak some French but don't have much chance to practice, my original research suggests you can get a lot more practice in an immersive online environment like Second Life; I've used more French there (both in text and in voice chat) during the past eight months than in the previous eight years. --- OtherDave (talk) 11:46, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have been to France a few times and I love it, though I speak next to no French and have relied heavily on friends who are bilingual, I prefer it there to the UK and would probably want to be able to stay there for extended periods of time, so really the full whack, learn to read and speak the language in both formal and informal contexts. Philc 0780 13:29, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
You might seek out textbooks used in courses to teach French reading comprehension to graduate students. In such courses, the students are mainly interested in learning just enough of the language to be able to read French-language technical articles in their own academic area -- and the corresponding textbooks make little pretense to teaching conversational skills, and have a higher proportion of grammatical analysis, and a much lower proportion of drill than texts aimed at ordinary undergrauate-level language classes... AnonMoos (talk) 13:06, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Any college text should be helpful in this regard.` The Jade Knight (talk) 09:21, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia actually has significant grammatical information available in its articles, there is also a Wikibook on French, and Wikiversity also has a French Department. The Jade Knight (talk) 09:21, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


September 5

Scunthorpe

What do residents of Scunthorpe call themselves? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 1000kA (talkcontribs) 00:56, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The escape committee? Sorry, couldn't resist it. DuncanHill (talk) 09:40, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dave, Steve, Andrea, Alison, Tom, Peter...But more seriously I (and I live around 40 miles from Scunthorpe) refer to the place as 'Scunny' and quite a lot of people seem to refer to it as that. To be fair that's more the place than the people though. I doubt they are called 'scunthorpians' (like mancunians or liverpudians) by anybody. There isn't distinctive enoguh of a Scunthorpe accent to warrant its own name/locational reference, plus it doesn't lend itself to a short-form description (for obvious reasons) as well as some would. 194.221.133.226 (talk) 09:47, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Per Google, the most common form is Scunthorpian, followed distantly by Scunthorper, Scunnyite, and Scunnier. Marco polo (talk) 20:15, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Scunthonian is more common and more correct than Scunthorpian

Translation requested

I'm translating Twinkle for the french wiki. However, due to my null understanding of French language, I'll like to request translation of the next words:

Deletion of articles
  • Notify if possible (tooltip: Notifies the original author)

  • General criteria
    • Not encyclopedic (tooltip: Pages that do not have encyclopedic importance)
    • Pure vandalism (tooltip: Vandalism)
    • Blatant advertisement (tooltip: Advertisement in articles)
    • User request
    • Redirects to nonexistent pages
    • Re-created material (tooltip:
    • Other reason (tooltip: Choose another reason)
(popup: Please write a reason)

Thanks, Macy 03:07, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to go over to the French Wikipedia and ask about this, or find English pages with these words and see if there are French equivalents. The Jade Knight (talk) 03:35, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll give it a go (might be *slightly* off due to lack of context):
Suppression d'articles
  • Nofifie si possible (infobulle: notifie l'auteur originel)

  • Critères généraux
    • Pas encyclopédique (infobulle: pages qui n'ont pas d'importance encyclopédique)
    • Vandalisme flagrant (infobulle: Vandalisme)
    • Publicité flagrante (infobulle: publicité au sein des articles)
    • Requête utilisateur
    • Redirection vers une page qui n'existe pas
    • Re-création d'une page supprimée (infobulle:
    • Autre raison (infobulle: Choisir une autre raison)
(fenêtre pop-up: Veuillez donner une raison)

Equendil Talk 23:11, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Might I suggest a slight emendation in : Notifiez si possible (infobulle: notifie l'auteur originel) ? Bessel Dekker (talk) 04:17, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

French instruction videos

Hi, I'm just curious about some videos that I had seen. They were for people learning French, and had a 1980s look to them. All the dialogues were in French, and the lessons were episodes with stories. The main characters were a young man and a young lady, and the young man's name was Vincent. He had a cute face and brown hair. The young lady was also cute, and reminded me of the teacher from Carrusel.

There are two episodes that I remember. One was where Vincent was invited to a family with kids. There was a budgie in a cage but Vincent made a mistake and the bird got away. Another episode was where Vincent and the young lady were working at the front desk of a hotel, instead of someone else. Vincent was saying things like "C'est facile!" and he was all smiles. But then lots of people rushed in at once and he ended up saying "C'est tres difficile," or something like that.

I think the video was sponsored by the académie française but I'm not sure about that. Does anyone have any idea what the title could be? --Kjoonlee 03:25, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It wouldn't be "French in Action", would it? I remember watching that in my high school French classes. I don't really remember the plots of the various episodes, but I do my buddies and I drooling over the cute French girl in it. Dgcopter (talk) 19:18, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it's French in Action. I must admit I've only seen the first 26 of the total 52 episode of French in Action, but the young man's name is Robert, and in the first 26 episodes there's no scenario of Robert and Mireille (the young lady) working at a hotel. Granted, one of the later episodes could feature that I suppose, but the characters wouldn't just be saying "C'est facile" and "C'est très dificile" that late in the program.--El aprendelenguas (talk) 22:49, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Corrupted Spanish word for misprinted/overstock clothing worn by impoverished citizens in Latin America?

I have /heard/ this word in casual conversation 2 or 3 times in the past year. It seems that there is a Spanish or "Spanglish" TERM used in the United States for misprinted/ overstock/ teams-that-didn't win clothing that is donated to charities an worn in Latin America.

No amount of Google-ing or other research is giving me any answers...perhaps because I have no Spanish language skills and additionally no memory of the way the word sounds!

Thanks in advance.

221.218.168.101 (talk) 14:56, 5 September 2008 (UTC)KB_in_Beijing[reply]

As a note, I DID find information about Africa: [2] In Togo, the castoffs are called "dead white men's clothing." Few people in that West African country believe that a living person would throw away anything this good. Consumers in Uganda, Kenya and Tanzania call the used clothing mitumba, the Swahili word for bale. 221.218.168.101 (talk) 15:12, 5 September 2008 (UTC) KB_in_Beijing[reply]

I spent some time on Google España looking at pages in Spanish that talk about mitumba [3] [4], but even though they actually borrow the Swahili word mitumba in the articles, they make no single-word Spanish equivalent. The best they can say is ropa de segunda mano (="second hand clothing"). If there were a popular Spanish word for this, I'd expect one of the article to say "...mitumba, or _________ when it's donated to Latin American countries..." but I haven't found that. I'd guess the word you heard was a part of a jargon limited to the clothing industry. I also found this article, which refers to the clothing as ropa barata de hombre blanco (="cheap white man's clothing"), albeit a translation of what you said above with no evidence that Spanish people would actually use that term in conversation. I also found this page, which refers to "vintage" clothes as ropa de moda tata, but of course I'm aware that "vintage" and "second hand" are not the same thing. The word you heard might very well have been an English word in a Spanish accent (Spanglish, as you mentioned). If so, you might find an English term somewhere online that comes close to what you heard. (If you're interested in any of the Spanish articles here, you can run them through Google translator to read them.)--El aprendelenguas (talk) 22:42, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In Zambia it's called salaula, Bemba for "rummage". That could pass for a Spanish word.... jnestorius(talk) 22:52, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Translation assistance request

Would anyone be interested in helping me with an English to Latin or Latin to English translation? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.151.147.129 (talk) 16:38, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, if it's not homework, we'd all be happy to help. Adam Bishop (talk) 19:00, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Unless it's a whole book or something, in which case you're really going to have to pay someone to do it. Algebraist 19:07, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You mean like Certe, Toto, sentio nos in Kansate non iam adesse? --- OtherDave (talk) 22:57, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

September 6

Czech name

How is the Czech name "Marie" pronounced? I believe it is different from the French and German one, but I am not sure about the syllables. Please do not use IPA, I can barely read it. It should either be pronounced "mah-ree-eh" or "mah-ree-ah". Which one of these is correct? Or maybe both are wrong? Vltava 68 (talk, contribs) 01:47, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

After skimming over Czech_phonology and Czech_phonetic_transcription, my educated guess is ['mariɛ], or per your request, MAH-ree-eh, where that last vowel "eh" is most like the e in bet. Perhaps someone more skilled than I am in Czech phonology can approve my pronunciation or correct it.--El aprendelenguas (talk) 18:01, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't speak Czech, but being a native speaker of a closely related language, I suppose "Marie" is pronounced as two syllables, not three, that is ['ma·rʲɛ] in IPA, or MAH-ryeh. The R should be rolled and softened (palatalized) by the following I. — Kpalion(talk) 21:50, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not a native Czech speaker but I believe a Czech speaker may pronounce the name as three syllables when speaking carefully and two when speaking quickly. The "r" is rolled as in Spanish. The "e" is pronounced like the short e in English, but since it's in a non-stressed syllable, it may just sound like "uh." -- Mwalcoff (talk) 02:48, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Any native Czech speakers out there? Vltava 68 (talk, contribs) 09:41, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In case no native speakers come along, I studied Czech in university for two years and spent some time in Prague, though I am far from proficient in the language. That said, I am confident that Czech writing has a fairly direct correspondence to (standard) pronunciation. In Czech, the only consonants that are palatalized when followed by the letter i are d, n, and t. Other consonants may be palatalized when a morphological ending starting with a vowel other than i is replaced by i as a result of a change in, for example, person or case, but that palatalization results in a corresponding orthographic change. For example, starý is an adjective (in the masculine nominative singular) meaning "old". The same adjective in the masculine animate nominative plural becomes staří. When r is palatalized (which does not tend to happen in words of foreign origin), its spelling changes to ř. So, if Marie were a two-syllable word pronounced with a palatalized r, it would be spelled Maře, which it is not. So the name is pronounced as El aprendelenguas and Mwalcoff have indicated. Marco polo (talk) 19:49, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Another possibility is that a Czech woman named Marie may have had a French parent, and the name is intended to be pronounced in the French way, with 2 syllables. -- JackofOz (talk) 20:06, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tenses in french

What is the difference in meaning between the pluperfect tense and the past anterior tense. Thanks. Philc 0780 14:35, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, my French reference book in which I could have found this answer right away is not with me now. I looked through some of Wikipedia's French-language articles and could not find a definitive answer. If it's anything like Spanish, though (as I suspect it is), the past anterior tense is very rarely used and only under a limited amount of circumstances. Plus, it is strictly a literary tense (much like the preterite in French), and outside of literature with fuzzy-old-style-Shakespearianesque writing, you won't encounter it.--El aprendelenguas (talk) 17:47, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The pluperfect (plus-que-parfait) is usually translated as "had done (something)."
  • J'avais cherché / I had looked for (searched for).
The past anterior (passé antérieur) is a literary form of pluperfect.
  • J'eus cherché / I had looked for (searched for).
"Used in literature and historical accounts to indicate an action in the past that occurred before another action in the past," it says here. Something like passe simple, also used in formal writing and very formal speech. --- OtherDave (talk) 18:08, 6 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(I clarified the English translations a bit... shouldn't post when I'm tired. --- OtherDave (talk) 20:26, 7 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]
Thank you both. Philc 0780 08:48, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

September 7

Coger

The Spanish word coger has many uses, like "grab, get, take." In some places in Latin America, its usage even includes "fuck." Is anyone aware if there is some kind of etymological connection between coger and the meaning "fuck"? Did one of the already-established meanings of coger lead to the meaning "fuck" (much like, I would assume, "screw" came to include the meaning "fuck")? Or does this meaning come from slang of uncertain origin? The RAE doesn't say much about it, but it does recognize the definition "realizar el acto sexual." Thanks!--El aprendelenguas (talk) 19:55, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Disclaimer: I don't know anything specifically about Spanish or Latin America) Surely the meanings are connected in the same way that the verb 'take' in English can mean 'fuck' (ie "she was taken from behind"). The connection would seem to be that sex is often viewed as a possesive action (in the sense that the male is in some way capturing or claiming ownership of the female). I'd expect that that is the most likely explanation. Daniel (‽) 20:33, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

September 8

stairs

If there exist words such as these--

acetabuliform shaped like a shallow cup or saucer
acinaciform scimitar-shaped
aciniform shaped like a berry
aculeiform shaped like a thorn
adeniform shaped like a gland

--what would be the word for "shaped like a stair case"/"shaped like stairs"/"shaped like a series of rising steps"? "Stairiform"? Was there a Latin word for stairs/steps? 128.239.177.28 (talk) 01:47, 8 September 2008 (UTC)CantSpeakLatin[reply]

Scaliform is possible (from Latin scala, 'staircase' or 'ladder', usually used in the plural), although the OED doesn't record it as an actually attested English word. The word scalar does have a sense "resembling a ladder"—though it has rarely been used with that meaning—and scalariform has a similar meaning; I can't find any evidence that they've been used to mean "resembling a staircase", however. Deor (talk) 02:12, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If someone use the word scaliform, I'd understand it just as easily (perhaps more easily) as the examples in the OP. Steewi (talk) 04:29, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, a quick Google search reveals that scaliform is a word in Turkish, although I've no idea if it means anything to do with staircases. Anyway, I think scaliform is great, even if no one has ever used it up until now outside of Turkey. Are there any existing (as in, someone once used it) words for "staircase-like", even if they don't end in "-iform"? 128.239.177.28 (talk) 13:41, 8 September 2008 (UTC)CantSpeakLatin[reply]

What's wrong with stairlike? One doesn't always need a Latinate word. Deor (talk) 15:40, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"Scaliform" certainly is not a word in Turkish! The second hit I find in googling "scaliform" happens to be a Turkish dictionary, but it is giving the Turkish for the English word "scaliform". The word does not appear in the OED, but the various examples Google turns up mostly seem to mean "shaped like a scale" (in particular 'scaliform leaves'); there seems to be a particular use in hypersolid geometry of "scaliform polychora", referring to polychora which are somewhat less uniform than uniform polychora. --ColinFine (talk) 19:03, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ancient Greek Question: Plural of Maimaktes

So according to Meilichios, Maimaktes means "the raging one" in ancient Greek. What would the plural of Maimaktes be? - in other words, "the raging ones"? Thanks! --Brasswatchman (talk) 05:35, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to my dictionary, it means "boisterous, stormy", and is used mainly as an epithet of Zeus (rather than an ordinary common noun). However, nominative plural would be Maimaktai... AnonMoos (talk) 08:53, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That should be Maimaktoi, no, since it's masculine? L&S say it has a genitive in -ου. Deor (talk) 09:13, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The ending -oi is the second declension nominative plural, and if a word has a nominative singular in -ês (eta-sigma), it's already not second declension. In fact, the inflection pattern with nominative singular -ês, genitive singular -ou is 1st declension masculine. Such nouns are inflected like 1st declension feminines, except that the nominative singular has a sigma at the end, and the genitive singular is borrowed from the second declension (replacing an earlier disyllabic long alpha + omicron ending seen in Homeric Greek)... AnonMoos (talk) 10:04, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Just goes to show what one can forget when one hasn't studied Greek for nearly 40 years. Deor (talk) 12:07, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There's something at Ancient_Greek_grammar#Alpha_Declension_.28first_declension.29 -- AnonMoos (talk)
Excellent. Thank you both very much. --Brasswatchman (talk) 16:53, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is the adjectival form of the word 'library'?

Something other than 'library-like' please - thanks, all. Adambrowne666 (talk) 07:15, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen some people use the word "librarial", but I'm not sure if that's actually listed in any dictionaries. Maybe you can just use "library", as in "library binding", "library edition", etc. (That would only work in certain contexts, though.) Zagalejo^^^ 07:40, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The OED doesn't list an adjectival form. It does say that bibliothec, bibliothecal, bibliothecary, and bibliothetic can all be used as adjectives for belonging/pertaining to a library. It rather depends on the context.--Shantavira|feed me 08:20, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've been going to those places that lend books for a long time, and I've never seen "bibliothecal" or any of its polysyllabic cousins used for a library having works mainly in English. "Library," as Zagalejo suggests, can be a noun adjunct, a noun that modifies another noun. Library edition, library science, library procedure. --- OtherDave (talk) 11:16, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Librarial: "glasses made Babel look like a librarian, but his silence is not librarial." Also "librarial and secretarial functions", "librarial support", "a librarial personality", "librarial assistance", "whose aims and objectives are religious, educational, or librarial in nature." —kwami (talk) 20:55, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everyone, great stuff. Adambrowne666 (talk) 23:53, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wording Problems

This paragraph is from the article about the herbicide Roundup:

"Monsanto firmly denies any negative impact on anything, including wildlife, and has many studies it has funded to back up its position.[citation needed] They would also be quick to point out that any possible negative impact on earthworms and nitrogen fixing bacteria, etc., would be offset by greater yields[citation needed], which have not been proven, due to the elimination of weeds, and also would point to soil benefits from less mechanical cultivation of weeds by using Roundup and similar products."

Aside from the lack of sources, I think there are wording problems. Some that stand out IMO are:

  • "would also be" instead of "are".
  • "quick to point out" instead of just "point out".
  • The location of "which have not been proven", interrupting the main thought.
  • The length of the last sentence due to packing in too many points.
  • "would point to". I'm not sure how to describe the problem with this but I think there is one.
  • "cultivation of weeds" I think people cultivate crops and soil but not weeds.

I think there are also wording problems in the first sentence but that sources are needed before these problems can be tackled.

Comments and alternate wording ideas would be appreciated. Thanks. Wanderer57 (talk) 12:44, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest "Monsanto...has many studies it has funded" would be better as "Monsanto has funded many studies". Also, If Monsanto is treated as a singular noun (which I agree with), better not to switch to 'They...' - we could say "The company..." instead. Strawless (talk) 15:02, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
On the last point, switching to "they" is standard informal North American usage even though companies are treated as singular. In Wikipedia a more formal tone may be appropriate, though. --Anon, 17:36 UTC, September 8, 2008.
Yes. I would change "They" to "The firm", and I would go ahead and make the other changes that you mention. However, the repeated use of the conditional "would" and the lack of sources together are disturbing. I have to wonder how much of this is the writer's mere guesswork or putting of words into the mouths of others. The best course might be simply to delete the passages in question if they cannot be sourced and try to find documents that allow you to state the company's actual position. Marco polo (talk) 19:21, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

an exemplary "role model"

If someone is described as a "role model", is it redundant to add the adjective "exemplary"? Wanderer57 (talk) 12:49, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No. A rôle model may be good, bad or indifferent. DuncanHill (talk) 13:10, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, but "exemplary" wouldn't be my first choice of modifier. Its first def at Merriam-Webster is "serving as a pattern", which is neutral, and means almost the same thing as "role model". If I wanted to stress that somebody is a positive role model, I'd pick an adjective that's more... positive. (I think most people will take "exemplary" as a positive modifier, and there are defs which support this; I just don't think it's the best choice.) -- Coneslayer (talk) 16:11, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The first meaning of "exemplary" given in Chambers Dictionary is "worthy of imitation". DuncanHill (talk) 00:58, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

was there a memo diffused?

when people write about "diffusing the situation" i always assume they mean "defuse", but lately i've seen that appear in places and/or by people i'd consider not that illiterate. (frinstance http://www.yourdictionary.com/diffuse) am i missing something? Gzuckier (talk) 16:54, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No. It's just careless. The slide is from de-fuse (with a hyphen) to defuse and then to the similar-sounding diffuse, which as a word is more widely used. It's almost a back-formation, like the use of "I'll be out of pocket" to mean "I won't be in touch" rather than the former "I'll have to spend my own money." --- OtherDave (talk) 19:08, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm curious how "I'll be out of pocket" might have come to mean "I won't be in touch". Thanks. Wanderer57 (talk) 20:27, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
So am I. I don't think I've ever heard it used that way. Gwinva (talk) 22:40, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Lucky you. It's all the rage among U.S. corporate drones, the kind of people who can't say three sentences without including "going forward" and "at the end of the day." Maybe they're shifting paradigms and leveraging their synergies. Or maybe they need more fiber. I honestly can't remember when in the past 10 years I have heard anyone say "out of pocket" to mean "I'm missing money."
My theory, which like many has no supporting evidence, is that they seize on "out," twist it into "away," (as in "I'm going to be out of the office") and drag "of pocket" along as a sort of verbal hostage. Your mileage may vary; past performance is no guarantee of future return; quis custodiet ipsos custodes? --- OtherDave (talk) 02:15, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eventuate

"A film version of the Broadway musical, A Tree Grows In Brooklyn, and an unnamed World War 1 themed musical co-starring Gene Kelly were also discussed, but the projects did not eventuate."

I think that using the word "eventuate" here is pretentious, but is it actually wrong? Wanderer57 (talk) 17:18, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not incorrect. I would consider 'actualize'. - Lambajan 18:04, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I believe "eventuate" is fairly common in Australia. I used to hear newsreaders saying it. jnestorius(talk) 19:09, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Long before 'actualize,' I would consider (and use) "happen." Film versions were also discussed, but the projects never happened. I can't think of any sensible use for "eventuate." In a spelling bee, maybe, but that's quite a reach for "sensible." "Eventuate" may not be "wrong," but it's pompous, self-important, overly latinate, and implies that the writer doesn't know alternatives like "never got off the ground," "never even started," or "went nowhere." --- OtherDave (talk) 19:15, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"Happen" is a little too semantically empty for me. I'd say "come into being" or "come to fruition" or "materialize" or "get off the ground". —Angr 19:21, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really see much wrong with "eventuate". I might not choose it straight up, but I wouldn't see any need to change it if I were editing someone else's text. I'd certainly prefer it to "actualize", which, if I ever used it at all, which is doubtful, I'd only ever use transitively or passively. OtherDave's and Angr's alternatives are good, though. -- JackofOz (talk) 19:58, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think "eventuate" is actually a very appropriate word semantically, but it's so formal as to be precious in almost any context. In this case, I might go with "result". jnestorius(talk) 20:10, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe this is a local thing. Jnestorius and I are both OK with it, and it wouldn't generally be considered precious in Australia. It's concise, it's clearly understood, and it's quite commonly used here. -- JackofOz (talk) 20:25, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Jack: I've regularly heard it used in quite informal contexts, and wouldn't think to change it in the quoted context, where it works well. Antipodean practice, perhaps. Gwinva (talk) 22:37, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to all for the inputs. Wanderer57 (talk) 20:30, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Even I'll freely concede it's likely a matter of style. Stylistically, though, "eventuate" is an antimacassar. --- OtherDave (talk) 02:17, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

opposite of honorific

What's the opposite of "honorific"? I'm thinking of pronouns such as Korean jane "you" which are used towards people of lower social status, as opposed to honorifics used for people of higher social status. kwami (talk) 20:48, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-honorific forms are usually described as "familiar" or "humble" or "intimate", but I don't know of a specific term for a form that is explicitly below neutral. "Diminutive" maybe, at a stretch? Koolbreez (talk) 21:13, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"Humble" forms are in effect honorifics, since they elevate to topic by downplaying the speaker. That's very different than a form that is insulting or shows contempt. "Familiar" or "intimate" could work, but only if other "familiar" forms are relabeled "plain". kwami (talk) 00:07, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Jane is not necessarily familiar or humble or intimate, though. Depending on context, it could be a bit like "sonny boy" (slightly insulting.) --Kjoonlee 23:50, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, misread your message. --Kjoonlee 23:55, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Kjoon, is jane really a pronoun, or is it a noun like dongsin? kwami (talk) 00:08, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Jane really is a pronoun. I'd classify dangshin as three pronouns: an extremely honorific 3rd person pronoun, a polite 2nd person pronoun with polite speech levels, and a rude 2nd person pronoun with casual speech levels. --Kjoonlee 00:33, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm, maybe that makes two pronouns, not three. But then there's also dangshin used among married couples, as a casual 2nd person pronoun. Which brings us to two pronouns, used in four circumstances. --Kjoonlee 00:41, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, what about Japanese kisama or omae? --Kjoonlee 00:36, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, they're either very brusk or rude. But kisama, omae, and dangsin are all nouns used pronominally. kwami (talk) 00:51, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid I don't understand; I've never heard anyone use dangshin in a way other than that which I described, and I'd classify those as proper pronouns. --Kjoonlee 01:29, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to find a certain punctuation mark

In the dictionary section of my German textbook it uses a character that I am assuming is a hyphen with an umlaut over it. I am trying to figure out how to get that character into Word 2000. Any help is appreciated. Thanks.  Laptopdude  Talk  22:17, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My first impulse would be to find out if it's a single symbol. If that fails, my next impulse would be to use '-' together with the Unicode codepoint U+0308, like this: -̈ --Kjoonlee 23:54, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I imagine that's for denoting umlaut plurals (der Apfel, die Äpfel)? --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 00:35, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's how it uses it. After a little searching, I found that it could be made with 3 spaces then U+0335 and U+0308 in word. Thanks, Kjoonlee; I was asssuming it was one symbol. The only problem with your suggestion was that the umlaut was off center. With a little searching I found the hyphen I mentioned before (U+0335) in Word's symbol dialog. Thanks guys =)  Laptopdude  Talk  01:03, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

September 9

Own the fact

What does "own the fact" mean?

Source: Blue Stockings Society (England) It was considered “unbecoming” for them to know Greek or Latin, almost immodest for them to be authors, and certainly indiscreet to own the fact.

Thanks, Dismas|(talk) 02:51, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Own can mean admit, so in the example above, it would be indiscreet for them to admit to knowing Greek or Latin. DuncanHill (talk) 02:52, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Verb

Trying to find the verb that relates to 'excursion' meaning to go out