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

February 24

up/down the street

Up and down are sometimes used arbitrarily to indicate direction on a plane. "Just up the street" means the same as "a bit farther down the street." When our neighbors wanted to go to the village they'd say "down to the village" wheras we used "up to the village." The road from both places was a bit hilly but neither went up nor down. I have observed the same in German. (Not so sure about Spanish but I think they do it, too.) Is this common throughout Indo-European languages and do others do that, too? I know "Why?" is mostly impossible to answer, but it seems odd. 76.97.245.5 (talk) 00:20, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

In America, in most contexts, "down" usually means "south", and "up" means "north", due possibly to how most maps are oriented on walls. This is of course, "wrong" to the pedants, but its still how most people talk. "Down south" and "Up north" are common enough idioms in America. One would never go "Up to Florida", only "Down to Florida" and "Up to New England" but rarely "Down to New England". In some places, the terms refer more to elevation, or at least are ambiguous as to whether it means elevation or direction. For example, on Manhattan, "Uptown" (i.e. Harlem) is both north of and higher in elevation than "Downtown". Down East in its two main U.S. usages, Maine and North Carolina, usually refers to the south-eastern areas of a state. The only exception I can think of offhand is Cape Cod, where "downcape" and "upcape" refer to the distance from the attachement of the peninsula to the mainland; thus "upcape" is towards the mainland, which for most of the Cape is "south". It's so unusual that natives often have to explain it in detail to visitors. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:11, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

That is an error. "Up the street" usually means in a direction of higher numbers as street addresses. Sometimes that's north, but it could be any direction. Someone who can't think of an "exception" except Cape Cod hasn't been around very much. Maybe someone who's always lived in Manhattan and is not familiar with other places. Michael Hardy (talk) 03:51, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry. You are right. No one has ever in history used the terms "Up north" and "down south". My bad. Seeing as I have only visited Manhattan 4 times in my life, and have lived large parts of my life in four widely seperated states in the U.S. I am probably not qualified to have noticed how people in different places discuss geography. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:57, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

In Australia, up and down are virtually interchangeable when referring to visiting a shopping centre - "I'm going up to the shops" and "I'm going down to the shops" are both commonly heard. Same for country people visiting a capital city - some say "I'm going up to Melbourne", some say "I'm going down to Melbourne". Technically, the only people who can go "up" to Melbourne are those living in Tasmania, and they'd need to either fly or go by boat. People in Victoria often say they're going down to Brisbane, which is 1,000+ km to the north. It has nothing to do with whether they're north, south, east or west of the destination, or whether they're higher or lower topographically. "Up" and "down" are idiomatically used with certain expression involving travel, but not with others. We don't say "I'm going up/down to school/the doctor/the movies", etc, just "I'm going to school/the doctor/the movies". Going up or down the street generally has no relation to the numbers of the houses, unless there's a very specific context. People can walk "up and down" the street, but that doesn't necessarily mean they start at No. 1, go to the highest house number, and then return to their starting point. It doesn't necessarily even mean they traverse the entire length of the street, or in any particular direction, just that they're ambling to and fro, perhaps looking for somebody or something they've lost. -- JackofOz (talk) 04:48, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

I have never heard of the usage Michael describes, referring to street numbers, and would be interested to see a cite for it. I consider the usage Jayron describes, referring to north and south, as standard (in North America). Of course the words may also be refer to uphill and downhill, and they may also be used arbitrarily, especially if the street runs east-west. --Anonymous, 05:12 UTC, February 24, 2009.

It's always "up North" or "down South" but otherwise I tend to use the terms pretty much interchangably, irrespective of actual direction... up or down the street is in any direction I want, unless there is an obvious slope. Interestingly, posh kids often went "up to Oxford" - either because it was an elevation in social class or because many came from the south-east of England and Oxford was slightly north-west of where they lived. Astronaut (talk) 07:56, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

See also Upper Canada and Lower Canada which confused me as a child, as the "upper" was not above (i.e. north of) the "lower. I don't know if it's some holdover from those days, but in southern Ontario, I sometimes specifically hear "up" and "down" relating properly to elevation. For example, as a child my family would go "down to" Toronto even though it was somewhat north of us - but closer to the lake and therefore lower. Matt Deres (talk) 14:17, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

One always goes up to London, and when starting in London and going somewhere else, one always goes down to wherever it is. (Except of course if one is going up to university, or being sent down from a university in London). DuncanHill (talk) 14:55, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Joe Jackson would seem to disagree. --LarryMac | Talk 15:35, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

It's the same with Upper and Low German. The adjectives refer to altitude above sea level rather than latitude. (Let alone the fact that orientation of maps with North up is only a recent convention, it used to be different a few centuries ago.) — Emil J. 15:17, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

And of course convicted murderers are "sent down" (for life, hopefully). Astronaut (talk) 15:37, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

I just thought... perhaps that comes from being "transported down under" (ie. to Australia). Astronaut (talk) 15:41, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

The judge, on passing sentence on a prisoner, would then instruct the warders to "take him down" (i.e. down from the dock). DuncanHill (talk) 15:51, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps in the UK they get "sent down", but in North America, they get sent "up the river" (a reference to Sing Sing prison, which is up the Hudson River from New York). Matt Deres (talk) 18:50, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

On the other hand, being sold "down the river" was a hard fate for slaves before the U.S. Civil War. —Angr 21:11, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't think this is used much in other languages. For me, a native speaker of Polish, using "up" and "down" outside a vertical context makes no sense and is just a weird English quirk. You can try listening to other non-native English speakers and see how often they say they go "down south" or "up to Canada" or "up and down the street", and how often they say they go simply "south", "to Canada" or "to and fro". — Kpalion^(talk) 15:29, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Duncan mentions 'up to London'. This was formerly so standard, that people (and I think railway timetables as well, though I am not 100% sure about that) would refer to 'the up train' or 'the up platform' (at a station) with no fear of ambiguity. I have heard residents of Edinburgh and Glasgow use the phrase 'go through' to mean 'go to the other one' (of the two cities). This is just 'go through', not necessarily 'go through to ... '. --ColinFine (talk) 22:27, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

"Up" and "down" are standard railwayman's jargon for the two directions on a British railway line. Normally if you look at the original section of the railways, "up" is the direction toward the more important terminal city and "down" is the other way, and then as the system is extended, the directions are transferred. (The result is that on all the main lines serving London, "up" is toward London except on the former Great Central line out of Marylebone.) The London Underground does not use this system, but uses compass directions. --Anonymous, 00:12 UTC, February 25, 2009.

What about "upriver" and "downriver"? Towns where previously centred around water sources, especially where Upper and Lower Canada where concerned/founded? Rana sylvatica

... and their ancient precedents, Upper Germania/Lower Germania, Upper Egypt/Lower Egypt.

In Chinese (off topic, I know), in terms of towns and localities, it seems to be at least partly hierarchical: going from a village to the county seat is "up", going from the town to a big city is "up", and going from anywhere to the capital city is "up". From thousands of years of a meticulously ordered empire, I suppose. In other contexts, the north-south and higher-lower elevation distinctions also apply. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 21:51, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Devotee

Hey gang-- Okay, while the answer might be "it just is" I'm asking anyway. why is the word "devotee" (pronounced day-voh-TAY sorry for my lack of IPA) retain its (i'm assuming french) pronunciation, while devote, devoted, devotion have been anglicized? Are there other words where one form retains its original pronunciation while some forms have been anglicized? Thanks!24.91.161.116 (talk) 00:48, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Many people may pronounce it as you indicate because it's so obviously French in form (that is, by analogy with such words as fiancée). That said, the first pronunciation given in the Merriam-Webster Collegiate is (expressed in your system) DEHV-uh-TEE. Deor (talk) 01:10, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

I would probably pronounce it in a "non-French" way, but those who pronounce it in a French-imitating way might partially be influenced to do so because the ending of this word doesn't have the standard meaning of the English "-ee" suffix (as in employee, draftee, payee, etc.). Anyway, for some people, the noun "envelope" has a French-imitating pronunciation, while the verb "to envelop" doesn't. This is all partly due to more recently-borrowed words being less fully assimilated into typical English patterns, but words can be nativized at different speeds. AnonMoos (talk) 01:44, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Devotee does to my mind carry the standard implication of "-ee": employee: one who is employed; payee: one who is paid; devotee: one who is devoted; --ee: one who is --ed. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 21:44, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

The real overall meaning of "-ee" as an English suffix (in most cases) is to express the one who is the recipient of the action expressed by the verb; in other words, it's a kind of passive personal noun. There is a contrast between active "employer" and passive "employee"; active "payer" and passive "payee". However, "to devote" doesn't really take a transitive personal direct object, and "devoted" as applied to people is pretty much a pure adjective, without true passive participial force (so "I am devoted" is not a real passive verb construction). This helps to explain why "devotee" does NOT mean "the recipient of an act of devotion" (which might be the expected meaning if "-ee" was used in a normal way in this word). AnonMoos (talk) 01:37, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

The mentioned '-AY' ending for French (or supposedly French) words in English is a common Hyperforeignism, the most notorious example of which is 'lingerie' in US English. As Anonmoos points out, it's actually not a French ending. It's the English "-ee" as in "employee", not the French "-é" as in "fiancé". There's no such word as "devotee" or "devotée" in French; The "-é" ending is actually the past-tense ending of a verb (fiancer = engage, fiancé = was engaged). --Pykk (talk) 10:39, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

However, there are French words devot (feminine devote) and devoué (feminine devouée). AnonMoos (talk) 11:40, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Let's have a part-AY to celebrate the excellent answering of this question.  :) -- JackofOz (talk) 21:58, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

A question below reminded me that if we can turn the verb guarantee into 2 nouns, one for the doer and one for the recipient (cf. employ > employer and employee), they'd have to be guaranteeer and guaranteeee. What fun! Wheeee!  :) -- JackofOz (talk) 18:35, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

spanish translation

how do you say broker and underbroker in spanish?

A general term might be 'agente'. A stockbroker is 'corredor(a) de bolsa'. An insurance broker is 'agente de seguros'. An underbroker is unknown to me in English. Richard Avery (talk) 08:03, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Depending on context, intermediario or intermediario financiero can also be possible. I must say I haven't got the faintest idea of what underbroker means. Any examples of its use? Pallida  Mors 16:07, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

No! No! No! The correct answer is camarero. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:33, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Spanish punctuation

Is there a specific term for punctuation that goes at the start of a sentence, like ¿ or ¡, either in Spanish or in English? Nadando (talk) 05:07, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Apparently, it is the Mark with No Name (or just the inverted/upside-down question mark). Clarityfiend (talk) 05:17, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

I've never heard of a term in English for punctuation marks that go at the start of a sentence; of course, we have use "opening" or "left" to refer to punctuation marks that appear as the start of a pair, like “ and (. In the Spanish Wikipedia, the ¿ and ¡ marks are called opening question mark (signo de apertura de interogación and opening exclamation mark (signo de apertura de exclamación and similar terms), although I don't really read Spanish, so I may have missed some other relevant terms in those articles. --Anonymous, 05:18 UTC, February 24, 2009.

Each character represented in Unicode (http://unicode.org/) has an official name.

In document http://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U0080.pdf,

on page 8, the symbol "¡" (hexadecimal 00A1) is called "INVERTED EXCLAMATION MARK" and

on page 9, the symbol "¿" (hexadecimal 00BF) is called "INVERTED QUESTION MARK".

-- Wavelength (talk) 05:52, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Category:Punctuation has a link to Inverted question and exclamation marks.

-- Wavelength (talk) 15:59, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Quotation marks vary in shape and function (opening and closing) in different languages. For more details, see Quotation mark, non-English usage. -- Wavelength (talk) 21:04, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

The document http://www.robotc.net/content/lego_curric/pdfs/Fundamentals%20-%20ROBOTC%20programming%20for%20LEGO.pdf has, on page 4, the following statement.

• Every punctuation pair consists of an “opening” punctuation mark and a “closing” punctuation mark.

-- Wavelength (talk) 22:36, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

A single preposition for both date and time

One of the templates is facing a problem with having to use a single preposition for both date and time. Example:

1. "—Preceding undated comment was added on 26 August 2007."
2. "—Preceding undated comment was added on 01:55, 26 August 2007 (UTC)."

I think it should be at in the second line. What is the solution if the same template has to be used in both the cases and there is no code change required? See the discussion at Template talk:Undated#Incorrect grammar. Jay (talk) 08:12, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

There's no solution in English, but why use English?

1. Undated comment added: 26 August 2007
2. Undated comment added: 01:55, 26 August 2007

--Anonymous, 08:36 UTC, February 24, 2009.

This is inferior to Anon's suggestion but if you wanted to force it, you could remove the preposition from the template and ask the user to add it to the parameter. For example {{subst:undated|at 05:55, 26 August 2007 (UTC)}}. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 12:05, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Telegraphic style permits

1. "—Preceding undated comment added 26 August 2007."
2. "—Preceding undated comment added 01:55, 26 August 2007 (UTC)."

You've already dropped the "the" from the beginning, so why not? -Milkbreath (talk) 12:11, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

This looks good. Is this style universal? Where can I get more details on telegraphic style? Jay (talk) 19:27, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

That's just what it's called after the fact. We do have an article, surprise, surprise: "Telegram style". The sample on that page is way too wordy: "This is an example of telegram style stop." In full-blown telegraphic, and leaving off the true telegraphic "stop", that would be, "Example telegram style", but that's a bit extreme. You just shorten as much as you can get away with by leaving words out, especially definite articles. It's a lot like headline style without the distortions in diction that brings. Hamlet's famous soliloquy: "be or not is question stop whether nobler in mind suffer slings arrows outrageous fortune or take arms against sea of troubles by opposing end...." --Milkbreath (talk) 20:49, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

I've created a redirect for telegraph style, and also added it along with telegraphese to Telegraph (disambiguation). What I understand from these articles is that it is now used in news headlines to conserve space. But I've heard this style in news reports on TV, and there is really no requirement to be brief in the audio medium. Probably it is a new phenomenon which should have been covered in one of our articles. Jay (talk) 22:07, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

The Esperanto preposition je is used for both dates and times, besides other things.

Ni ekvojaĝos je la tria [horo] [posttagmeze] je [merkredo] la kvara [tago] [de Marto].

"We will set forth on our journey at three [o'clock] [in the afternoon] on [Wednesday] the fourth [day] [of March]."

The bracketed Esperanto expressions are optional, but at least one of them should be included in this example, in order to avoid ambiguity. -- Wavelength (talk) 23:11, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

What is this City in Japan?

File:Place name in Japan.png What is the name of this place? I can't read it..........--KageTora (talk) 08:20, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Urayasu, Chiba.--K.C. Tang (talk) 08:52, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Hohen vs. Hoher (Meißner)

The caption to an archival photo refers to a summer camp of the Austrian Blau-Weiss youth movement held at "Hohen [sic] Meissner" in Germany (tentative date: mid/late 1920s to early 1930s). Searching here brought me to this page. Might they be the same locale? -- Thanks, Deborahjay (talk) 10:59, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes. Adjectives inflect in German, even in place names. "Hoher Meißner" uses the nominative strong form of the adjective; "Hohen Meißner" is probably used in some context like "auf dem Hohen Meißner", using the dative weak form of the adjective. Check de:Hoher Meißner, where the page name itself is "Hoher Meißner" but the first sentence begins, "Der Hohe Meißner" using the nominative weak form of the adjective. (Weak forms of adjectives are used after the definite article, among other places.) —Angr 11:16, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

in this case yes, but there are also quite a few German placenames starting with "Hohen-" (Hohenlohe, Hohenstaufen, Hohen Neuendorf, etc.) where the accusative/dative inflection has become part of the actual name. --Janneman (talk) 17:41, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

As what I need is the isolated place name form as a key word in a directory, and its pages in both the English and German Wikipedias use Hoher Meißner, it seems the reasonable choice. -- Deborahjay (talk) 18:45, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that's the correct isolation form. —Angr 20:49, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

What does 山人 mean?

What does 山人 mean? Here is the context that I found it in: 我是李山人， 今年九十九岁。 I am pretty sure that here, 李 is the person's name, and that 山人 is some sort of a title. Based on the age that it describes, I assume that it's some sort of a title for an older person. Is this true? Yakeyglee (talk) 23:37, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

"Mountain man" - "wild/unsophisticated man". It is not, however, a regular title, and looks more like a name here. It may not be the real given name, but rather a courtesy name or pseudonym. See also Bada Shanren.

(ed): used alone as a noun - means something like "hermit". --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 21:21, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Actually, Mountain Person, Chinese does not make the distinction with grammatical/syntactic gender......96.53.149.117 (talk) 04:09, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

The first phrase says, I am a Li Mountain [a place name] person, which I take to mean "I am a native of Li Mountain." The second phrase, This year, [I am] 99 years old, suggests the two phrases are the start of an autobiography or story. DOR (HK) (talk) 02:31, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

butler in spanish

how do you saybutler in spanish is it modromo? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Troyster87 (talk • contribs) 22:48, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

I believe it is "mayordomo." Yakeyglee (talk) 23:39, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

See the article about the word majordomo. -- Wavelength (talk) 17:34, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

The word steward occurs in some verses in some translations of the Bible. See Bible Concordance: Steward. Various synonyms are used in English and in other languages. To see any verse in a multilingual format, simply click on the verse link, then click on Multiling (not to be confused with clicking on Multilingual).

For example, see http://multilingualbible.com/luke/12-42.htm, where one Spanish translation (with mayordomo) is in the first column, and one Portuguese translation (with mordomo) and four Spanish translations (with mayordomo) are in the third column. -- Wavelength (talk) 19:05, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

"valet" for private homes. I think "mayordomo" is more for a position in a palace, or s.th. like the White House. 76.97.245.5 (talk) 21:34, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

See Open Directory - Reference: Dictionaries: World Languages: S: Spanish.

-- Wavelength (talk) 05:57, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Grammar Question

Is the following sentence grammatically correct:

All of the mountains on Earth lie below an altitude of 8500 m, with the exception of Mt Everest, Kangchenjunga, and Lhotse in the Himalayas and K2 in the Karakoram which have summits of 8848 m, 8586 m, 8414 m, and 8611 m, respectively.

Thanks for your time. 170.54.58.5 (talk) 22:58, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Hmm. "Lie below an altitude" - that's a little meaningless, because the base of the mountain is as much part of the mountain as its summit. "... which have summits of 8848m ..." - no, it's not the summits that are 8848m, it's the altitudes that are of that dimension. May I suggest:

• All of the mountains on Earth are less than 8500 m tall, with the exception of Mt Everest, Kangchenjunga, and Lhotse in the Himalayas, and K2 in the Karakoram, which have altitudes of 8848 m, 8586 m, 8414 m, and 8611 m, respectively. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:34, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Note the comma before "which" in Jack's version. This comma is necessary, since the which-clause is non-restrictive. On another point, I would prefer "exceptions", as several exceptions are being listed. The singular "exception" implies that the few higher mountains are being treated as a single group, and I'd say it's acceptable if that's what you really want. --Anonymous, 05:09 UTC, February 25, 2009.

Oh, and I think "lie below an altitude" is acceptable. If the summit is below 8,500 m, then the entire mountain is below 8,500 m, so the mountain does indeed "lie below that altitude", whereas this is not true for the few mountains that are taller. If the sentence had said that the tallest mountains "lie above an altitude" of 8,500 m, that would be wrong. --Anon, 05:13 UTC, Feb. 25.

Good points. We could also replace "with the exception(s) of" with "except", which is just as good, and more concise. -- JackofOz (talk) 05:25, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

(ec) Yes, but I'd delete the "of" in "all of" and the first comma. In the US, "Mt" takes a period ("Mt."). There is a problem of sense: 8414 is less than 8500. --Milkbreath (talk) 23:38, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Personally I would delete the "the" as well and go with "All mountains..." I would also close the spaces between the numbers and 'm', and deep-six the comma before "respectively". --Richardrj ^{talk email} 10:28, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

And this is why copyediting by committee never works. Read any mission statement. I messed up a little (I was tired, and I'd hurt my finger). If I found the sentence in an article, I'd make it be

All the mountains on Earth lie below an altitude of 8,500 m (27,900 ft) with the exception of Mt. Everest, Kangchenjunga, and Lhotse in the Himalayas and K2 in the Karakoram, which have summits of 8,848 m (29,029 ft) , 8,586 m (28,169 ft), 8,414 m (27,605 ft), and 8,611 m (28,251 ft), respectively.

with a note to "see talk" where I'd mention the odd mountain out. The comma before "respectively" is formal and mandatory. Anonymous is right (as usual) about the comma before "which", but it's "exception" no matter what you mean. "Exception" gets carried along just fine, and "exceptions" rings over-nice. "With the exception of" is cast-iron. To make it "except" would be good, but it would also be to rewrite, and I try to draw the line somewhere this side of that style issue. That the mountains "lie below an altitude" is indeed a bit unfortunate, but I'd let the writer have that because it's clear enough. The first comma goes because it's not necessary. If Richardrj meant "All mountains lie...", that's OK (we can assume that the mountains of Venus are out of the running), but, again, let the writer write as long as he's not hurting anybody, I say. "All of" is substandard for "all". That's a matter of opinion to be sure, but let a copyeditor work, I also say. --Milkbreath (talk) 12:02, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I meant "All mountains on earth lie..." (the 'the' is unnecessary IMHO). Could you explain why you think the comma before 'respectively' is mandatory, because I don't see it myself. And am I missing something here about the third one? As you pointed out above, it doesn't make sense... does it? --Richardrj ^{talk email} 13:11, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

OK, I've looked it up, and many authorities don't use the comma before "respectively". (I'm officially trying to skulk away out of this thread now. I think my problem is that I remember everything I was taught in grade school, and most of that was wrong.) Yes, the "the" can go. As further proof of how badly I hurt my finger, what third what? --Milkbreath (talk) 13:29, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

The third mountain in the sentence. What's it doing there, if it's 8414 metres tall and yet the sentence says that it's one of the four mountains that is higher than 8500 metres? --Richardrj ^{talk email} 17:08, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Exactly. I would want to know on the talk page. It might be a typo. I might even look it up myself. Till then I leave it. --Milkbreath (talk) 17:24, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Lhotse clearly says the main summit is 8,516 metres high; 8414 applies to Lhotse Middle. Clarityfiend (talk) 19:45, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

So the sentence is all right, but a slip-up has crept in with the third height. Strawless ^(talk) 19:48, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

February 25

Definition

What does "leg lamps" mean use ctrl+f: [1]96.53.149.117 (talk) 04:06, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

It refers to a worthless award. The term comes from the movie A Christmas Story, where the father receives an award from his boss, and the award turns out to be this. The movie, and that specific scene, have become iconic pieces of Americana and show up in cultural references all the time. You can buy your own replica of the lamp at many places, and it shows up, as you found here, in all sorts of references. For example, on the sports debate show Pardon The Interruption, a replica leg lamp is in the background behind Tony and Michael. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 05:21, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Bit of irrelevant clarification: The Old Man actually won the lamp as a prize in a newspaper puzzle contest; and the leg prominent in its design was a symbol of the Nehi company, as mentioned in our article at the preceding link. Deor (talk) 14:03, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

What colour is jajeok (Korean 紫赤)?

I was reading some random articles, and came across the article Wonsam. It mentions the colour jajeok, and gives the Korean for it (紫赤), but what is it in English? --Snorgle (talk) 11:55, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

It's jajeok rather than janjeok in the article, but I haven't a clue about the colour. Karenjc 13:51, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Ok, I edited the word, and hopefully someone else will have an idea.Snorgle (talk) 14:16, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

The Japanese Wikipedia has a page for the color purple, I guess. Your two symbols appear in reverse order at [2], seemingly denoting a strong pinkish violet. --Milkbreath (talk) 14:37, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

紫 is purple and 赤 is red in Japanese. Oda Mari (talk) 14:51, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

In case it helps, I chased the links and came up with the hex code for that color with the signs reversed: #C54EA0. --Milkbreath (talk) 21:00, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

"Purple red" would be the meaning in Chinese. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 21:41, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

I looked at our article "Korean language", and it didn't say why a Korean word would be in Japanese. I'm guessing that both languages use the Chinese for certain things, such as colors. Is that right? --Milkbreath (talk) 22:06, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Both Japanese and Korean use Chinese compounds, but both alnguages have contributed their own combinations that aren't used in Chinese. I suspect this is one of them, but the assumption that it is a purple-red combination seems appropriate. My speaciality is Chinese, not Korean, though. Steewi (talk) 23:39, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the help, everyone who answered! Snorgle (talk) 16:29, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

XX: 你好

What does XX: 你好 mean? I saw it at the top of a letter, and I think that it's the equivalent of "dear: " in chinese. Is this true? If not, what is the way that you write dear: at the top of a letter? thanks! Yakeyglee (talk) 20:51, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

If I'm not mistaken (my Chinese is practically non-existant), those two characters are simply ni hao, that is Hello in Chinese. TomorrowTime (talk) 20:58, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Right, I know, but do the two Xs do anything to it to make it something along the lines of "dear"?Yakeyglee (talk) 21:01, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

XX is the name. It's roughly in usage equivalent to "Dear XX," in the sense that it's a common way to begin a letter. However, the connotation carried by the words is probably more like "Dear XX, I hope you are well." or "Dear XX, how are you?" --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 21:40, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

你家有没有吗？

Could someone tell me what "你家有没有吗？" means? Thanks! Yakeyglee (talk) 22:05, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

It means "Does your family have any?" What they are asking about isn't specified, and I'd assume it was understood through context. If there is no context, you should be able to assume that it refers to what family members you have (i.e. father, mother, brothers and sisters). Steewi (talk) 23:41, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

That's ungrammatical. It's something like "Does your home have or not, is it?" If you are asking "Do you have [it] in your home/Does your home have it?" it should be either 你家有没有? or 你家有吗? --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 23:41, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

February 26

Surnames that indicate ancestor was an abandoned child

We have this article about André Vingt-Trois here, whose surname means "23" and indicates that the ancestor from whom he inherited his name was the 23rd abandoned child to be marked on a list (23rd whether of the day, month or year I don't know). What are those kind of surnames called ? Do we have an article about them and are there surnames in English that show your ancestor was an abandoned child ? Rosenknospe (talk) 10:08, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

A bit of research tells me that foundlings have been given the surnames:

• Winters (from the season in which they were found – see Victoria Winters) – and I imagine Summers and Spring might have the same origin in some cases; I’ve never heard of anyone with the surnames Autumn or Fall
• Cree (after the church where they were found)
• Temple – regularly so named if found abandoned at a temple [3] – and I imagine some people named Church and Chapel (variant spellings) were also named for similar reasons
• Esposito (Italy)
• Expósito (Spain).

I haven't found any instance of a person with the surname Foundling, but I imagine there are some out there. -- JackofOz (talk) 23:03, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

I have heard of (in fiction) a medieval foundling being given a surname "Orbus", Latin for foundling. Steewi (talk) 23:43, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't think there's a word for it in English (or most languages). Because I haven't heard of it being the case that foundlings were ever routinely given a (particular) name because of their status, in any culture. --Pykk (talk) 07:31, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

A previous partner of mine was a mental nurse and told me of a case where an adult "foundling" – in other words a person who was picked up with amnesia, and didn't know his real name – was given the name "Leslie Cherry", becuase he was found on the corner of Leslie Grove and Cherry Orchard Road, in Croydon, South London. --rossb (talk) 08:15, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much everyone, and sorry I forgot to sign (Note to self: Don't edit when you should be sleeping). Have a nice day, Rosenknospe (talk) 10:08, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

You could email the curators of the Foundling Museum; I bet they's be interested. BrainyBabe (talk) 19:21, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that could put a new twist on things. StuRat (talk) 02:29, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

The father of Major Barbara was one of a dynasty of foundlings (each had adopted and renamed his successor) named Andrew Undershaft. Apparently a church in London was called St Andrew Undershaft because a maypole was kept there. —Tamfang (talk) 00:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Apparently no Dutch people on this forum, otherwise someone would certainly have reported that 30 years ago we had a well known politician called Anne Vondeling (which means foundling), his grandfather was reportedly an abandoned child. Dutch page at http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anne_Vondeling . Another interesting aspect of these kind of names is that they potentially start a new line of surnames, whereas most surname system are destined to have less and less surnames, pls see http://www.bokke.com/vestzak/surnames.htm Bokkeveltkamp (talk) 15:59, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

comma after or before "and"

which would be correct: "The ILS is a manually activated lock that is located in the back of the pistol's grip. It is cylindrical in design and, according to Glock, each key is unique. " or The ILS is a manually activated lock that is located in the back of the pistol's grip. It is cylindrical in design, and according to Glock, each key is unique. " thanks. Theserialcomma (talk) 09:54, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

In my opinion all five of these should be considered correct and the choice is a matter of style:

• 1. It is cylindrical and according to Glock each key is unique.
• 2. It is cylindrical and, according to Glock, each key is unique.
• 3. It is cylindrical, and according to Glock each key is unique.
• 4. It is cylindrical, and, according to Glock, each key is unique.
• 5. It is cylindrical, and according to Glock, each key is unique.

A comma is optional before a coordinating conjunction introducing a second main clause, as in versions 3 and 4. A prepositional phrase serving as an adverb, like "according to Glock", can also be optionally set off by commas, as in versions 2 and 4. And version 5, an illogical combination of 3 and 4, is too widely used and accepted to be considered wrong; in fact, it's the one I'd most likely write myself.

Of course, we aren't supposed to be answering with opinions here. But the trouble is that the other way to find an answer to this sort of thing is to look in a style guide, and those tend to recommend a style (that's their job) without declaring whether some alternative style is also correct. --Anonymous, 10:12 UTC, February 26, 2009.

Why would they recommend alternatives? By minimizing the number of acceptable choices, they maximize the nervousness of the insecure kind of person who consumes books such as these, and thereby maximize their own sales. Perhaps the best known among them is The Elements of Style, a spectacularly silly book that is treated with entirely undue reverence. Hoary (talk) 10:27, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I would write, "It is cylindrical and according to Glock, each key is unique." NeonMerlin 10:31, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, that one I'd call erroneous. --Anon, 23:21 UTC, February 26, 2009.

You will find a supporter for every combination of commas there is. The only chance you have of resolving the issue is to study and understand a style guide and apply its dictates judiciously, or find somebody you can trust to do that and stick with him. I'm surprised to hear that "a comma is optional before a coordinating conjunction introducing a second main clause". I've always considered that comma to be one of the very few things in English that is invariable. Look at any reputably edited publication and you will find that comma throughout. (OK, that's a counter-example, but it's a special case of "and" where it makes the first phrase act as though it started with "if" and therefore properly belongs to it.) But in your sentence, the comma is called for and indispensable. As for the other commas, it depends on what you want. If "according to Glock" is bracketed with commas (option 4), the phrase becomes parenthetical—read aloud it would be sotto voce—it becomes divorced from the writer's opinion and stands outside the sentence. In option 3 or option 5, "according to Glock" is not parenthetical and serves simply to inform the reader where the information came from. The second comma in option 5 is a judgment call, because a short introductory phrase can do without its comma. This one is pretty short, and it stands among other short stuff—the sentence would look all chopped up. The trend seems to be toward fewer commas, and I personally try to lose as many as I can (that "personally" was properly parenthetical, but I trust the reader to twig to that without help). So, the choice is between option 3 and option 4 and depends on how strong you want "according to Glock" to be. --Milkbreath (talk) 12:25, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

The Elements of Style? Hey, I've got that book! I don't have a clue where it is. I didn't read my copy of The Elements of Organization. Can't find that one either. --Nukes4Tots (talk) 16:49, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I read 'according to Glock' as parenthetical, so I'd go with alternative #2. --Pykk (talk) 13:07, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Me too. #5 grates. —Tamfang (talk) 01:04, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

I highly recommend Wilson Follett's Modern American Usage for discussion of punctuation. He treats this very subject, contrasting between rhetorical/elocutionary punctuation, which would have

Q's attempt to do justice to the old, and to his generation lost, liberator is thrilling.

and the strict constructionist approach to punctuation, which would have

Q's attempt to do justice to the old and, to his generation, lost liberator is thrilling.

Nukes4Tots's preferred punctuation is of the strict constructionist style. Theserialcomma's preferred punctuation is of the rhetorical style, with the sentence punctuated "according to voice" — i.e. as it would be read aloud. It is a style that Follet observes to have fallen out of fashion in "the past three or four hundred years", in favour of the strict constructionist approach which "has long been gaining authority and seems likely to retain it". I've seen no evidence that, in the 4 decades since Follett wrote that, he was wrong about the continuation of the trend. (My immediately preceding sentence is strict constructionist punctuated, note. I suspect that many if not most people nowadays would correct it for being wrong if it were punctuated in the rhetorical style.) Uncle G (talk) 22:39, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Longest string of letters shared by non-cognates

What's the longest string of letters shared by two English words that aren't etymologically related? (The longest example I can think of is ravenous and intravenous.) NeonMerlin 10:27, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Depending on what you define as etymologically related, I think the trick is to find something with multiple suffixes. That way, two words with entirely different roots may have a whole string of identical letters at the end. consciousness and rapaciousness share 9, for example. One more than yours! =P --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 11:50, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

How about "ontological" and "gerontological" - 11! But that would also depend on how you define it, since the -logical parts are obviously the same. Adam Bishop (talk) 14:12, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

If we're going down that route, then the OP's original example is disbarred. Algebraist 14:17, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Are you saying the -ous endings make them etymologically related? How so? -- JackofOz (talk) 18:57, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Those are both the English-from-Latin suffix -ous, aren't they? Algebraist 19:01, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Hmm. I don't know enough about the origin of -ous to comment. But isn't that a bit like saying sitting is etymologically related to googling and hypothesising, merely because of their common -ing ending? Maybe the -ous endings of ravenous and intravenous have a common origin, but the primary parts of the words, and the words as as whole, don't. -- JackofOz (talk) 20:42, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes. My point was that the OP's pair is in the same boat as Adam's pair in this sense. I suppose -logical is more substantive than -ous, so that pair could be said to be more related. Algebraist 20:56, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

-ous comes from French, through Latin -osus, but of course the OP's point is that "raven" is not related to "intra" and "ven-" (and neither are onto- and geronto-). Adam Bishop (talk) 04:34, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

guarantee

why is guarantee spelled with u? it's garantie in french, and there shouldn't be a u before a, or am i getting something wrong? --84.191.224.82 (talk) 14:38, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Probably because it came from a Germanic word beginning with a "w". During a certain period, such Germanic words were borrowed into Old French with a "gu" spelling (not sure about the pronunciation at that time). Cf. the doublets "guarantee" and "warranty", "guard" and "ward", etc. 15:09, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

The etymology for "guarantee" in the Oxford English Dictionary shows it entering English around 1600 as "garanté". They are a little coy about its ultimate source, suggesting it came in by analogy with the Spanish word garante, which had an equivalent forms in French, spelled garant, and Old French, spelled guarant or warant depending on the dialect. They don't explain the "u" in English, but I guess we can assume it came from the Old French word. French underwent an overhaul around the time "guarantee" entered English, and the Académie française (French Academy) was established in 1634. I imagine it was they who turned all the "w"s and "gu"s into "g"s. Noetica, where are you? --Milkbreath (talk) 17:55, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

See User talk:Noetica#Away for a couple of days, because of sickness.

-- Wavelength (talk) 21:24, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

It may be that the 'u' was inserted by mistaken analogy with the examples mentioned in the first response. —Tamfang (talk) 02:18, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

German/English Beamte/Functionary

How to you say someone is a "corporate functionary" in German? I have the impression that they only use the word Beamte for Government functionaries. --Mr.K. (talk) 17:31, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Functionary not only translates to "Beamter" (Which (in the true sense of the word is in fact any state Employee that has gone through the Process of "Verbeamtung" being called on the state for a life time, other employees of State Agencies are called "Beschäftigte") translates as "Funktionär", so a corporate functionary would be a "Firmenfunktionär"--217.84.56.241 (talk) 20:25, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I had never seen "corporate functionary" before, but you learn something new every day. Apparently there are two types of CFs, depending on the writer's intent.

1. A catchall term for, as one legal document that I found on the Web put it, "a director, officer, employee or agent of the Corporation". (This could be translated as "Vertreter [this covers both "directors" and "officers"], Mitarbeiter oder Erfüllungsgehilfen des Unternehmens.") If you choose a literal translation, e.g., "Funktionsträger", Google finds many hits, but most of the top hits come from political parties, educational institutions, or association such as sports clubs, but not the corporate world. Probably best to resolve it to a multi-part enumeration such as the one I gave above, at least on first occurrence.
2. The other, very different usage is "corporate functionary" as in "cubicle dweller", "drudge" or "low-level manager". Here you need to have a good ear to pick an apt equivalent. If the entire paragraph surrounding "corporate functionary" exudes an air of irony then make sure that it does in German, too. "Funktionsträger" could work, but so could at least a dozen other terms, some of them fairly colloquial, others more formal-sounding (possibly as a rhetorical device to communicate irony).

In no case should you use "Beamter". A Beamter is a civil servant.

Cheers,--Goodmorningworld (talk) 05:03, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

How to disambiguate following sentence

Alliterations are series of words that begin with the same letter or sound alike.--Mr.K. (talk) 17:32, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Isn't the second assonances etc.? AnonMoos (talk) 18:42, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Heh, that aside, just switch the complement phrases: Alliterations are series of words that sound alike or begin with the same letter. Indeterminate (talk) 19:35, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Alliterations are series of words that either begin with the same letter or sound alike. Livewireo (talk) 22:16, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I'd rewrite it to either of the following, depending on what you meant: "... that either sound alike, or begin with the same letter" or "...that either sound alike, or begin with the same sound or letter". Bunthorne (talk) just answering the question as asked, not commenting on the correctness of either assertion 05:44, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Semester

Does semester mean "half year" or "six months"? The dictionary [4] seems to say both. Black Carrot (talk) 18:30, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

What is the distinction in your mind between "half year" and "six months"? If we are speaking of a calendar year which comprises twelve months, then half of that is six months. If you want to think of a year as 365 days, then half of that is 182.5, which isn't any convenient number of months. As can be seen from your link, "semester" can have various meanings, including half an academic year. Many words have multiple definitions; usually context is sufficient to distinguish between them. --LarryMac | Talk 18:40, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I suppose Black Carrot is asking about the etymology. From www.etymonline.com: 1827, from Ger. Semester, from L. semestris, in cursus semestris "course of six months," from semestris "of six months," from sex "six" + mensis "month." --NorwegianBlue ^talk 23:20, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

One may be forgiven for supposing that it's related to semi. —Tamfang (talk) 02:36, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

The Disappearance Of J.Thomson

Imagine you are head,express your feelings and also the help given to you by Mr.Merevale to get some clues regarding the disappearance of J.Thomson. VALUE POINTS: 1.Message received by the Head. 2.Information given by Mr.Merevale. 3.The guilty feeling of the Head. 4.Mr.Merevales opinion about Thomson. 5.The meeting with Welch. 6.Welchs description of his last meeting with Thomson. 7.Perfects were sent in search for Thomson. 8.Express your feelings.18:35, 26 February 2009 (UTC)Shehkhan (talk).

Welcome to the Wikipedia Reference Desk. Your question appears to be a homework question. I apologize if this is a misevaluation, but it is our policy here to not do people's homework for them, but to merely aid them in doing it themselves. Letting someone else do your homework does not help you learn how to solve such problems. Please attempt to solve the problem yourself first. If you need help with a specific part of your homework, feel free to tell us where you are stuck and ask for help. If you need help grasping the concept of a problem, by all means let us know. Thank you.--Jayron32.talk.contribs 18:43, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

If you are going to ask a homework question, at least disguise it. This looks like you just copy and pasted directly from the assignment. Livewireo (talk) 22:12, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

If you just read it you can cover all your own points there. Our article The Pothunters by P.G. Wodehouse doesn't have much, least of all on Chapter 16. It does have links. Cheers, Julia Rossi (talk) 03:33, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

The Reference Desk is not meant for airing opinions, so it is inappropriate to ask for our "feelings" here. —Tamfang (talk) 03:12, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Does the OP kknow you're being ironic? Julia Rossi (talk) 23:13, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

What irony, earthling? —Tamfang (talk) 02:22, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Fear of Computers in Latin

Irritated with an editor who created Logicophobia as supposedly a phobia/fear of computers I did a quick google and left a slightly snarky comment that he'd used the wrong word root and that it should have been Ordinatraphobia (see User_talk:Ilovemassachusetts84#Logicophobia). Not being any kind of latin expert was I actually correct? If not what would the correct term be? What would Logicophobia and Ordinatraphobia actually translate to? Exxolon (talk) 19:34, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm of the school that thinks Latin roots have no place in -phobia (from Greek phobos) words. But if you have no such squeamishness, the Neo-Latin for a computer, used by the Vatican (source: [5]), is instrumentum computatorium, so I guess you could go with computatoriphobia. Deor (talk) 20:17, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Modern Greek for computer is el:Ηλεκτρονικός υπολογιστής, so if you insist on a Greek root, you could call it "hypologistophobia". —Angr 20:39, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

To judge by the Google hits, most folk just call it "computer phobia." Deor (talk) 20:52, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Given enough angst I could develop a fear of multiple or any computers in Latin.;-) Julia Rossi (talk) 03:26, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

A strict classicist wouldn't like "ordinatraphobia" because it combines a Greek stem and a Latin stem into a single compound word, and appears to use a connecting vowel between the two stems which is not appropriate to either Greek or Latin patterns of morphology. Anyway, Latin Ordinator literally means "arranger", while Computator would be understood in Classical Latin as meaning "person who calculates". Latin Wikipedia uses the word la:Computatrum, which is a conscious neologism (some strict classicists don't like it for that reason). AnonMoos (talk) 07:21, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Conscious neologism? I'd say that any so-called Latin word created in the last few hundred years is a conscious neologism. They may conform to what scholars believe the Romans would have said, but they never got an opportunity to, so we'll never know for sure. -- JackofOz (talk) 20:33, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but some fairly obvious minor analogous extensions are not very controversial among modern Latinists. However, computatrum uses a suffix which has been claimed not to have been morphologically productive within Latin after the period of the Punic wars, roughly, as was covered in a radio piece on Latin Wikipedia which I heard maybe a year ago... AnonMoos (talk) 22:39, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Earliest attestation for singular "United States"

What's the earliest known instance of the use of "United States" as a singular? I don't care when it became predominant, just when was the first time anyone used it. Would it have been familiar to the Founders at all? I've seen an alleged George Washington quote, "The United States is in no sense founded upon the Christian doctrine," but I don't know if that's apocryphal or not. --140.232.11.217 (talk) 21:09, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, some web sites give that one as "The government of the United States is...", so you're right to be suspicious. Unfortunately, I have no idea where it comes from.

• Interrupting myself: I've found it. It's not Washington at all, but it is from his era: It's Article 11 of the Treaty of Tripoli in 1797, written by consul-general John Barlow and endorsed by President John Adams. The actual wording does not quite match either of the above versions, but it does use "of the United States", so "United States" cannot be distinguished as singular or plural from this (or anything else in the treaty). The passage actually goes "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion..." Follow the first link for a scan of a printed copy of the treaty and this link for the original, almost identical handwritten text of tihs article. --Anonymous, 10:06 UTC, February 27, 2009.

All the presidents' inaugural addresses except Obama's are available under www.bartleby.com, and I figured that these would be good-quality transcripts. I decided to look through them to see which presidents used "United States" as a plural and which as a singular. It turns out that a lot of the addresses either did not use term at all, or used it only in ways such that you couldn't distinguish singular from plural, e.g. in phrases like "people of the United States". Two 20th-century presidents used the phrase "these United States", which is certainly plural but might be considered a set expression. Other than that, the only president whose address(es) used as a plural was Monroe.

Plural:

• Monroe:
  • (1817) "...the United States have flourished beyond example. Their individually have been happy and the nation prosperous."
  • (1821) "The great interests which the United States have in the Pacific...."
• Harding (1921): "The unselfishness of these United States..."
• Reagan (1981): "These United States are confronted..."

Singular:

• McKinley:
  • (1897) "The United States has progressed with marvelous rapidity..."
  • (1901) "...the United States in its relation to Cuba."
• Taft (1909): "...upon the mainland of the United States and in its dependencies."
• Hoover (1929): "The United States fully accepts ..."
• Franklin Roosevelt (1937): "I see a United States which ..."
• Truman (1949): "...the United States has invested its substance and its energy..."

This is not intended to answer the question; I just thought it was interesting. --Anonymous, 00:42 UTC, February 27, 2009.

I did a Google Book search for the exact phrase"the United States is" and looked for cases where they are not saying something like "the President of the United States is..." In the results from 1775-1800, the only singular uses of "United States" were cases where the year of publication was grossly in error, like the South Dakota legislature report from 1890 being reported as being from 1800 , or the Rand Corporation publishing something in 1789. Google Book Search is full of gross errors of publication date. In the results from 1801-1825, I found [6] "The American law journal and miscellaneous repertory" (January 1809)page 194, which says "To this contract the United States is one party, and an individual the other." But it goes on to say "...if the United States cannot appear in a State Court to prosecute a suit in their own behalf..." so it was not cut and dried singular. Then in [7] Niles' National Register (1815), page 60 "The United States is bound to provide for its common defence." From 1824 I found" "A New System of Geography, Ancient and Modern" whicih says "The United States is the great middle division of North America." (page 48). From 1825 I found [http://books.google.com/books?id=ONsUAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA180&dq=%22the+united+states+is%22+date:1801-1825&lr=&as_brr=0&as_pt=ALLTYPES "Reports of cases adjudged in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania" page 180: "The state is represented in congress, and has authorized the tax: and the United States is a government for the respective states, sovereign in imposing constitutional taxes." So until a proven usage before 1809 is found, that is it. Edison (talk) 02:57, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

need a word that starts with the letter D and means pattern

I need a word that starts with the letter D and means pattern. Such as a pattern that may be used on a table or woven or used in heraldry. TIA for any help to remind me what this word is. This is not homework I just can't remember the new English word I learned today. NoClutter (talk) 22:52, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Design? Device? Decoration? --LarryMac | Talk 22:53, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Skimmed through the Heraldry article, the only possible candidate I found was Division of the field. --NorwegianBlue ^talk 23:13, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

No, its a single word like Desma or Damesk ... aggggh I was hoping this would be easy! NoClutter (talk) 02:41, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Could it be "dobbles" - "Probably molds or patterns on which armor was made (Old English)" Clarityfiend (talk) 02:57, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, "damask" is sometimes used in heraldry in connection with roses, but it's not a pattern. Could it be "dancetté" or "dancetty" or "dantelly", which is a zigzag pattern, or "dovetailed"? - Nunh-huh 03:04, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Dovetail? Dancetty? Dentilly? Diagonal, diamantine, diamond, diaper, dog-tooth. --Milkbreath (talk) 03:19, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Could be damascening - inlaying different metals to produce intricate patterns. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:13, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Dither? --Jayron32.talk.contribs 04:28, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

See http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/pattern. -- Wavelength (talk) 04:30, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Were it not for the heraldy reference, I'd suggest "doily". It's not a pattern as such, but they always incorporate a woven pattern, and they're used on tables. -- JackofOz (talk) 05:20, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Probably "diapering", believe it or not... AnonMoos (talk) 07:11, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

So a knight might pay a professional to do this, if he felt in need of a bit of pampering ? StuRat (talk) 16:48, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Hey! I said it first! --Milkbreath (talk) 16:44, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

I think LarryMac hit it with "device". F'rinstance, this poem from Henry Wadsworth Longfellow "...A banner with the strange device, Excelsior!" Bunthorne (talk) 06:07, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

February 27

What's the word for a medication that doesn't cure, only mitigates symptoms?

Resolved

What do you call a medication that doesn't cure the disease but only minimizes its symptoms? For example, virtually all medicine for the common cold falls under this category. There's a term for this, but I can't for the life of my remember what it is. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 13:23, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Symptomatic treatment. — Emil J. 13:56, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Palliative? DuncanHill (talk) 13:57, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Palliative! Yes, that's it. Thanks. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 14:01, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Isn't that just about every med ? Those which actually cure a disease are few and far between, as there's not much profit in curing people. StuRat (talk) 16:42, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

The fact remains that they're used as palliatives, and they may form only one element of a treatment regime. -- JackofOz (talk) 20:27, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

There's a difference in usage between the terms "palliative" and "symptomatic". "Palliative" is used when referring to treating the symptoms of severe diseases, often in terminal stages of the disease. Treating the pain of metastatic cancer with morphine would be palliative treatment, while taking paracetamol (acetaminophen) for treating the symptoms of a common cold would be symptomatic treatment. And Sturat, there's a lot of money in making drugs that cure common diseases, like antibiotics. The problem is getting the big pharma to look for drugs that might help people with rare (and often chronic) diseases. --NorwegianBlue ^talk 14:39, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

February 28

A few of chinese phrases

Could someone please tell me the meaning of the following phrases: “老师好”， “早”， “同学们好”， “老师再见”. Thanks!Yakeyglee (talk) 01:21, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I can look up the characters but I can't say as to the grammar:

老师好 - teacher good (perhaps good teacher?)

早 - early

同学们好 - classmates good (perhaps good classmates?)

老师再见 - goodbye teacher

(Don't thank me, thank On-Line Chinese Tools.)- Eron^Talk 01:43, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

"老师好" and "同学们好" are greetings to the teacher and classmates respectively. It's like saying, "Hello teacher" and "hello classmates." "早" is "good morning." "老师再见" means "goodbye teacher." bibliomaniac15 01:55, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Just to clarify, "早" as a character by itself does, in fact, mean 'early', but it would be a rare occasion (in modern Chinese) to hear it said in isolation, and, as we are dealing with greetings here, it is an abbreviated form for 「早上好」, which means 'Good morning.' (around about the only occasion when the character "早" would be heard alone). as Biblio says.--KageTora (talk) 13:23, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Root words in a polysynthetic language

I just noticed that in the Inuinnaqtun dictionary, published by Nunavut Arctic College, the root word for northern lights is aqhaliaq or aqhalingiaq. While the Kangiryuarmiutun (a dialect of Inuinnaqtun) gives kiguryak (from Ronald Lowe's Basic Kangiryuarmiut Eskimo Dictionary, which is similar to the Siglitun word kiurjait (from Inuktitut Living Dictionary, search for northern lights). The Inuinnaqtun dictionary then gives aqhalialaqijuq to mean the northern lights are out while Lowe gives aqhalingiiqtuq to mean there are northen lights. It's obvious that both of the last two words are derived from aqhaliaq but if the root word is kiguryak how can that be? Both works are accepted as being authoritive so that shouldn't be an issue. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 01:36, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians by language has a link to Category:User ik and a link to Category:User iu.

-- Wavelength (talk) 02:22, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Why should you expect there to be only one root, and every word with related meaning to be derived from it? In English, the only adjective related to 'law' is 'legal', which in the context of English is from a different root (though they are ultimately related). I realise that this is not quite parallel, because English has a large learned vocabulary, but it is suggestive that things need not be as clear-cut as you are assuming. Another related-but-not-completely-to-the-point example is 'beam', which is derived from the same root as German 'baum', and once meant 'tree', but now has other (derived) meanings. It does however still survive meaning 'tree' in whitebeam and hornbeam, though these names are probably not analysed by most English speakers. --ColinFine (talk) 09:07, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Re legal being the only adjective related to law: There's law-abiding, lawful and (arguably) legitimate. Edit: Some more: lawless, unlawful, illegal and illegitimate. --NorwegianBlue ^talk 12:45, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the replies. The question came about in part because of the Eskimo words for snow fallacy, but also it's not so much that there should be only one root word, but that there is very little difference between Kangiryuarmiutun/Inuinnaqtun, not enough to account for the different word. There are minor differences in speech, but very little, between Cambridge Bay, Nunavut, Ulukhaktok, Northwest Territories and Kugluktuk, Nunavut, as opposed to say Gjoa Haven, Nunavut, an Inuktitut community. I did do some extra checking last night. After talking to my ex (from Ulukhaktok) she said that she would use aqhaliaq but wasn't sure why. There are a couple of reasons. First her parents moved in 1959/1960 from the south end of Victoria Island to Ulukhaktok, so they may have used the word. Then she lived for several years in Cambridge Bay and may have picked it up there. The other thing she pointed out, and I should have remembered, is that there is a significant proportion of people in Ulukhaktok from Sachs Harbour, Northwest Territories and at least one or two of the elders consulted by Lowe were from the west and he may have just got the wrong word. Of course the logical thing would be to call people in Ulukhaktok and ask them but the people I would need to talk to don't speak English. On thing of note is that the words from the east are all similar and it's only the Siglit and Kangiryuarmiut words that are different. I'll check with the people listed on the babel, especially the two Inupiat ones. I'd be interested to know if kiguryak is derived from Inupiat, and came to Canada with the migration of Alaskan people. Thanks again. Enter CambridgeBayWeather, waits for audience applause, not a sausage 17:25, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Similar sounding terms?

There's a discussion at the science desk where the OP expresses frustration over the terms hypotension and hypertension. See here. The OP states they sound similar. I disagree. Any linguists around who can explain it? Please add your comments to the Science desk Q. Cheers, Mattopaedia ^{Have a yarn} 03:07, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm not a linguist but it is plausible that the speaker's accent can affect the pronunciation and make the words sound similar. It doesn't help that when written they differ by only two letters. It's even worse because the difference is in the middle of the word and none of those differing letters "stick out." (like the letters bdfghijklpqty) Also speakers of other languages may find it hard to hear certain distinguishing sounds. See Non-native pronunciations of English. A classic example is Japanese language speakers having a hard time hearing the acoustic difference between English "r" and "l". I fixed the wikilink to the post.Sifaka ^talk 03:48, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

In a nonrhotic accent, the R in "hypertension" is silent, so the only difference between them is a single vowel and an unstressed one at that. In rapid or careless pronunciation unstresssed vowels are often reduced to a schwa, leaving the words completely indistinguishable. It's a bit better in a rhotic accent, but they're still pretty close. I think most people would be aware of this and would try to always enunciate the first O in "hypotension" to avoid confusion, but I can imagine "hypertension" being mistaken for "hypotension" if the speaker was nonrhotic and the listener rhotic. --Anonymous, 06:18 UTC, February 28, 2009.

The difference in pronunciation of the two prepositions from which the prefixes hypo- and hyper- were derived was more distinct in Ancient Greek phonology and is still more distinct in the phonologies of many languages in comparison with many if not most varieties of modern English phonology, with one notable exception being Scottish English#Phonology.

The Russian alphabet has even fewer letters with ascenders and descenders than the English alphabet, and refers to the two medical conditions as ru:артериальная гипотензия and ru:артериальная гипертензия respectively.

If unclear pronunciation by doctors is a medical risk factor, then unclear handwriting by them is one also. Apparently, Wikipedia does not have an article on this topic. (Doctor's Handwriting - MedicineNet - Health and Medical Information Produced by Doctors) (Cause of Death: Sloppy Doctors - TIME)

-- Wavelength (talk) 06:31, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

[I revised my first paragraph to reflect the fact the prepositions did not disappear with the appearance of the prefixes. I revised my second paragraph to clarify that ascenders and descenders are features of letters and not letters themselves. -- Wavelength (talk) 17:39, 28 February 2009 (UTC)]

I'd say that even for rhotic speakers, the two terms sound similar. Remember that for two things to be similar, they have to be different. (Otherwise they wouldn't be similar, they'd be identical – which is not the same thing.) —Angr 09:46, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Grrr, that should of course be "Doctors' Handwriting" - it wouldn't be too serious if only one doctor had bad handwriting. (I mean it's wrong in the cited article, not that Wavelength copied it incorrectly. Sloppy doctors indeed.) AndrewWTaylor (talk) 15:09, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

---

The French words dessous "underneath" and dessus "on top" only differ by a single vowel (or if you pursue linguistic analysis, only by a single phonological feature), yet have opposite meanings (and there's no borrowing from a foreign language involved). AnonMoos (talk) 17:52, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Even more bothersome for English speakers, the two vowel sounds are almost identical to English-speaking ears, much like the Japanese feel about "l" and "r" in English. Of course, the French readily recognize the difference. In "dessous", the second vowel is pronounced like the English "u" or "schwa" sound; and in "dessus" the second vowel is pronounced like the English long-e sound, but with puckered lips. The sounds are made very differently at the vocal cord (which is why the French don't screw this up), but in English we are not trained to hear a difference, ... --Jayron32.talk.contribs 21:09, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

The second vowel of "dessous" isn't the schwa, the first vowel is. The second vowel is similar to the "oo" sound of "goose". Its difference from the vowel of "dessus" is not at the vocal folds but in the tongue position. In [u] (the second vowel of "dessous") the back of the tongue is raised toward the soft palate, while in [y] (the second vowel of "dessus") it's raised toward the hard palate. —Angr 22:18, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

---

See minimal pair, two words that differ by a single sound: live/leave, light/night. BrainyBabe (talk) 20:06, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Domo

What is this word in the following sentence that I cannot find in any English or Spanish dictionary: "he (Marquez) struck up a conversation with the major domo of the presidential palace"? Thanks. --Omidinist (talk) 07:46, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

• That's major domo. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 07:49, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
  • Just to clarify, Major domo is a compound word and so you will not likely find a defintion for domo by itself...--Jayron32.talk.contribs 12:58, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
    • Also, for some reason Major domo redirects to Mayors of the Palace, which is a related, but more specific, term for the Frankish office, while Majordomo is a seperate article. Him. Oh, and "domo" in this case comes from the latin for "of the house". In modern terms, "majordomo" or "major domo" generally refers to the head servant in a household, the one who was in charge of running the entire house. So all of the butlers, valets, maids, cooks, etc. would be under him. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 13:03, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
      • Never mind. I just fixed that. Strikethru. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 13:04, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm surprised the article makes no mention of the alternative spelling, major duomo (e.g. as used here). -- JackofOz (talk) 20:32, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Umm - I'm not (surprised). I've never come across that spelling, and the OED doesn't mention it, either as a historical spelling, or in the etymology (from Spanish 'mayordomo' c. 1120 or Italian 'maggiordomo' C13). Since 'duomo' in Italian means 'large church' not 'house', it looks to me very much as if 'major duomo' is a recent hypercorrection. Googling for "major duomo" the example you quoted is the only one in that sense on the first page, and the next example is near the bottom of the second page (Most examples seem to be names of dogs and horses, but some are Italian churches). --ColinFine (talk) 19:30, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Now, that is interesting, Colin. I was also surprised to find very few ghits for it when I looked for an example. Up till now, my encounter with this term was through characters in opera (Richard Strauss has two such roles in Der Rosenkavalier, for example), and I am convinced I've mostly seen it spelled "duomo" in that context. However, I can now find only one example of such a spelling on google, and I've now discovered I've misplaced both the programme from the last time I saw it live, and my libretto from the recording of it in my collection. Odd, very odd. My memory must be faulty. Hard to believe, but I suppose it is technically possible.  :) -- JackofOz (talk) 23:11, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Hmm. But the original title would be 'Haushofmeister' then. (The borrowed version, 'majordomus' is less common, and would refer to the aforementioned 'Mayor of the Palace' type role). --Pykk (talk) 23:38, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, Haushofmeister indeed. But such titles are routinely translated into their equivalents in other languages, even if they still routinely sing the opera in German or whatever the original language was. For example, anglophones refer to the "Queen of the Night" as such, and not as "Königin der Nacht"(this is a role in Mozart's The Magic Flute, which is normally sung in German, even if it's billed under its English title and not Der Zauberflöte). Those particular Strauss roles are known in English-speaking countries as "Major Domo", or, in the version my memory would have it, "Major Duomo". But, as I say, the weight of evidence seems to be against me. -- JackofOz (talk) 00:28, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

and we feel that this initiative would further the goals of that policy

Is this construction grammatically acceptable? - "and we feel that this initiative would further the goals of that policy" ----Seans Potato Business 12:17, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

It's grammatically unremarkable, that is to say, right, but it has other problems. You can't further goals—goals just sit there and wait for you to attain them. "Initiative" is a two-dollar word for the ten-cent word "thing". Replace it with a noun that means what you want to say. --Milkbreath (talk) 15:02, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I suppose it is possible to further one's goals. Initially, we have goal A. Then we do something that broadens our horizons and enables us to have goal B. That would be a furtherance of goal A. But I guess Seans was talking only about the attainment of goal A, not its furtherance to goal B. -- JackofOz (talk) 20:26, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

one word or multiple words that mean New Beginning, Hope, Rebuilding, Courage

Is there one word or multiple words thats meaning would encompass all of the above? —Preceding unsigned comment added by RobertNOP1 (talk • contribs) 18:22, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Not sure I know of one such word, but I find "thats" as a genitive or possessive form of "that" to be interesting... -- AnonMoos (talk) 18:30, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

See English relative clauses#Grammatical case. -- Wavelength (talk) 19:50, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I already knew the basic terminology, and the existence of "whose". AnonMoos (talk) 21:19, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

"Reformation" could cover all of those depending on the context, or "restoration". Wrad (talk) 23:27, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

"Reformation" (capital R) has a specific, historical meaning. "Reform" is the noun with the more general meaning in ordinary usage. (And then there's re-formation, which is something else entirely). --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 22:49, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

The only reason it was capitalized was because it was at the beginning of the sentence. "reformation" doesn't have a specific historical meaning. Wrad (talk) 02:52, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Renaissance also has a meaning like that, but is already taken. Steewi (talk) 22:58, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps the English "rebirth" then? Or "renewal"? --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 01:26, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Words that have travelled a long way

I'm looking for some examples of English words that were borrowed/derived from another language, but came to that language from a third language, and came to that language from a fourth language, and so on, as far back as we can go. It doesn't matter if there have been various spelling/pronunciation/meaning changes along the way, as long as a continuous history can be proven. What is the longest "linguistic journey" of any such word? -- JackofOz (talk) 20:45, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

In terms of actual mileage traveled, a word like Chocolate, which enters English via Nahuatl via Spanish is probably a pretty good one... but in terms of steps that only 3. However, depending on how you define "language" then nearly every word is going to have countless steps. For example, most core words in English can be traced back English <- Middle English <- Anglosaxon <- proto-Germanic <- proto-Indoeuropean or something like that. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 21:01, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I think he's more interested in borrowings between separate languages, rather than in-place gradual linguistic evolution. One that occurs to me offhand is that the Sumerian word transcribed as E-GAL "palace, temple" went through several different varieties of Akkadian and several different varieties of Aramaic to end up as Arabic haykal هيكل -- AnonMoos (talk) 21:32, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

My favorite example of a well-traveled word is apricot. We got it from French abricot, which is from Spanish albaricoque, which is from Arabic al-barqūq, which is from Greek praikokion, which is from Latin praecoquum, making it a doublet of precocious. —Angr 22:09, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

JackofOz, the web page @tmbchr » Word Origin: Parasite contains the following statement.

Interesting aside, the word “church” has the longest etymology in the entire work, running about 4 pages in the original. -- Wavelength (talk) 22:27, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Our article, Orange (word), describes its history as "Orange derives from Indian, tamil naranthai to Sanskrit nāraṅgaḥ "orange tree", with borrowings through Persian nārang, Arabic nāranj, Spanish naranja, Late Latin arangia, Italian arancia or arancio, and Old French orenge, in chronological order." Rmhermen (talk) 22:29, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Late Latin borrowed from Spanish? Weird. 202.40.14.58 (talk) 04:48, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

The word sugar comes from French sucre, which comes from Latin succarum, which comes from Arabic sukkar, from Persian shakar, from a word originally meaning "grit" or "pebble". LANTZY^TALK 00:38, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Chess, checkmate, artichoke? Apricot was interesting. Thanks, Angr. Steewi (talk) 23:00, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

I like word pairs that kind of come full circle. Like 'beef'->'boeuf'(fr)->'bovis'(lat)->'bous'(gr)->'*bu' (PIE), originally onomatopoeic for the sound a cow makes. Then there's *bu->'*ku' (proto-germanic)->'cow' and *bu->'moo'. So: 'moo', 'cow' and 'beef' all have the same origin! --Pykk (talk) 13:53, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

All nice examples. Thank you. "Church" looks particularly daunting, Wavelength. I think I'll leave it for a rainy (Sunday) afternoon, if you don't mind. -- JackofOz (talk) 20:30, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

你家有没有宠物吗？

Is 是，我家有两只猫。an appropriate and grammatically correct answer to the question 你家有没有宠物吗？Or do you say 是的，我家有两只猫。 or 有的，我家有两只猫。?Yakeyglee (talk) 22:23, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

你家有没有宠物吗 is ungrammatical. It should be either 你家有没有宠物? or 你家有宠物吗?

A grammatical answer to the first question (你家有没有宠物? ) should be 有的，我家有两只猫, or 有，我家有两只猫.

A grammatical answer to the second question (你家有宠物吗?) should be 是的，我家有两只猫, or 是，我家有两只猫; 有的，我家有两只猫, or 有，我家有两只猫 are also acceptable.

That is to say, as a matter of grammar, "有没有" cannot go with "吗" in the same sentence, and 有没有 is answered with 有 or 没有, whereas 有...吗 can be answered with either 是 or 有 (or their negative counterparts).

Generally, you can choose to end a "有没有" sentence with an additional "啊?" but not "吗". Both "有没有" and "吗" are question indicators and having both is tautological.

The exception is where "有没有" is used along with another questioning component, e.g. in "有没有发现什么吗？". --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 01:11, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

March 1

Blood

Why isn't blood pronounced like brood (for example)? I don't think it's a dialect thing, it's always pronounced the same way. 212.201.71.43 (talk) 05:02, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Phonological history of English high back vowels#Foot-strut split has all the answers. --Kjoonlee 05:24, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

In short, it used to be. Still is in the other Germanic languages. (c.f. German blut). --Pykk (talk) 13:48, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Breendonk vs. Breendonck

I'd queried this back in Aug. '06, and now discover I haven't received any response. None of the interwiki pages I've checked (= de/fr/nl) for Breendonk or Fort Breendonk in Belgium use the ck spelling, but it crops up all over the web, e.g. in testimony texts. How to sort out the variant spelling, if such it is? -- Thanks, Deborahjay (talk) 10:42, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes, 'donck' is a variant spelling. It means a small hill. I'm not Dutch but I think it's typical for Brabant place names. (Although that might just be because the south is somewhat less flat.) Since the article is titled "Breendonk" I'd assume that's the more common form now at least. --Pykk (talk) 23:23, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Two questions about German pronouns

1. In this discussion, it was said that Guten Tag is in the accusative, there being an implied "Ich wünsche Ihnen einen ..." But according to the table at German pronouns#Personal pronouns, Ihnen is the formal form of 'you' in the dative, not the accusative.

2. If a friend asks me Was machst du heute?, and I want to return the question back to them, is it correct to say und du?, und dir? or und dich?, and why?

Many thanks. --Richardrj ^{talk email} 11:22, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Others will come up with better answers than me, but until they do:

1. It is Ihnen because it should be in the dative. Guten Tag is the object: literally I wish a good day (accusative) to you (dative). It's just one of a group of verbs that take the dative: helfen (ich helfe dir), gratulieren, schenken, geben, sagen are others.
2. I would think und du because they are going to be the subject of the reply. In English, it is "And you?", not "And to you?", if you see what I mean. On the other hand, if your freinds ask Was gibt deine Eltern dir?, then one might suppose that you could say und dir? in those circumstances.

Hope that helps, - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 11:35, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

But if wünschen takes the dative, doesn't that govern the case of the entire sentence? Why does it suddenly change to the accusative? --Richardrj ^{talk email} 18:48, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Wünschen is what's known as a ditransitive verb: it takes two objects, one in the dative (Ihnen) and one in the accusative (einen schönen Tag). —Angr 18:56, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Both of Jarry1250's answers are correct. However, "What are your parents giving you?" is Was geben dir deine Eltern?, and if you were to return the question with Und dir? you'd be implying that your own parents were giving your interlocutor something. In other words, in the following conversation:

SCHMITT: Was geben dir deine Eltern?

MEIER: Einen Pullover. Und dir?

Meier is asking what his own parents (Herr and Frau Meier senior) are giving Schmitt, not what Schmitt's parents are giving him. To change the subject from Meier's parents to Schmitt's parents, he'd have to say Und deine dir?. —Angr 12:24, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Indeed. You learn something new every day (especially where GCSE German is concerned I suppose). - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 15:41, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

The Outsiders

Is The Outsiders based on a TRUE STORY or not?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.32.148.57 (talk) 14:58, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't believe so, no. The Outsiders (novel) would likely have mentioned that, if it were true. StuRat (talk) 16:29, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

And straight from the authors mouth, "Sometimes things from real life inspire me -- the social situation in my high school inspired a great deal of The Outsiders, but the book itself is fictional." (From her FAQ at www.sehinton.com.) - Eron^Talk 22:57, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Japanese translation

How do you say "Gay Pride" or "Proudly Gay" in Japanese?, I am writing it in a lot of a languages .. --190.49.116.122 (talk) 16:03, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

I can't help you with Japanese, but it might help to add that a good literal translation in Chinese is 同性爱的自尊(tongxing'ai de zizun). It literally means "Homosexual pride". There isn't a good not derogatory, not official word for gayness in standard Chinese. Zizun means self-respect or pride (rather than arrogance). Steewi (talk) 23:09, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

The standard Chinese for homosexual(s)/(ity) is 同性恋. 同性恋的骄傲 is the usual translation for "gay pride", but it does not carry the same sloganeering connotations. 自尊 means dignity, self respect, or self esteem.--PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 23:37, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

They just transliterate it, thus ゲイ・プライド --K.C. Tang (talk) 03:30, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

ゲイとしての自尊心 or 同性愛者としての自尊心. Literally, pride as a gay. Oda Mari (talk) 05:18, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

But is it better to keep the slogan? Perhaps something along the lines of

ゲイ	プライド
同性愛者としての	自尊心

--K.C. Tang (talk) 11:14, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

I have changed your code a bit, looks like you triggered a bug that indented the rest of this page. --Tokikake (talk) 11:38, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, Tokikake. :)--K.C. Tang (talk) 14:00, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

There's no sloganized word in Japanese. If you don't like the translation, use ゲイ・プライド. Oda Mari (talk) 15:50, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Random German question

So I've been set this question to answer: Was würdest du am liebsten am Wochenende machen?. Obviously, that translates as What would you most like to do at the weekend?. It's probably just my teacher forcing me to use the conditional, but I really wanted to know whether I should be writing about this weekend, or weekends in general. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 16:32, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

In principle, it could mean either one, just as "on the weekend" could in English. For purposes of your assignment, and to maximize your practice in using the conditional, I'd interpret it as "on weekends in general". —Angr 16:38, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Aside: in British English the standard idiom is still "at the weekend". "On" has been gaining ground in recent years but still feels like an import to me. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 15:19, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Unless, of course, the question were: Was würdest du am Liebsten zum Wochenende machen? Who said that German does not lend itself to jokes of subtle obscurity? But then again, I seem to be casting pearls... --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 23:23, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

With "würdest" it would not be idiomatic to consider it to concern all weekends. Then it would either be "Was machst Du am leibsten am Wochenende/an Wochenenden". or "Was würdest Du am liebsten an den Wochenenden machen." "Würdest" indicates desire for the future. "Am Wochenende" = an dem Wochenende is only one and would usually be understood to be the one that is coming up/being discussed as part of planning an excursion. Since it's an exercise just put together a list of activities starting with "Ich würde gerne..." - "Ich möchte ..." - "Ich wäre für <noun phrase>." It doesn't really matter whether you'd generally like to do that or only next weekend. - Unless it's a one time event. (LOL Cookatoo :-)76.97.245.5 (talk) 10:59, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Languages with only one preposition

The book The Power of Babel discusses a Papuan creole language which only uses the preposition "long"(derived from "along" in English), and notes that there are other languages, some of them "full" languages rather than pidgin or creole, with this feature. Is this correct and, if so, what are these languages? 69.224.37.48 (talk) 23:08, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Most of the languages that use only one preposition are creoles and pidgins. I think The Power of Babel talks about PNG Tok Pisin, which is similar to most of the Pacific pidgins (Bislama, Aboriginal Creole English, etc.), and he might talk about Russenorsk, which uses pa as its preposition. I can't think off the top of my head of any not-creole languages that have only one preposition, but I imagine that there are one or two. Most, however, have a number. Steewi (talk) 23:14, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Tok Pisin#Grammar contains the following paragraph.

• There are only two proper prepositions: bilong (from "belong"), which means "of" or "for", and long, which means everything else. (Note that longlong (i.e. long reduplicated) means 'crazy'). Some phrases are used as prepositions, such as long namel (bilong), "in the middle of".

-- Wavelength (talk) 00:00, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't consider Russenorsk a true language or proper creole though. Using (or over-using) the preposition 'paa' is logical since it works as both Norwegian på and Russian по. But given that the speakers of 'Russenorsk' tended to follow the sentence structure and such of their native language, I suspect it did have other prepositions - just no others that a native Russian or Norwegian speaker would agree on. --Pykk (talk) 00:02, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

In the early 20th century, some linguists thought that Proto-Indo European didn't really have prepositions as such. That is, there were a number of words in the proto-language which generally developed into prepositions in the different daughter languages, but in the proto-language itself such particles functioned much more as adverbs than as true prepositions (e.g. using a particle to modify a basic verb could mean that the modified verb would take an additional noun object in a specified noun case -- as happens sometimes in Latin -- but the particle would be modifying the verb, and not the noun directly). AnonMoos (talk)

German railway term

Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Trains#redirects_History_of_rail_transport_in_germany

Re: the article History of rail transport in Germany - are the terms Epoch III etc actually ever used outside the world of 'modeleisenbahn'?

From a german point of view, are the sub heading titles eg "Epoch IV (1970-1993)" incorrect usage for this type of article?FengRail (talk) 23:48, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

The German article uses proper descriptive headings for the sections. The term "Epoche" (=epoch) is used but once in the text in the normal meaning of "era". I would suggest to take the German headings as a guide for English translations, but I know next to nothing about the subject matter. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 00:14, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

The article http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epoche_(Modelleisenbahn) seems to suggest that the titles in History of rail transport in Germany are based on a misunderstanding - and are probably not suitable for a 'real world' article.

Unless I'm wrong of course.. Can anyone confirm my suspicions?

FengRail (talk) 01:15, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

March 2

A few things I want to know how to say in chinese.

How do you say "that's all right", "sports", "busy", "do not like", "sorry", and "not going". Also, how do you respond when someone says 对不起。? Also, how would you say things for the following situations: "you would like to invite a friend to go swimming", "you accept your friend's invitation to play tennis", "as you don't like playing cricket you decline your friend's invitation", "how do you say that you are in year seven at school?", "how do you say that you and Robert are in the same class?", "how do you say 'let's go!'". THANK YOU SO MUCH if you can answer these for me. This isn't homework...but I really just need to know how to say these things and phrases. Yakeyglee (talk) 02:49, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Not that I know any Chinese, but those are awfully specific and homework-like phrases to not be homework. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 08:56, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, if they are homework, it would be a lot faster and more accurate to look them up in your dictionary or textbook. But I'll do the easy ones for you. "busy" is máng, "do not like" is bù xĭhuān, "sorry" is duìbuqĭ (which is what you've written in Hànzì up there), and "not going" is bù qù. "Sports" is apparently yùndònghuì, and "that's all right" (which is probably how you'd respond to duìbuqĭ) is méi(yŏu) guānxi. Ah... I'm still not very comfortable with Chinese, so that's all the translating I'm doing today. Indeterminate (talk) 20:48, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Bathroom / Restroom

What, if anything, is the distinction between the terms bathroom, restroom, men's room, etc.? Are there any times when it would be incorrect (as opposed to just odd) to use one rather than another? 98.228.74.177 (talk) 04:23, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

It would be incorrect to refer to a toilet in a private home as a restroom, men's room, or women's room. As far as I am aware, those terms refer only to public toilets. Even if a private toilet is used only by people of one sex, it would not be called a men's room or women's room. However, you might speak jocosely of using the little boys' room, even in reference to a private commode. The term washroom also strikes my ear as inappropriate for a private toilet, as does lavatory, to a slightly lesser extent. On the other hand, a public toilet can be called almost anything - bathroom, washroom, lavatory, men's room, water closet, john, can, head, etc. And there's nothing wrong with calling a toilet a bathroom even if it doesn't contain a bath, though some people might take issue with that. In the United States, it's considered crude to use the term toilet for the room, as opposed to the receptacle, but it's not wrong per se. Also, you would never use the term 'throne' for a public john. LANTZY^TALK 04:27, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

In North America, calling any sort of room a "toilet" is incorrect, not crude; here the word only refers to the device. "Bathroom" is commonly used to refer to the room whether it contains a bath or not. In real estate jargon it may be more specifically called a "half bath(room)" if it contains only a toilet and washbasin, a "3/4 bath(room)" if it contains a shower in addition, and a full bathroom if it contains a bathtub. I believe "restroom" is mostly a US term while "washroom" is more common here in Canada. I have a "1¾ bath" house, but how I refer to it myself is that it has two washrooms: the bathroom and the other one. "Lavatory" is not an everyday word here, although airlines sometimes use it; "water closet" is not used at all. "John", "can", and "throne", are vulgar terms and I take them as referring to the device, not the room. --Anonymous, 05:36 UTC, March 2, 2009.

No indeed. While "throne" refers unambiguously to the receptacle, "john" and "can" may be used for the room. Consider the expressions "in the john" and "in the can", which certainly don't refer to splashing about in a toilet bowl. I agree that "lavatory" is less commonly used, but I heard it all the time in grade school. LANTZY^TALK 06:03, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

The answer depends crucially on where you are talking about. None of the terms the OP used, and few of those in subsequent replies, are generally used in the UK (though all are recognised, like much American vocabulary). I guess that the OP is asking about NAm, but I'll answer for the UK for completeness. The normal term both for the device and the room is 'loo'. This is often felt to be informal, and 'toilet' used in more formal situations - but when I was growing up, 'toilet' was non-U, and our family said 'lavatory' - still in use, but rather old-fashioned. When I first came across a reference in American writing to a 'bathroom' that didn't contain a bath, I thought this must be a mistake.

For public facilities, in normal use 'loo' or 'public loos', usually 'toilets' on signage, and 'public conveniences' from officialdom. We also say 'the gents' and 'the ladies' rather than 'mens room' etc. The UK equivalent of 'john' I think is 'bog' (though that might be a little bit more vulgar - I'm not clear how vulgar 'john' is). --ColinFine (talk) 08:45, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

I think 'bog' is approximately as vulgar as 'can' or 'john'. I wish the word 'bog' were used in the United States, along with the terms 'bog roll' and 'bog breath' - they're so expressive and succinct. LANTZY^TALK 09:43, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Adding a couple more US options you can go to/ ask for/ use "the facilities" (private or public). Ladies may ask for "the powder room" (privat or hotel/restaurant/bar). This could also describe a half-bath or guest-bathroom (only sink and commode). Guys may say that they would like to "take a leak" when they need to "step out". In the South you may still encounter people who say they are "going to use the out-house". A "commode" describes the device just like "toilet" does. (This can result in misunderstandings if someone was referring to the furniture piece.) "John" is acceptable for a men's room, "can" is more for conversations among friends. For a public facility look for a "restroom" sign. Cat owners may jokingly refer to using "the litterbox". 76.97.245.5 (talk) 10:05, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

I think most English people would expect one of these if offered a commode. DuncanHill (talk) 14:48, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

"Usual offices" is sometimes used for the toilets in Britain. DuncanHill (talk) 14:50, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

And guess what, we have a lengthy discussion of various terms in the relevant article, see Toilet#Etymology. BrainyBabe (talk) 20:13, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

I sometimes euphemise "I'm just going outside, and may be some time" (but unlike the originator of that quote, I always come back).  :) -- JackofOz (talk) 20:28, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Alemannic Kraut

What is the Alemannic equivalent of the standard German Kraut? LANTZY^TALK 04:40, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Kohl, Salat/Kopfsalat, Sirup/Kuchensirup=Zuckerrübenkraut, Grünzeug (among others). 76.97.245.5 (talk) 10:17, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

(ec) The Swiss / Schwytzerdütsch term seems to be "Chruut", if measly 3 Ghits can be trusted. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 10:19, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

BTW. "Kraut" without any compound noun is only "standard" in the South. Northern Germany uses terms like Sauerkraut, Unkraut, Küchenkraut. Without compound it is only used in the idiom "Kraut und Rüben" (=chaos).76.97.245.5 (talk) 10:36, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

On an amusing kraut-idiom related note, the German expression "Unkraut vergeht nicht" (idiomatically: "Bad weeds grow tall") was mistranslated into the Swedish expression "Ont krut förgås inte lätt" (literally: "Bad gunpowder doesn't pass away lightly") --Pykk (talk) 13:45, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Which translates as "Chruut & Rübli" in the Alemannic version of chaos theory. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 10:56, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks all! LANTZY^TALK 12:10, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Egg-ague merger

I can't find any mention of this in our category of Splits and mergers in English phonology. I've long noticed the tendency of some people to pronounce egg, leg, keg, beg, dreg, Greg, Meg, peg, etc. with the vowel /eɪ/ rather than /ɛ/. I've noticed it in speakers of various American dialects. Stephen Colbert does it. I'm interested in how widespread this phenomenon is. Has anyone outside the United States noticed it? LANTZY^TALK 05:08, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

brain tweezer

Which among the following sentences is true? Why?

• only 1 sentence is false
• only 2 sentences are false
• " 3 " " "

     4
     :
     :

• all the 10 sentences are false —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sriraga (talk • contribs) 14:16, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

If n is the number of false sentences, then sentence n is true, and all the others are false. Thus there are 9 false sentences, hence sentence number 9 is true, and all others are false. — Emil J. 14:41, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

BTW, did you mean to say brain teaser ? Or is something jammed into your gray matter, which you are trying to extract ? :-) StuRat (talk) 15:25, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Origins of the last name Boxerbaum

I have been trying to find out more about the origins of our family name. Boxerbaum is jewish in origin. My great grand parents came over from somewhere in eastern Europe or what was then the USSR, possibly Chech. They spoke Hebrew and Yiddish. I know 'baum' means tree in german, and is incorporated into many jewish last names. Boxer may just mean boxwood, meaning my last name means boxwood tree. However, I ran into someone randomly who told me that my name meant 'cherub' tree in yiddish. I learned that the cherub tree has a lot of symbolism in the jewish faith, literally meaning a tree full of angels. It might represent the tree of life in the garden of eden. However, the yiddish translators online do not reference any similarity between the word 'boxer' and 'cherub. Any ideas?173.88.157.242 (talk) 17:04, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

In the Weinreich dictionary, bokser is listed as meaning "Carob pod, St. John's bread" (whatever that means). AnonMoos (talk) 19:02, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

See carob tree. —Angr 21:41, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Well if 'bokser' means a pod from a Carob tree then, it would seem to stand to reason that 'bokserbaum/boxerbaum' would mean the tree. The article states it's named "חרוב" -charuv in Hebrew. Which I gather is cognate with "כרוב" - kerubh (cherub). As for the etymology of 'bokser' Google books gave a hit from Goodman's "Teaching Jewish Holidays", that states its "a corruption of boihshorn meaning "ram's horn" — the long, curved shape of the carob being reminiscent of the shofar" --Pykk (talk) 19:40, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

I would be very surprised if "חרוב" and "כרוב" were cognate. In modern, Europeanised, Hebrew the initial consonants may be pronounced alike, but historically they are utterly different. See heth and kaph. --ColinFine (talk) 20:04, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

"Joe the Plumber"-type names

Is there a special term for a kind of nickname consisting of a single name plus a job title, like "Joe the Plumber" or Bob the Builder? 69.224.37.48 (talk) 17:16, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, they're a kind of appositive; I don't know if there's a more specific term for nicknames including a job title, though. —Angr 18:10, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Linguistics Careers

Hi there. I live in the UK, and am currently learning French, Spanish, Psychology, and Biology to A Level standard, and Italian to GCSE standard. I have a keen interest in Linguistics - particularly Psycho-, Euro-, and Socio- linguistics (and if it helps, I'm also interested in EU affairs). However, I am really not sure of the jobs available in "linguistics" at all, let alone these specific areas. Yes, there is Speech therapy, Translation, Interpreting, and teaching a language - but is that all?

Translation/Interpreting is firstly only a good thing to do if you can speak three, four, or more languages fluently - as competition from more competant areas of the world is fierce otherwise.

Speech therapy is more medicinally than linguistically centred, and I don't much fancy that.

I've tried looking on the internet, but still there isn't that much out there. I just don't know what to do, and I'm feeling time ticking on. Please help me. Thank you! 78.146.219.221 (talk) 18:13, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

You can become a professor, to do research and teach linguistics. And if you become a phoneticist/phonetican, you can go into speech synthesis or speech recognition. Speech therapy might be related to medicine, yes, but it requires knowledge of articulatory phonetics as well.

I'm not sure about other paths, but here are a few guesses: I think natural language processing and artificial intelligence needs semanticists, syntacticians, and morphologists too. If you go into historical linguistics I think you can have ties with archaeology. If you're a general linguist you can have ties with cultural anthropology. If you're interested in the brain or if you're interested in language acquisition, you can have ties with psychology.

BTW, if you're interested in sociolinguistics, have you looked at Sociolinguistic Patterns by William Labov? I think that book has a chapter titled "The Social Stratification of English in New York City", which is definitely worth checking out. (I know it's a bit old, and I know I'm not very knowledgeable about sociolinguistics. But that doesn't stop the paper from being remarkable, IMHO.) --Kjoonlee 18:59, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Unusual library

There is a library, in Europe, I think, that is housed in the home of its former owner, who is now dead. It is run as a public service IIRC. The books are arranged into four sections, not by the dewey system, but by an obscure schema that the owner came up with that locates books next to other books that the owner thought would be interesting or useful. I have forgotten the name of the library - can anyone help me with it? Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.189.100.62 (talk) 20:27, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Sounds like the Cotton Library, although that no longer exists. Adam Bishop (talk) 21:20, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Sounds like a pretty impossible question. There are many private libraries that remain in the homes of their previous owners, as libraries, museums, research institutes, etc. And it's not really typical for old/small/private libraries to use an established cataloging system either. --Pykk (talk) 21:41, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you - the Cotton Library is not the one, although that is interesting. I understand that there are many, let me try to be more specific in details. It was organized into four rooms, with a theme for each room that had some sort of visual (a woodcut carving iirc) that distinguished it. There was some notion about the arrangement of the books being its own form of literary art. Thanks, I know it is a long-shot! I am pretty sure it is in continental europe, too, maybe Austria? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.189.100.62 (talk) 21:51, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure about the four rooms, but your description of the associative method of "organization" reminded me of the library of Aby Warburg in his Hamburg house. I believe that his actual collection of books is now in the Warburg Institute in London but that his library has been partially recreated in Hamburg. Deor (talk) 23:06, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you - that is really interesting, and the right line of thought, but the one I am looking for is one house, and it has a website which explains it that I can't find. I appreciate the suggestions, I know I am being infuriatingly vague!

Spanish: Difference between hambre & hambruna.

--190.49.100.214 (talk) 21:39, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

To judge from hambre and hambruna, hambre is hunger (i.e. at the level of an individual person), while hambruna is famine (i.e. widespread across a community). —Angr 23:10, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Quotations and punctuation

Are there any "hard and fast" rules about whether and when to include (or exclude) the final punctuation mark in a sentence that ends with a direct quotation? It is understood that a sentence can always be reworded to avoid punctuation problems or issues. Nonetheless, I am not concerned with rewriting the sentences as much as I am concerned with what the correct punctuation would be in these circumstances. In examples such as these below, what is the correct way to end the sentence ... that is, what is the correct punctuation? Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 23:28, 2 March 2009 (UTC))

• John said, "I am going to Hawaii.".
• John said, "I am going to Hawaii!".
• John asked, "Did you go to the supermarket?".
• Did John say "Today is Friday."?
• Did John ask "What time is it?"?
• Did John yell "Fire!"?

American newspaper style is not to use any punctuation after the second quotation mark. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:37, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. So, doesn't that leave the "original sentence" (not the imbedded quotation sentence) without an end punctuation? If so, how does the reader know if the "original sentence" is a statement versus a question versus an exclamation? Merely a reliance on context? Also ... by the way ... what does "newspaper style" mean?

Example 1: I want to assert that John yelled out the word "fire" ... John yelled "Fire!".

Example 2: I want to ask incredulously whether John yelled the word "fire" ... John yelled "Fire!"?

According to your stated rule, they would both be reduced to ... John yelled "Fire!"

Is that correct? Thanks. (Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 23:54, 2 March 2009 (UTC))

I don't think any of the first three examples is correct. As per Mwalcoff's statement, it should be John said, "I am going to Hawaii." Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 01:21, 3 March 2009 (UTC)