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

September 2

Auxiliary verbs

We often say in response to questions like "Do you work on weekends?" or "Will you come to the party?" with constructions like "I do" or "I will". How do the French do this (or do they just say oui?) The French don't have the modal verb "will" and don't use "do" like that, so any response to the equivalent questions "Travaillez-vous les week-ends?" or "Viendrez-vous à la soirée?" would be very long. As an aside, I forget the difference between le samedi and samedi, as in Le samedi, je ne vais pas au travail; can someone refresh my memory? 76.199.146.176 (talk) 00:23, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

"Le samedi" means "every Saturday", doesn't it? For the first question, they tend to repeat the verb, often with an object pronoun (so the answer to "Do you work weekends" could be "I work them"/"je les travaille"). Of course, that is really just an unusual feature of English. Can any language use auxiliaries like English does? Adam Bishop (talk) 00:59, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Echoing Adam here: yeah, the usual response (as far as I know) would be with a "yes" and repeating the verb. As in "tu viens a la soiree demain?"//"si, je viens".

As for other languages, well, Chinese doesn't have a system of "auxiliaries" comparable to English, but there are limited cases that are similar. For example, the verbs 要 yào and 会 huì are used for events someone intends to do, like English "will", and you can repeat them to answer a question, just like in English (although in Chinese you drop the subject in such a case). For instance, ni yihou hui bu hui zai lai zhongguo ya? ("will you come back to China in the future"?), hui a! ("I will!"). rʨanaɢ (talk) 01:44, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

How do the respective parties say their equivalent of "I do" at non-English weddings? (I should have some idea about this, being married in a Russian Orthodox Church, but the details are lost in the mists of time). -- 202.142.129.66 (talk) 01:43, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

They simply say "yes" (or "I agree", or stuff like that). Eliko (talk) 07:32, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Examples: Spanish usually Sí, quiero ("Yes, I want (to).") or Sí, acepto ("Yes, I accept."); French usually Oui (je le veux) ("Yes (I want it)."); Italian similarly Sì (lo voglio) ("Yes (I want it)."). Sorry for the lack of non-Romance examples; I'm sure verbs of volition and the word "yes" are also commonly used elsewhere (though I haven't seen "I agree"). I don't doubt that 202's response was something more complex than да though (maybe involving хотеть "to want"). -- the Great Gavini 09:12, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

As a possibly interesting aside, German has the noun Jawort ("yes-word", wiktionary translates it as "word of consent"), which is often used in the nuptial sense. dict.cc translates "das Jawort geben" as "to say 'I do'" and "das Jawort hauchen" as "to breath 'I will'". ---Sluzzelin talk 09:15, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

je dois, -rai = I shall

je veux = I will

je nécesse = I mot

je fais bien = I do

je sais = I can

je peux = I may

je dois = I owe

-lysdexia 15:00, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Am I alone in wanting to question almost the entire bullet point list above?86.135.25.224 (talk) 19:24, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

No; lysdexia is a banned troll. It's just nonsense. Adam Bishop (talk) 20:12, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Adam Bishop is a libeller and malapropist, abusive of users and things he doesn't understand. See how he doesn't back up anything he says? My edits are as earnest as anyone's.

An electronic mail message, Usenet posting or other (electronic) communication which is intentionally incorrect, but not overtly controversial (compare flame bait), or the act of sending such a message. Trolling aims to elicit an emotional reaction from those with a hair-trigger on the reply key. A really subtle troll makes some people lose their minds. (1994-10-17)

The Free On-line Dictionary of Computing, © Denis Howe 2010 http://foldoc.org

an internet user who sends inflammatory or provocative messages designed to elicit negative responses or start a flame-war. (As a fisherman trolls for an unsuspecting fish.) : Don't answer those silly messages. Some troll is just looking for an argument.

Dictionary of American Slang and Colloquial Expressions by Richard A. Spears.Fourth Edition. Copyright 2007. Published by McGraw Hill.

There is no bullet list; it's a list, with a indent. Nothing's wrong with it. If you can tell me/us of any flaws, then do so; otherwise, 86, you'd be as bad as these crooked admins. sais is the best thruwend for can for want of a scis (of Latin scire). scire means cunnan, and therefore scientia cunninghead. Writers are often not lingvists, are clueleas of English roots, and thus will often tell ye malliterate paradighms for English. I know in Francish would be je gnais.

lysdexia isn't wholly banned but indefinitely blocked. -lysdexia 21:25, 2 September 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.128.79.3 (talk)

I'm almost sure that most (if not all) of the human languages have both: "Yes" and "Yes I was", as legitimate responses to "Were you there?", and the like. What still interests me is whether there's any human language, other than English, that has the following stuff: Question: "<word> you see?" (i.e "Do you see?") Answer: "Yes I <word>" (i.e. "Yes I do"), while the <word> is the same word in the question and in the answer (anyway, the <word> doesn't need to have anything to do with the verb to do, however I don't care if it does have). Eliko (talk) 07:32, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm assuming you won't allow <word> to be an auxiliary verb in the conditional mood (e.g.: <word> = "would" in English). Am I correct? ---Sluzzelin talk 08:15, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't care what the <word> means (so it may mean "would"), however, as I have already pointed out, the meaning of the whole conversation should be: Question: "do you see?" Answer: "Yes I do", and the whole conversation should go like this: Question: "<word> you see?" Answer: "Yes I <word>", the <word> being the same word in the question and in the answer.

Additionally. the verb "see" is an example only, and can be replaced by any other verb.

Eliko (talk) 08:33, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Ah ok, I misunderstood. My example (German) only works in the conditional, and means "would you want it". Swiss German dialects have an unpredictable way of sometimes using "tuä" ("to do" / "to make") as an auxiliary verb in the indicative mood, and you could ask: "Tuäsch es welle?" ("Do you want it"). But to answer with "Ja, ich tuä" or even "Ja, ich tuä's" would be highly artificial if not incorrect. You'd either just say "Ja." or perhaps "Ja, ich tuä's welle", but more likely you'd avoid the auxiliary verb construction and say "Ja, ich wott's". ---Sluzzelin talk 08:37, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

You say that to answer with "Ja, ich tuä" or even "Ja, ich tuä's" would be highly artificial if not incorrect. I don't care whether it's incorrect, but can one here this (at least rarely) from native Swiss adults? Eliko (talk) 08:53, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Well, by incorrect, I meant that it goes against a native speaker's intuition (at least against mine). There is no standard grammar taught in Swiss German. Formally, the dialects aren't taught at all to native speakers, and this makes its usage fluid even within a particular dialect. Though I can't exclude that my artificial example has been uttered, it just doesn't sound right. Sorry, that's all I got, but I'll ask around. ---Sluzzelin talk 08:57, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. Eliko (talk) 09:04, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't think you're going to find other languages that do this; English is widely accepted to be one of the only (if not the only known) language that has do-support. rʨanaɢ (talk) 09:36, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

That's exactly what I'm not sure about yet, because for being sure one must scan all of the human languages, and I haven't done that yet. Anyways, English is not the only known language that has do-support, because in Swiss German too, one could ask: "Tuäsch es welle?" (i.e. "Do you want it"?), although one can't answer: "Ja, ich tuä" nor "Ja, ich tuä's" (i.e. "yes I do"), as Sluzzelin has pointed out. Eliko (talk) 10:51, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

At this point, I need to emphasize that "Wottsch es?" (without auxiliary verb) would be the standard way of asking "Do you want it?". It works better with verbs that, unlike "welle", can't be modal verbs in their own right. And I think it mainly depends on which sounds less awkward. Examples: Intransitive "Tuesch söile?" ("Are you making a mess?") sounds much better than "Söilsch?", while transitive "Tuesch es ässe" ("Are you going to eat it?") and "Issisch es?" are both acceptable. "Tuä" is also often used as an auxiliary in the imperative mood, particulary when the sentence is negative. I'd probably say "Tuä's nöd ässe!" (Don't eat it!) instead of "Iss es nöd!", but both are correct and commonly used. Finally, in some German dialects, not just Swiss, "tuä" is also used as an auxiliary verb in the conditional mood ("Täätsch das welle?" = "Would you want that?"). Here the usage is similar to that of "würde" in Standard German or "would" in English.---Sluzzelin talk 11:19, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Finnish has no such auxiliary verbs as "do" or "will". Instead, verbs are declined in four cases: indicative (example: lähden "I leave"), conditional (example: lähtisin "I would leave"), potential (example: lähtenen "I probably leave") and imperative (example: lähde "leave!"). Responses to yes/no questions are made simply by repeating the verb in the same declination as in the question. However, Finnish does have verbs that can have other verbs as objects, similarly as in English, for example haluta "to want", uskaltaa "to dare", etc. As for weddings, the general question is tahdotko sinä M.M. ottaa tämän N.N.:n puolisoksesi? "Do you M.M. want to take this N.N. as your spouse?" and the response is tahdon "I want". JIP | Talk 08:00, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

"tahdotko sinä..ottaa" means "will you take" and "tahdon" means "I will". -lysdexia 15:00, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, that is the accepted meaning in the wedding protocol, but literally, tahdon means "I want". JIP | Talk 16:43, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

What about periphrastic tenses?

However, what would be the answer if the tense is periphrastic? For example, Avez-vous vu le chat?. Is the answer full "Si, j'ai le vu", or is perhaps "Si, j'ai" acceptable? In my native tongue, we just repeat the auxiliary, but to my very limited French, "Si, j'ai" sounds somewhat crippled. No such user (talk)

I don't know about French, but in Finnish, this question uses the perfect tense of the verb, which is expressed with the auxiliary verb olla "to be". The full question (using the singular second person for clarity) is Oletko nähnyt kissan? and the answer is simply Olen. JIP | Talk 09:14, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Oui, surely? -- the Great Gavini 09:15, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Si is used only to answer negative questions or statements. Oui is the correct answer in this case. You can also say Oui, je l'ai vu. but not Oui, j'ai since it wouldn't mean anything to me, I would think that you are trying to say yes, I own which in this context would be very surprising, I would ask Vous avez quoi?. --Lgriot (talk) 09:36, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

How is Leeuwenhoek pronounced?

As in Anton van Leeuwenhoek. --75.33.216.97 (talk) 01:04, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

You have it here. --Omidinist (talk) 04:14, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Italian dentals

I am learning Italian from Pimsleur recordings. According to our articles on Italian phonology and Denti-alveolar consonant, Italian /d/ and /t/ are dental or denti-alveolar. Now, on the Pimsleur recordings, one of the speakers seems to have a mostly denti-alveolar articulation, but another seems to have an alveolar articulation. Is the latter a regional or social variant in Italian, or are my ears deceiving me? Thanks. Marco polo (talk) 01:31, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Many years ago I got the 1st set of Pimsleur recordings for learning Russian. One of the benefits but also frustrations was that not every native speaker sounds the same—I strongly suspect simple regional variation. It was more of an issue with Russian as I would try to figure out the Cyrillic spelling from the sound, it's less obvious with Russian where you have probably five different variations on the "i" sound. PЄTЄRS J VЄСRUМВА ►TALK 14:29, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

was used to

in some books you see "I was used to [infinitive]" whereas today we say "I used to [infinitve]" or at a pinch "I was used to [participle]"> Is the first usage still correct? What is the difference? 76.229.183.8 (talk) 03:07, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Depends on the context. These can mean different things. "I was used to X" can mean "I was accustomed to X" (i.e., "Back then I was used to running every day, but not anymore"). On the other hand, "I used to X" means "I habitually did X", as in "when I was little I used to go to the beach every summer". I don't think I've ever seen "I was used to [infinitive]" in English, and I don't know what it would even mean. rʨanaɢ (talk) 03:26, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

"I was used to [infinitive]" isn't anything a native speaker would say, except perhaps while inebriated. "I was used to [gerund]" would unambiguously mean "I was accustomed to [gerund]", not "I used to [infinitive]". But the OP is vague. S/he writes, "In some books you see..." but just what books are these? In order to assess the writer's purport, we'll have to see the phrase in context. LANTZY^TALK 05:47, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

"I was used to shore up the number of men in the group." Matt Deres (talk) 13:18, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Or "I was used to run errands". And here's where the oddities of "use" come into play. If you say "used" with a soft "s", it sounds like bad English in those sentences, becaused "used to" with a soft "s" means "accustomed to" (unless there are some regions where they say it like a "z" in those circumstances). I wonder where that expression comes from anyway. But if you say it with a "z" sound, those sentences mean "employed to" or possibly "exploited to", and are good English. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:26, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Etymonline [1] unexpectedly lists used to under the verb form of use (that is, the "z" form). "The pronunciation is affected by the t- of to", apparently. It seems to say that, archaically, there was a present tense "I use to" construction... so I guess "I use to go running" would have meant "I go running regularly". 213.122.3.229 (talk) 16:33, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

I remember being told when I was very young that "I used to <infinitive>" is common and vulgar, and the 'proper' way to speak is "I used <infinitive>" (e.g. I used like bananas, but I prefer strawberries now). That advice never rang true then, even in a family that prided itself on how teddibly correct it could be in an upper middle class sort of way, and it doesn't now. What this has to do with anything is marginal, but I thought I'd throw it into the mix. -- 202.142.129.66 (talk) 06:01, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

If they really told you that, they needed to go back to school themselves. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:26, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

I agree it's "was used to [gerund]" being the proper form of which "was used to [infinitive]" is simply bad grammar. PЄTЄRS J VЄСRUМВА ►TALK 14:33, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Another question about "used to"

I have read from an American comic that when used as an active verb, "used to" retains the "d" even when used with the "do" auxiliary verb, such as "didn't you used to...?" To me, this sounds wrong. Is this correct usage or not? JIP | Talk 14:57, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

It's not. Auxiliary verbs take the imperative mood. -lysdexia 15:09, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

It's not correct, as you probably know, that auxiliary verbs are always imperatives (!), but you are right that "didn't you used to..." is incorrect. It should be "didn't you use to...". (In colloquial American English, though, both forms are pronounced identically.) Marco polo (talk) 15:46, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

No, the subordinate verb is imperative. -lysdexia 15:49, 2 September 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.64.168.136 (talk)

Indicative?86.135.25.224 (talk) 19:19, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

No it's neither the imperative nor the indicative but the infinitive. In this case the form of the infinitive without "to" - in its turn it governs another infinitive, in this case with "to" --rossb (talk) 23:22, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

A simple explanation for ESL learners, and a similar thing with a little more explanation. When I'm having a blank moment, I find these things 'ping' me back into the language and I wonder what I was thinking! You can substitute in another verb like like, and it becomes clear: "I liked to eat..."/"I didn't like to eat...", adding the corollary that "used to do something" is always in the past. Interestingly (to me), discussion of used to (for example, in Imperfect) seem to treat it as a phrase, whereas I thought it broke down as "(I) (used) (to eat)..." and "(I) (didn't) (use) (to eat)...", with the to forming part of the infinitive. 86.161.108.172 (talk) 23:33, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Question from banned user closed

Irregular elative cases of Semitic/Qhàŕàbijhh?: ŕàkhmàn Elative (gradation) says the masculine singular elative case makes aCCaC; therefore for the adjectival ŕàkhim its elatend must be -àŕkhàm. ŕàkhmàn bewrays the indefinite accusative or adverbial ending, but there's a nuwn instead of a fàthàtàn. Where'd this word come from? How about the Qhibiŕiqht word ŕaxmàni? -lysdexia 15:46, 2 September 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.64.168.136 (talk) some background: http://www.reocities.com/spenta_mainyu/Islam2.htm Let us look into this name, Rahman, and try to find where it would lead us. Rahman is not Arabic but Syriac, and the original is Rahmono, meaning ‘the merciful’ (actual name of this supreme being was Rahman ‘the Merciful’). D. B. MacDonald in the Encyclopaedia of Islam wrote: “It is almost certain that the prophet has borrowed the sentence ‘Bism-el Rahman’ from Southern Arabia” where this monotheistic belief system had existed [in fact the expression has become “Bism’el (Lah el) Rahman,” which means ‘with the name (of the god Lah) the merciful’]. The research done on the texts shows us that this name Rahman was borrowed by the southern Arabians from Aramaic and Hebrew, then turned into Rahmanan and shortened into Rahman. Here I would like to remind you that the Sabians and other peoples of Mesopotamia used the name Rahman also as the name of god. http://books.google.com/books?id=WBx2ejzo_v0C&pg=PA118&lpg=PA118&dq=Rahmono The ending /an/ in the Qur'anic word "Al Rahman" represents the Eastern dialect of Syriac. -lysdexia 17:14, 2 September 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.64.168.136 (talk) Ah, lysdexia (talk · contribs), before we attempt to figure out what you are saying this time, it will be useful to remind you that you will have to wait much, much longer before people forget that you are banned. Adam Bishop (talk) 17:27, 2 September 2010 (UTC) I was banned wrongly, by a liar, and the terms and talks a'leading up to then were forgotten by all other parties. Does that or the policies of Wikipedia not matter to you? I had not broken any. -lysdexia 17:54, 2 September 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.64.168.136 (talk) You're a nonsensical troll and attempting to answer your questions here will be beyond unproductive. Adam Bishop (talk) 18:01, 2 September 2010 (UTC) You're a h​ýpocritical liar, one of the many online who takes [or flings] words he hasn't a clue the meaning of. I never troll or mess or goad. If you hadn't a constructive edit here, you're the exemplar of eirony in how not to work. -lysdexia 18:27, 2 September 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.64.168.136 (talk)

Singular or plural

• I want one of these certificates
• I want one of this certificates

Which one is correct?--180.234.28.102 (talk) 18:59, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

"These". —Angr (talk) 19:09, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

• • Thanks Angr.--180.234.28.102 (talk) 19:27, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

It is "these" because it's plural. "I want this certificate," would be the correct use of "this." Falconus^{p t c} 22:06, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Another Italian question

I know that my log-in name suggests that I am a native Italian speaker, but I am not. (I chose the name because of my interests in history, geography, and travel.) Anyway, I am learning some Italian in preparation for a trip to Italy. I will be traveling with my male partner, who speaks almost no Italian. I anticipate needing to say My friend and I... a lot. Here is my question: If I say Io e il mio amico... does this imply that he is my boyfriend/partner? I ask because if I Google this phrase, I see more instances of Io e un mio amico... ("I and a friend of mine..." or "A friend and I...") I am wondering if Italian is like German, where mein Freund usually means "my boyfriend/partner", and you have to say ein Freund or ein Freund von mir to mean "my friend". Can anyone answer? (He is in fact my partner, but I want to be conscious whether I am outing myself due to the possibility of a homophobic reaction.) Thanks. Marco polo (talk) 22:59, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm a native Italian. Don't worry, amico only means friend. You have to avoid Io e il mio ragazzo (me and my boy/guy) which almost universally means lover. Have a good trip here, Marco! --151.51.145.104 (talk) 06:19, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

September 3

Dutch Het

(Copied from the Wikipedia Help Desk Rojomoke (talk) 10:41, 3 September 2010 (UTC))
I need to know what het means in Dutch. I found it used everywhere and looks to be a definite article.

In this instance please: "Usils- genitivus van Usil, Sol, zon (in het Sabijns: Ausel)".Zanzan32 (talk) 08:31, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Het can be a definite article or the third person pronoun ("it"). "Usils – the genitive of Usil, Sol, sun (in the Sabines: Ausel)".—Emil J. 11:20, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

See Gender in Dutch grammar. Angus McLellan (Talk) 12:20, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

EmilJ's translation is good, except that in het Sabijns means "in Sabine" (that is, in the Sabine language). Marco polo (talk) 13:45, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you.Zanzan32 (talk) 07:08, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Leaving monkhood

With respect to Buddhist monk, is there a specific pali or English term for an act by which a Buddhist monk leaves his monkhood (and becomes a layperson again)? For example, an act by which he enters monkhood is called "upasampada" or "ordination".

182.52.102.58 (talk) 15:38, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

The usual English expression for a priest to leave his profession is called either "Defrocking", "Unfrocking" or "Laicization" all meaning the opposite of "Ordination". These are primarily christian terms though. --93.241.232.86 (talk) 16:18, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

I thought that defrocking means to be sacked as a priest, rather than leaving voluntarily. Alansplodge (talk) 17:31, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

"Return to laity"? "Return to secularity"? --98.114.146.39 (talk) 15:58, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Slander and libel in online social contexts

Now I know that slander refers to spoken defamation of character, and libel to published, written defamation. When I think about online forums however, where the posts seem to be of a more conversational manner than normal online publications like newspapers, do these terms still apply the same? I find it strange to call someone 'libelous' when it almost feels like a prolonged conversation. I'd be tempted to call online defamation of character, in this sense, slander. Am I wrong? Regards, --—Cyclonenim | Chat  20:26, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't know where this falls legally, but in everyday usage I feel the distinction between "slander" and "libel" has worn pretty thin anyway. A lot of people use them interchangeably. rʨanaɢ (talk) 23:04, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

I do agree but I'd say, rather than the line wearing thin, it's more of a case of people using the two inappropriately and then others learning the bad habits. It's frustrating, to me at least, when people refer to newspaper lies as slander. Regards, --—Cyclonenim | Chat  23:32, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

I think that's usually how lines wear thin... rʨanaɢ (talk) 02:32, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Language learning

I'm italian and i'm learning english language. When i'm reading in english I translate in my mind every word in italian. I want to ask if this way it's right. I think not but I dont know how to do.--93.47.40.126 (talk) 21:48, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

I think that's inevitable when you're learning a language. I don't know how fluent you are, but when you become more fluent you'll rely less on your own language to understand. Regards, --—Cyclonenim | Chat  22:19, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

What he said. It's the natural course - at first, you translate everything, then you start subconsciously thinking in the foreign language when you speak it. Then, if you pursue your language studies long enough, you may wake up one morning and discover you just dreamed in a foreign language - that's quite a ground-shaking experience. TomorrowTime (talk) 22:46, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

While I haven't dreamt in English (except for dreams where I explained something in English to someone else), I've basically skipped step one of your list.

Growing up in the eighties, our local cable company had more channels available than there were German TV stations to fill them, so they added foreign stations. Which means I would watch British children's television each Saturday/Sunday morning, animated series like Inspector Gadget, Transformers, He-Man, and later even "regular" programming like The Ghost & Mrs. Muir and Land of the Giants on Sky Channel (I think it's called Sky One these days).

Watching the animated series had the advantage that the same episodes were usually shown in German shortly after, on one of the German channels. So if there was something I couldn't figure out from the given context, I could watch it again in German and see what it was all about.

I started doing this about the same time I started taking English classes, so it's hard to claim I had a head start over my classmates, still, I could never figure out why most of them were using word-by-word translations - even though I didn't have a formal understanding of English grammar back then, it would sound and feel plain wrong when they talked like that. It's like you subconsciously pick up the pattern of the language, even if you don't understand it at the beginning.

What I would suggest is to buy DVDs of movies you like - yes, buy them, don't download them illegally, so you have good quality and access to all the audio tracks and subtitles, plus it gives you that warm fuzzy feeling of not being a copyright violator - and watching them in your native language first, then again in English with subtitles in your native language, then in English with English subtitles, and then without subtitles. If you buy enough DVDs you can do this without boring yourself to death from watching the same movie over and over. ;-) Of course, once you start to get the hang of it, you can try to skip a few steps and start watching a new movie directly in English with English subtitles, for example.

One thing you really should keep in mind is that a foreign language isn't just a new set of words with a 1:1 mapping. If it were, you could always use machine translation like translate.google.com and wouldn't need humans for translation tasks. That was also something my classmates had trouble understanding - seeing that I had good grades, they would come to me for homework help and ask "How do you translate XXX into English?", getting mad at me when I asked about context before giving an answer. Seeing that for example the German word "Flügel" can mean, amongst other things, grand piano, the wing of a building, or the wing of an airplane, context does matter - think of the unexpected results of mounting a replacement engine on a grand piano. ;-) Given enough thrust, even pigs will fly, so a grand piano probably would, too. Still, that might not have been what you had in mind. -- 78.43.71.155 (talk) 18:20, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Ecco due collegamenti utili. Here are two useful links.

• English For Italians | Inglese per Italiani - Carmelo Mangano’s Blog
• Corso di inglese on line - ABA English

—Wavelength (talk) 22:55, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

The article on Language immersion isn't quite what I had in mind, but in general "immersion" means surrounding yourself with people speaking the language you want to learn. Kind of like the way kids learn a language, but accelerating the pace. That would probably be the best way to learn, if you have the opportunity. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:42, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2008 September 19#Thinking in a second language.

—Wavelength (talk) 03:35, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Deewa / Pashto

Hello. This week I was listening to Voice of America in Pashto and was surprised to learn that there is a new and different version, VOA Deewa, apparently in "Pakistani Pashto," in supplement to the regular Pashto service. My question: is "Deewa" the name of the Pakistani Pashto dialect / regional variant; or is that the name of the radio station? Our relevant articles have no information on "Deewa" and I am curious what this word means. Any ideas? Thanks, Nimur (talk) 23:03, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

differentiate Slavic languages

hey guys. I like languages. I can speak French, Spanish, and English, and I can understand a lot of most Romance languages and tell the difference between Chinese, Japanese and Korean. However I can only tell if something is a Slavic language; I can't identify it. Can someone give me some tips on how to differentiate the Slavic languages in their spoken and written forms? I'm only interested in differentiating the ones that have major differences/are not mutually intellegible. 99.13.222.181 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:03, 3 September 2010 (UTC).

The written forms are easy. Almost every Slavic language has orthographic idiosyncrasies. Also, of course, some Slavic languages use versions of the Cyrillic alphabet, while others use versions of the Latin alphabet. See, for example, Polish orthography, Czech orthography, Croatian orthography, Russian orthography, etc. As for spoken forms, I agree that Slavic languages are generally closer phonetically than are the Romance languages, but there are substantial differences. For example, Polish has nasal vowels that don't occur in other major Slavic languages. If you study one or more Slavic languages, you will learn to hear what is distinctive about each of them. Marco polo (talk) 00:04, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

If there are a lot of consonant+z combinations in running written text, then there's a good possibility it's Polish; if there are a lot of hachek diacritics, then there's a good possibility it's Czech... AnonMoos (talk) 01:22, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Minor nitpick - South Slavic languages have plenty of hacheks too. However, the hachek on the r (Ř) is a distinctively Czech feature, so that's a good indicator. Similarly, the l with stroke (Ł) is a distinctively Polish feature. D with stroke (Đ) is a South Slavic thing, used in all ex-Yugoslav Slavic languages except Slovene (where you may still find it used for the sake of convenience when writing personal or place names that are Croatian or Serbian in origin). As for differentiating the languages when hearing them... That might be a bit more difficult for someone who doesn't speak a single Slavic language, unfortunately. I could tell you that to my ears, Czech sounds like a melodic language with plenty of diminutives that make it sound like a cute, almost childlike language, whereas Russian sounds like it's using all the right words, but assigns weird, unthought of meanings to them (for instance, where "krasno" means "wonderful, beautiful" to me in Slovene, it means "red" in Russian, for some inexplicable reason), but that doesn't help you much :) TomorrowTime (talk) 07:01, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Caution: apart from Czech, ř is also used in Upper Sorbian, and likewise ł is used in both Sorbian languages. Frequent acute accents over vowels are an easy giveaway of Czech or Slovak; these do not appear at all in South Slavic languages, and Polish and Upper and Lower Sorbian have only ó. Apart from the already mentioned sz/cz/rz digraphs, another unique feature of Polish is the ogonek accent (ą, ę), and (this one is shared with U. and L. Sorbian) the usage of w instead of v.—Emil J. 12:23, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Language recognition chart. -- Wavelength (talk) 02:19, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

On a side note, Chinese, Japanese, and Korean are unrelated languages, so it isn't surprising that it is not hard to tell them apart. The Slavic languages, however, are by definition closely related, as are the Romance languages. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 02:40, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

September 4

Danish letter

I want to see if someone here (preferably a native speaker, but anyone fluent or knowledgable will do) can translate the following letter into Danish, or the accompanying dialect spoken near Sakskøbing.

Good Day!
My name is Schyler Raadt, and I live in Texas, United States.
There is an old family story that says our progenitor hails from your very estate!
I hope and plan to someday visit your beautiful town as well as stay at your
Bed & Breakfast.
I have seen the pictures and they are amazing, but nothing is like real-life!
I was wondering, are there any documents concerning this matter, specifically, 
illegitimate children born of local nobility?
Also, are there any portraits of the nobility that once occupied your grand estate?
I want to take this time to send my many thanks to you yourself as well as
the entire people of Denmark.
Your society is an example for the whole world!

Thank you Wikipedians for any help you can provide! schyler (talk) 01:31, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

If you don't get a translation, I would point out that most adult Danes understand English. Marco polo (talk) 21:23, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

You could try Google Translate for a rough estimate. Lexicografía (talk) 01:26, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

It would be best just to send the letter in English. It's widely understood and you don't give away the false impression that you'd understand what they write if they reply in Danish... Jørgen (talk) 07:59, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

I can recommend on tradukka, a multilanguage online translation. Gil_mo (talk) 22:54, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Help Desk Query

Discussions moved from Wikipedia:Help desk#Need a Translation of Kanji
♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪ ―Œ ♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣ 04:45, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
Kanji - Miyazaki The first part of the Kanji, the Surname, says Miyazaki but I don't know what the second part, the First Name, says. So far I've found three possibilities: Miyazaki Shigesaburo Miyazaki Shuichi Miyazaki Takeshi --Arima (talk) 01:50, 4 September 2010 (UTC) The best venue for this would be wp:Reference desk/language, which specialises in er, Language questions!220.101 talk\Contribs03:12, 4 September 2010 (UTC) It's Miyazaki Shigesaburō. Oda Mari (talk) 04:32, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Help desk#Need a Translation of Kanji. Any takers? (already suggested they come here). 220.101 talk^\Contribs 03:18, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Miyazaki Shigesaburou - Japanese Wikipedia article on him is here. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 04:01, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your help, KageTora. If you would please, I need to have a Kanji List of IJN Personell DOUBLE-CHECKED against a Translation List of the Names to see if I made some Identification Errors.

Kanji - IJN Personnel

• Isoroku Yamamoto
• Soemu Toyoda
• Mineichi Koga
• Shirō Takasu
• Nobutake Kondō
• Jisaburō Ozawa
• Chūichi Nagumo
• Nishizō Tsukahara
• Shigeyoshi Inoue
• Takeo Kurita
• Gunichi Mikawa
• Seiichi Itō
• Jinichi Kusaka
• Boshirō Hosogaya
• Takeo Takagi
• Kakuji Kakuta
• Matome Ugaki
• Takijirō Ōnishi
• Raizō Tanaka
• Ryūnosuke Kusaka
• Shōji Nishimura
• Sadaichi Matsunaga
• Kiyohide Shima
• Chūichi Hara
• Hiroaki Abe
• Sentarō Ōmori
• Tamon Yamaguchi
• Takatsugu Jōjima/Takatsugu Jyojima
• Ikuzo Kimura
• Masafumi Arima

--Arima (talk) 05:22, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Right, well, I am a bit busy, but I am sure somebody will have a go at it. I am replying so that people know the 'job' is still open. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 15:24, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

I looked through them, and they seem to be alright, other than Shigeyoshi Inoue, (井上成美) who I'm not really sure about and is in my opinion possibly wrong. I can't be sure, though - I'm just in the middle of moving and I can't find my dictionary of personal names at the moment. For the same reason, I wouldn't mind if somebody else looked through these as well - as I said, I'm pretty certain the ones other than Inoue are legit, but I can't be 100% sure for some of them. TomorrowTime (talk) 07:14, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, TT. And Shigeyoshi Inoue's Japanese Wikipedia page is here (with pronunciation shown, as with the other link I gave above). A Google search on the names generally reveals links with their pronunciations, and usually more than one link for each. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 11:06, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Wow, that's a reading I'd never have expected. At first glance, I'd say it was a female name, not the name of a salty seaman :) So Inoue's name is correct as well. In that case, I'm pretty certain they all fit. TomorrowTime (talk) 11:47, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

What about Matsunaga? I couldn't find any reliable information on him which is possibly due to the obscurity of his existence on the pacific front. So I'm specifically concerned about whether or not I got his name right. --Arima (talk) 09:07, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Matsunaga's name definitely reads as Sadaichi. TomorrowTime (talk) 09:38, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Here's the ja.wiki article that confirms it: http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/松永貞市 TomorrowTime (talk) 09:48, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks for all your help guys. My research is complete. The only thing I'm missing now is Kimura's Kanji. --Arima (talk) 10:42, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Kimura Masatomi - here is the Japanese Wikipedia page. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 15:28, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

How did British English and American English come to use different quotation marks?

How did British English and American English come to use different (primary) quotation marks? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.114.146.39 (talk) 07:18, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

British publishers have recently (in the last 50 years) changed the traditional rule that double quotes come first. Many of us in the UK ignore them and prefer the traditional British rule which is the same as the American one. Dbfirs 07:54, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

This sort of punctuation usage (along with other conventions such as spelling and layout) is more a matter of house style rather than national rules, and the most important consideration is to maintain consistency within an individual work. No-one ever (successfully) set out an official standard for such things (since no-one had the de facto authority to do so), so originally individual writers and printers went with their own judgement. Eventually the majority in each 'national publishing community' somewhat converged in their practices, but every publisher had their own set of preferences and until quite recently most major publishers issued style or house-rule booklets to their authors and editors for guidance (I possess several). Some of these, notably the Oxford University Press's, were published for general (optional) use and became a more generally observed standard, but none constituted "the English/American rules."

Inter-work consistency is obviously important in, say, a series of textbooks or references written by various hands, but is less so in fiction, and most publishers would allow a fiction author to use their own preferred punctuation and other styles rather than the house's default if he/she felt strongly about the matter. Then, too, titles are often individually designed overall to achieve a look consistent with their subject matter (which might be historical romance or futuristic space fiction), and their punctuation style might be modified to fit within this context.

People who frequently read books published on both sides of the Atlantic usually assimilate unconsciously the conventions of spelling, grammar and punctuation of a particular work in its first few pages and thereafter don't consciously notice them, just as one is not normally confused by different people speaking in different regional accents. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 10:21, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Two passages in Dutch

I have difficulty in understanding the following:

"Sommige Etruskische steden raken op de achtergrond, andere komen op. Zeker voerde Etrurie zelden of nooit als natie -wat het niet was-of als federatie- wat het ook niet was -oorlog". ...

Some Etruskan cities move into the background, while others emerge. It is certain that Etruria rarely or never went to war as a nation - which it wasn't - or as a federation - which it wasn't either.

"Afgebeeld zijn o.a. een gebonden man genaamd Caile Vipinas die bevrijd wordt een zekere Macstrna. Zijn broer Aule Vipinas doorsteekt een tegenstander en op een andere schildering wordt Cneve Tarchu Rumach...gedood door een andere aanvaller uit Vulci.

Pictured are a.o. a bound man named Caile Vipinas who is freed by a certain Macstrna. His brother Aule Vipinas stabs an opponent and in another painting Cneve Tarchu Rumach is killed by another attacker from Vulci.

Ondanks de vele raadsels die blijven, krijgt toch Claudius' versie van de Tarquinius servius Tullius affaire vastere grond onder de voeten, temmeer omdat een te Veii (en dat is veel dichter bij Rome) gevonden vaas een inscriptie draagt: Avile Vipiennas. ... De pikante mogelijkheid dat macstrna niets anders is dan een Etruskisering van de Romeinse titel 'magister'... opent duizeliingwekkende vergezichten".

Despite the riddles that remain, Claudius's version of the Tarquinius Servius Tullius affair is on more solid groud, even more so because a vase found in Veii (which is much closer to Rome) carries an inscription: Avile Vipienas. The engaging possibility that Macstrna is nothing but an Etruskisation of the Roman title "magister" opens dazzling views.

...

Wie de Romeinse verovering van Etrurie puur beschrijft als mensen werk, vergeet -wat de Romeinse historiographie in tal van legenden heeft verwoord- dat Etrurie's ondergang en Rome's opkomst volgens de antieke opvatting bovennatuurlijk bepaald waren. ...

Those who describe the Roman conquest of Etruria as the work of humans forget - what Roman historiography has put into words in many legends - that Etruria's demise and Rome's rise were according to the antique views supernaturally decided.

De reeds eerder genoemde Aulus Vibenna was na zijn dood nog niet uitgesproken. ....

The above mentioned Aulus Vibenna had not finished speaking after his death.

Andere bronnen verduidelijken de zaak: het hoofd heet "Caput Oli", deze Olus was niemand anders dan Aulus Vibenna, het hoofdt wordt gevonden tijdens het funderen van de tempel op het Capitool, de uitleg van prodigium werd gegeven door een Etrurier.

Other sources clarify the matter; The head is named "caput Oli", this Olus was none other than Aulus Vibenna, the head is found during the laying of the foundations of the temple on the capitol, the explanation of "prodgium" is geven by an Etrurian.

Sorry for the length and thank you for your help.Zanzan32 (talk) 07:48, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Entymology of "-ish"

What is the entymology of the English suffix "-ish"? Is it related to the colloquial usage in the UK meaning "sort of", "somewhat" or "a bit"? --Rixxin (talk) 11:28, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Chambers 20th Century Dictionary, 1983 edition has "-ish, adjective suffix signifying somewhat... or like or similar to... sometimes implying deprecation" and gives the root as the Old English suffix -isc. The colloquial usage simply shews that it is still a productive suffix. DuncanHill (talk) 11:33, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

It's cognate with ancient Greek -isk-os, as in "Meniscus"... AnonMoos (talk) 12:06, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

According to The American Heritage Dictionary of Indo-European Roots the relevant root is *-(i)ko-, which also, through various routes, gave rise to a number of other English adjectival suffixes, such as -y, from OE -ig; -ic, from Latin -icus and Greek -ikos; and -esque, proximally from Italian but derived from a Germanic root. Related is the Slavic -sky seen in English coinages such as brewsky and Russky, as well as such names as Dostoyevsky and Tchaikovsky. Deor (talk) 12:50, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

@Rixxin: just FYI, what you are asking about is called etymology. Entomology is the study of insects. rʨanaɢ (talk) 12:18, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

According to the SOED: ORIGIN Old English -isc corresp. to Gothic -isks, Old Norse -iskr, Old High German, Old Saxon, Old Frisian -isc, German, Dutch -isch, from Germanic: cogn. with Greek -iskos dim. suffix of nouns.

Is it related to the colloquial usage ... meaning "sort of", "somewhat" or "a bit"? Probably. SOED includes: (d) colloq. from names of hours of the day or numbers of years, with the sense ‘round about, somewhere near (the time or period of)’, as elevenish, fortyish. Wiktionary also agrees with this. Mitch Ames (talk) 14:30, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

According to my Webster's, "-ish" comes from "-isc" and means "of, or relating to, or being". Taking it in that way, words like "English" and "childish" and "bookish" and "elevenish" all really have the same concept in mind. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:43, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Who was it who denied he was a Jew, but admitted to being Jew-ish? -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 19:50, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

It was Jonathan Miller, in Beyond the Fringe. DuncanHill (talk) 09:50, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Ah yes, thanks. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 11:21, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Latin

Did any sounds exist in latin (any variety short of proto-Romance) that do not exist in modern English? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.230.146.8 (talk) 15:44, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Greek y, when they pronounced it the Greek way; Z may also have been /ts/ or /dz/, although I guess we do have those combinations of sounds too. English vowels, well at least in the kind of English I speak, tend to be diphthongized (/e/ is usually /ej/, etc), but Latin didn't do that. I also remember learning that the R is "trilled" but I'm not exactly sure what that was supposed to mean, since there are at least three different R sounds in European languages that I can think of. Adam Bishop (talk) 18:30, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

By the way, for more info about this, see Latin spelling and pronunciation, pronunciation of contemporary Latin (i.e. the way we learn it now, according to the most likely classical rules), and the traditional English pronunciation of Latin. Adam Bishop (talk) 20:15, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Word-final unstressed vowel + m sequences were actually nasalized vowels in the ordinary colloquial pronunciation of the empire period... AnonMoos (talk) 03:13, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Compass directions

When an English speaker says "southwest", he/she places north-south first. But in many other languages, east and west comes first. According to Wikipedia's links to compass direction articles of various languages, I learned:

• N-S first languages: da, de, es, fr, nl, no, pt, sk, sv (all European languages) and ja
• W-E first languages: zh
• I can't tell: cs, et, fi, pam, and pl

It's interesting that Chinese language is the only language I know that places W-E first. Japanese language places N-S first. I have no idea as to Korean and Vietnamese languages.

How do cultures order north-south and east-west?

How do they order front-rear and left-right? -- Toytoy (talk) 16:18, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Hungarian fits the "N-S first languages". There are more interlanguage links to cardinal direction possibly leading you to some more answers. Rosa ventorum the Latin version of compass rose shows several interesting roses, where the intermediate directions have their own special names. ---Sluzzelin talk 21:25, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Side note - remember that many smaller languages from premodern cultures don't have a cultural analogue to N/E/S/W. Steewi (talk) 04:10, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

It's N-S first for all other Slavic languages I know or figured out from WP's links (cs, pl, ru, sh, bg).—Emil J. 12:12, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Asterisk and interpretation

Hello,

Newsweek's recent US issue, Sep 6, 2010, says this on the cover in stark red and white lettering against a black background:

The making of a terrorist-coddling warmongering wall street-loving socialistic godless muslim president*

and then beneath, it says in small lettering:

* who isn't actually any of those things

In English, doesn't this mean that Newsweek says he isn't actually the President, because of where the asterisk is? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lantern Red (talk • contribs) 22:04, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

If one reads it super-literally, yes it could mean that. But consider the alternative: if the asterisk was placed after 'muslim', the meaning would still be unclear, as it would not be certain which of the preceding "those things" it included. Presuming it's referring to Obama, nobody in their right mind would be unaware he's the president (although some deny he's the legitimate president) - so I think it's fair enough to put the asterisk where it is, in the certain knowledge that nobody would read it to mean that his de facto presidency is being denied (even if his de jure presidency is denied, by some). After all, there'd be no point in calling someone a 'warmongering president', for example, if they did not first accept he was the president. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 22:17, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

In any case, 'not actually any of those things' means '[he] is actually none of those things', with 'those' referring to all of the nouns/adjectives in the sentence preceding the asterisk. Simple as that. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 00:17, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Which would be the super-literal interpretation to which I referred in my opening sentence. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 00:59, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

I'd parse it as " The making of a [adjectives] [noun]*", "*to whom none of those adjectives apply" . I don't think I would have taken it to be de-presidentifying him until you mentioned that. Lexicografía (talk) 01:31, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Well, he isn't the making of a president. He is a president. There's a difference there. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 10:59, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Right. The "making of" refers to the adjectives, not the noun. Lexicografía (talk) 12:11, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Not so sure about that -- it's an allusion to the famous old Theodore H. White books: The Making of the President, 1960 etc. AnonMoos (talk) 15:29, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

That book is about the 1960 election which made JFK president. He wasn't president during the election. Actually, is the article in Newsweek about how Barack Obama became president, or is it something else? This has not been made clear from the start, unfortunately. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 15:36, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes; I was only referring to this particular sentence. Lexicografía (talk) 16:59, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Actually, thinking about this again, the word 'who' in the second sentence refers back to the word 'president', meaning he must be the president in order for the second sentence's statement that the [other] words in the first sentence are not true be true. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 15:28, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Another answer to the original question is "No, because this is language, not logic, and pragmatics are at least as important as grammar in understanding language. --ColinFine (talk) 19:06, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

September 5

French for 'Bless you'

Wiktionary lists 'à vos souhaits' as the french for 'bless you'. I have a few questions about this: 1. would 'à Dieu vous bénisse' and 'santé' be considered acceptable alternatives (if so, can I trespass upon you to add them? I'm totally confused by wiktionary's translation thingy)? and 2. how is 'à vos souhaits' pronounced (with regards to intonation especially)? I've seen souhait transcribed /swɛ/ - is this the complete pronunciation, or is there a trace of the vowel in 'sou-'? 76.199.167.204 (talk) 00:37, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

I think "à vos souhaits" only really translates as "bless you" when responding to a sneeze. The more specific English translation of "à vos souhaits" would be "Gesundheit"... -- AnonMoos (talk) 03:09, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

I have the same intuition as AnonMoos--it seems like just a sneeze term. You also hear the less formal à tes souhaits. As for pronunciation, the stress falls on the last syllable (as is usually the case in French); [swɛ] is probably the most accurate transcription for "souhaits", but [suwɛ] would also be accurate (it depends on the speaker and the situation), the [u] (<ou>) is part of the word's underlying form but is usually elided in rapid speech. (That is also something common in French; for instance, je ne sais pas [ʒə nə se pa], for "I don't know", often becomes [ʃe pa].) rʨanaɢ (talk) 18:11, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Agree with most of this - but one doesn't really stress the last syllable in French, stress being very different in French from English, as explained at French_pronunciation#Stress. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 164.36.38.240 (talk) 20:54, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Off-topic discussion. rʨanaɢ (talk) 18:11, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

English? Dbfirs 06:51, 5 September 2010 (UTC) "Gesundheit" is a term widely (but not solely) used in parts of America (directly loaned from the German). [It is practically unheard of in the UK.] - Jarry1250 [Humorous? Discuss.] 07:12, 5 September 2010 (UTC) I wouldn't say it was unheard of in the UK, because we are bombarded with American TV. We just never say it. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 10:56, 5 September 2010 (UTC) Being British, KageTora, (cough, cough) I disagree. People don't tend to sneeze in American TV shows, so only a small minority of people here understand. Unless it happens to be common in Liverpool than here in East Anglia. - Jarry1250 [Humorous? Discuss.] 13:39, 5 September 2010 (UTC) I didn't mean to imply that people sneeze in the majority of American TV shows, and that they are more often than not greeted with 'Gesundheit'. I was meaning that the majority of people in the UK will have heard it from American TV shows at some time or another, due to the number of American TV shows we have here. I am pretty sure that I myself must have heard it often enough to have known what it meant before I even studied German. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 13:55, 5 September 2010 (UTC) FWIW, my experience is that everyone in or with a family connection to the British Army understands (and sometimes uses) "Gesundheit!", because a large proportion of the British Army are at some stage stationed in Germany (often accompanied by their dependent relatives - which is why I used to live there) and consequently acquire and maintain its usage. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 14:15, 5 September 2010 (UTC) "The German-born children only speak a little English, but they can already say 'Kindergarten'." JIP | Talk 10:03, 5 September 2010 (UTC) "Gesundheit" and "Bless you" are the most common American responses to a sneeze. Most of us wouldn't have a clue how to pronounce "à vos souhaits", but "Gesundheit" looks fairly obvious. Plus, it kind of sounds like a sneeze itself. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 14:26, 5 September 2010 (UTC) Sometimes spelled "gazoontite" by people who have no idea that it's German. By the way, there's an article Gesundheit... AnonMoos (talk) 15:24, 5 September 2010 (UTC) One time a friend posted on Facebook that she was about to sneeze. I replied "Gesundheit" and her friend corrected me with something like "you spelled kzutight wrong". Lexicografía (talk) 16:58, 5 September 2010 (UTC) Cute. One semi-common misconception is that "Gesundheit" means "God bless you". It actually just means "health" (as with the Spanish response to a sneeze, "salud"). Leave it to the Germans to use 3 syllables where we use 1. However, what it literally means is "soundness" (along with the frequently-used "ge-" prefix that a German expert would need to step in here and explain). ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 17:35, 5 September 2010 (UTC) ... for certain values of 'English'. "Gesundheit" is not part of British English. --ColinFine (talk) 19:10, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

To answer the first question asked here, "à (que would be grammatically correct) Dieu vous bénisse" is never used. "Santé" is a common informal translation but is, I believe, used mostly outside of France. MLauba ^(Talk) 08:56, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Jackeen?

[2]: What's a jackeen? Everard Proudfoot (talk) 01:09, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

It is a mildly pejorative term for a person from Dublin -- the word is defined at Wiktionary. Looie496 (talk) 01:40, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

And you can see that entry here. If I may, where does the term come from? Dismas|^(talk) 08:06, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Bad poetry

What's it called when a poet (or a doggerel writer) takes liberties with the ordering of a sentence, in order to achieve the desired rhyme or scansion? For instance, crambo mentions a James Boswell poem with the line "Take Punch made of rum that is double" instead of "made of double rum", and a Robert Burns poem that says "I to the crambo-jingle fell" instead of "I fell to the crambo-jingle". The use of "did go" instead of "went" is a common one. The jarring quality of these rearrangements isn't always caused by split infinitives, though. You might put an adjective after the noun, or otherwise massage the sentence into an awkward shape. 213.122.53.53 (talk) 09:01, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Artistic license more specifically poetic license.--93.241.219.33 (talk) 10:13, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

I guess. I looked at that article already, but was disappointed. The two examples from Shakespeare are quite tame, and not at all offensive. I'm interested to know how bad it can get. 81.131.37.131 (talk) 10:38, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

The term inversion is frequently used for such departures from "normal" word order; but if you want to be fancy, you can call the device anastrophe. (Sometimes hyperbaton is used with this meaning.) When one feels that the word order is particularly awkward, one might call it cacosyntheton. Deor (talk) 14:49, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, those are some good words. :) 213.122.1.99 (talk) 06:56, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't understand why you regard those as jarring (and you've quoted no split infinitives). The result can be grotesque when perpetrated by a bad poet (such as William McGonagall), but I find little wrong with the examples you've given. --ColinFine (talk) 19:13, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

I thought "I to the crambo-jingle fell" was a split infinitive, but now I see that it doesn't count because "fell" is in the past tense. (Why does that matter to the concept? Why was the concept of a split infinitive ever thought to matter at all? Who knows.) I couldn't remember what an infinitive is, and I know splitting them isn't actually a bad thing, but intuitively, what seems jarring about these lines is their quality of split-ness. If this was a natural way to speak in the 18th century then I forgive them. I just hate it when people assume poetry entails talking like Yoda. Sometimes bizarre word order, in amateur poetry, isn't even justified by the need to force rhymes or scansion. It just seems to be a style people adopt when they want their words to appear poetical. When they want poetical their words to appear. Ugh. 213.122.6.209 (talk) 08:24, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

There's no infinitive in that at all: "to the crambo-jingle" is a phrase in it, not "to ... fell". As for why they ever mattered, see split infinitive#History of the controversy: a matter of fashion, basically, and no more explicable than any other rule of fashion.

But you're right that it is sometimes "just ... a style people adopt when they want their words to appear poetical". It's very much parallel to the way that some people speak when they want to sound official - using "commence" instead of "begin", for example. --ColinFine (talk) 20:04, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

What does the word "udderly" mean?

When I was listening the podcast of Scientific American-60 seconds,I find the word "udderly" hardly being understanded.

The text is as follows,"The veterinary medicine prize was given for finding that cows that have names make more milk than those who remain anonymous. Another study that’s udderly original. The medicine prize went to a physician who, for fifty years, cracked the knuckles on only his left hand to test his mother’s contention that knuckle-cracking causes arthritis."

Can any one do me a favor? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivanxia1988 (talk • contribs) 09:35, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

A pun on udder? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.171.56.13 (talk) 09:39, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, a pun on "udder" and "utterly". DuncanHill (talk) 09:43, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

I expect this is in reference to the IgNobel Prizes, just in case anybody is puzzled. Looie496 (talk) 16:22, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

It's a very old pun that also calls to mind this Tom Swifty joke: "That's not a bull", he uddered. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:32, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

that reminds me of the old joke about the first rule of working on a dairy farm: If you can't tell a bull from a cow, don't start milking. --Ludwigs2 22:56, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Should "the" be used with abbreviations such as NOAA

I am guessing that when writing initals such as AMA (American Medical Association), pronounced A - M - A, one would say the AMA, however whan writing initals such as NOAA (The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), pronounced noah, or OSHA, pronounced o-sha, one does not use the "the". Is that correct? Gandydancer (talk) 11:39, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

That's certainly always how one hears these things on the news. Maybe someone with a style guide could confirm, though. - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 12:18, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

(ec) Yes. There are some what I like to call 'true acronyms' (spoken as a single word rather than as separate letters) that take 'the', but the above are not examples of them. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 12:22, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Both acronyms and initialisms can take "the" but only some do, by usage and convention. There is no rule. Dbfirs 17:02, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

But initials for businesses, like IBM or DHL, do not take a "the," even when read as individual letters. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 19:49, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

For quick examples, one says "NATO" (usually spelt "Nato" in the British press) but "the U.N." (as well as "the NAACP, and "the ACLU", and, at least its commonest meanings, "the N.R.A." But note that while "the BBC" and "the CBC" take an article, ITV, NBC, CBS, ABC (United States), PBS and CNN don't, even though they don't form pronounceable words like "Nato". I wonder if the Australian Broadcasting Corporation's acronym, also ABC, and SABC (the South African Broadcasting Corporation) take articles like the BBC and the CBC, or drop them like ABC for the American Broadcasting Company. Wikipedia's article on the Australian Broadcasting Corp. suggests that they do take "the". —— Shakescene (talk) 20:08, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Oh yes, always "the ABC". Except when used as a descriptor - "ABC staff are taking part in a mass walkout over the issue of ...". Or when it's referred to as "Auntie ABC". -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 20:34, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

CBC doesn't always take an article. If referring to the television or radio channels, or something broadcast on them, it doesn't ("what's on CBC?"). If it's the actual corporation, it usually does ("the CBC announces blah blah blah"...and in that case it is also sometimes called "The Mother Corp"). Adam Bishop (talk) 01:58, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

To me it seems fairly random which initialisms/acronyms are used with 'the' and which aren't. I more often don't use it than do; of the examples given so far, the only ones I'd use "the" with would be AMA, UN, and NAACP. I wonder if it has to do with familiarity (some of these I've never heard of, and so by default wouldn't use the article.) Lexicografía (talk) 20:40, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

American speakers generally don't use an article in front of BBC. Googlemeister (talk) 18:40, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Quick translation of Russian (from 1917)

File:Демонстрация работниц Путиловского завода в первый день Февральской революции 1917.jpg

Hey all. Would some good soul mind transcribing and translating the slogans on the two banners from the file on the right for the file description? They're from the February Revolution of 1917, an article I'm working on. Thanks, - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 12:16, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

I asked a friend of mine, who's Russian. His response was:

• One on the left is "Feed the kids - defenders of the motherland."
• One on the right is "Increase payments to the soldiers' families - defenders of freedom and world peace"

Vimescarrot (talk) 14:30, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Very good. Straightforward and heartfelt, but not nearly as catchy as "We will bury you!". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:39, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Are you confusing February and October? AnonMoos (talk) 15:19, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Not at all. I'm saying the Boys of October had much better slogans. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 16:04, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Great, thank you (and you friend!). Do they have / Could they knock out a quick Russian transcription to add to the file description page, to make it more easily findable? Also, would it be misleading to change the word for "kids" to "boys"? It undoubtedly refers to soldiers, so I'm thinking "boys" is probably more idiomatic. - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 14:50, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Here's a transliteration:

• Kormitye detyei zaschitnikov rodiny
• Pribavku paika semyam soldat zashchitnikam svobody i narodnogo mira.

Note: There’s a spelling error in the left-hand flag. The 3rd word is spelt з-а-с-ч- ...(z-a-s-ch- ...), but the 3rd and 4th letters are more properly spelt with the single letter щ, transliterated as shch. The other flag uses the same word (albeit in a different case) – see the first word on the 3rd line, which correctly uses the letter щ. I think this error needs to be noted and preserved, hence the subtle difference (underlined) in the way I've transliterated the root part of these 2 words. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 20:28, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

An amendment of the first translation: not "Feed the children - defenders of the motherland", but rather "Feed [plural imperative] the children of the defenders of the motherland", because защитников is the plural genitive form of защитник. Since this is a photo of 1917, the text follows the orthographical rules as they applied before the spelling reform of 1918. The slogan goes: Кормите дѣтей засчитниковъ родины. Without the spelling mistake, it would be Кормите дѣтей защитниковъ родины. And here it is with the modern orthography: Кормите детей защитников родины. --Theurgist (talk) 00:30, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

"I'm finished working with these pictures"

Windows XP Scanner And Camera Wizard offers as a menu option: "I'm finished working with these pictures". Shouldn't it be "I've finished working with these pictures" or is the former correct in American-english? Thanks 92.15.30.74 (talk) 13:58, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

The phrase has a different nuance meaning in British English and so sounds odd in this context, but it is normal in American English. If Bill Gates had been English, the Wizard would have said "I've finished working ..." Dbfirs 15:05, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

"Finished" is being used as a stative rather than an activity verb (see Lexical aspect). Compare to "I'm done" vs. "*I've done". rʨanaɢ (talk) 15:09, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

True, but this difference in grammar is separate from the lexical differentiation. "I am finished" in British English is rather like "Je suis fini" in French. Dbfirs 16:00, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

"I have finished" is technically more accurate and clear. "I am finished" or "I am done", by themselves, have an unintended double meaning, as "finished" or "done" are colloquialisms for "defeated" or "dead" (hence the humor in a famous Zsa Zsa Gabor quote). Technically, it's the work itself that's finished, and "I am finished" is more of a colloquialism. But the addendum "...with [whatever activity]" should take away any misunderstanding. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:24, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

"I'm finished working with these pictures" sounds like something a politician might say when presented with photos of him in a compromising situation. -- Q Chris (talk) 08:47, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Four-week month

Did there used to be a name for a four-week month of 28 days in the UK, in contrast to a calendar month? I have a feeling that there was, but I cannot remember what the name was. (I do not mean February). Thanks 92.15.30.74 (talk) 14:09, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Do you mean sidereal month (not exactly 28 days), or are you looking for a more colloquial term, like fortnight is used for 14 days? --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 14:20, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

The colloquial term. 92.15.30.74 (talk) 14:46, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

I only know of "four-week month". Lunar month is slightly longer. Dbfirs 16:16, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Asterisks

Thank you for answering my question earlier about asterisks. My question now is also about asterisks. Is an asterisk, to show there is a foot note, universal on all languages? Do most all languages use asterisks for this? What is used in Japanese? Lantern Red (talk) 16:17, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

This is more a typographical standard rather than a language standard. Even within English, different publications might use different standards; for instance, some use asterisks and daggers, while others might use numbered or lettered footnotes. Off the top of my head, a lot of Chinese books use numbered footnotes in little circles (like ①, but usually superscript). rʨanaɢ (talk) 16:33, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

In Japanese, I have seen on rare occasions the asterisk used - very rarely, though. More usually I have seen the same as Rjanag says - ^①②③, and so on. Note, that the asterisk that is produced on a keyboard when using Japanese IME and typing shift+8 (＊) is not used in this way, at least to the best of my knowledge. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 01:44, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

The rather pretty symbol ※ is sometimes used in Japanese for a purpose similar to asterisks, although I can't remember exactly how it works - I don't think the reference text is placed in an actual footnote as such; I think it's more like a bullet point with a particular meaning of "reference follows". 213.122.1.99 (talk) 07:08, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Yes, that is for adding extra notes at the end - like 'Note 1', 'Note 2', etc., in English. If a specific part of the text needed you to reference a specific note, then it would say 以下参照 ('see below') or something similar. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 11:48, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Word

I need a word that describes a strong burning desire to rub oneself against another girl who is beautiful and adorable and lovely and perfect, but one would never do something sexual to her. She is cute like an adorable kitten. The word I want is somewhere between lust, cuddle and worship. Adorfui (talk) 22:34, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Frottage? Adam Bishop (talk) 00:39, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Sorry Adorfui, but rubbing yourself against someone tends to be construed as something sexual, whether you want it to or not. You should probably avoid doing it in public places. rʨanaɢ (talk) 01:27, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

I read the question as saying they wanted to do that, but don't. "but one would never do something sexual to her" 71.170.245.203 (talk) 10:54, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

The OP needs to be more specific about what he intends to rub on what, as there is the "sexual touch" and the "non-sexual touch". For example, rubbing his left arm against her right shoulder (or vice versa) might not be all that sexual. Or shaking hands or giving a high five. Then again, they might be, if the guy is as horny [and by the way, that's the word he's looking for] as he says. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:57, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

The OP clearly stated they WERE NOT going to rub anything on anything only that they felt the desire to, so what they want to rub on what is irrelevant. In reply to the OP, the only word I can think of which fits the description is "waifu", used not in the Japanese way which means wife but in the Wapanese way which means "adorable kittenish want to protect and cuddle", usually extended towards anime characters. 79.88.221.54 (talk) 21:08, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Also, the OP talks about rubbing oneself against "another" girl, so it looks like the OP is also female. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 21:17, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

September 6

French gerund

In French gerunds are in the form 'en [participle]', i.e., 'en donnant' for the gerund of 'donner'. How are these used? For this example, would we say 'L'en donnant des cadeaux' for 'the giving of gifts'? Thanks. 76.229.214.25 (talk) 00:30, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

No, in that case you just use the infinitive as a noun, "le donner de cadeaux" (although sometimes there is already a noun derived from the verb, like here I think "le don de cadeaux" is more correct). "En donnant cadeaux" would mean "while giving gifts" or "by giving gifts". Adam Bishop (talk) 00:38, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

"En donnant cadeaux" is a subordinate clause, and needs to be attached to a main clause... AnonMoos (talk) 03:57, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

The upcoming Hebrew year

The Hebrew calendar year 5771 begins this week. If I understand correctly, the year will be written תשעא in Hebrew numerals. How is that pronounced? Tasha'a? Thanks -- Mwalcoff (talk) 00:49, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Most of the Hebrew speakers would simply say: "tav shin 'ayin aleph". If you insist on pronouncing it as one word, you will say "tash'a" (note that I've used here the sign ' for denoting the consonant 'ayin). Eliko (talk) 01:29, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

So would 5770 and 5771 have the same pronunciation if spoken as words? -- Mwalcoff (talk) 02:28, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

In formal pronunciation there would probably be a syllable-break difference: ta-sha vs. tash-a... AnonMoos (talk) 03:46, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

It depend on whether you know to pronounce correcly the 'ayin, as a different consonant from aleph. Most of the Hebrew speakers know how to pronounce the 'ayin correctly, though not using this pronunciation in everyday life, so if a Hebrew speaker doesn't say tav shin 'ayin aleph, then they will probably say tash'a, while pronouncing the 'ayin correctly (see our correspondent articles about both consonants and about their correct pronunciation). I personally pronounce 5770: tesha' (i.e. tehsha' ), because the acronym of 5770 (as one word) is an existent Hebrew word pronounced tehsha' (that means: nine), and I pronounce 5771: tav shin 'ayin aleph, like most of the Hebrew speakers. If I had to pronounce 5771 as one word, I would probably pronounce it: tash'a, which is not only different from tesha' (the way I pronounce 5770) but is also different from: tasha' (the way you suggest for pronouncing it). If you both pronounce 'ayin like aleph, and also want to pronounce the year as one word, and you don't want to pronounce 5770 as I pronounce it (i.e. tesha' ), then you will probably have to adopt AnonMoos's suggestion, but I never heard people say tash-a (i.e. not tash-'a but rather tash-a). Eliko (talk) 10:09, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Eliko -- insofar as the aleph א and ayin ע consonants have any realization in mainstream non-Sephardizing non-archaizing modern Israeli Hebrew pronunciation, it pretty much comes down to changing the syllable breaks. I don't know about year gematria acronymic pronunciations, but in more ordinary words, the difference in pronunciation between לירות ("liras/pounds" or "to shoot") and לראות ("to see") is [li-rot] vs. [lir-ot]. Of course, even this distinction can disappear in casual pronunciation... AnonMoos (talk) 16:59, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

AnonMoos -- you're absolutely correct as far as "lir-ot" is concerned. However most of the Hebrew speakers, who really don't use the correct 'ayin in everyday life (although a considerable minority may use it in their everyday life), would try to pronounce the 'ayin whenever pronouncing it like aleph may bring about a misundersanding, e.g. in: "I'm destitute", for making a distinction between ani ("I'm") and 'ani ("destitute"). They may say ani for both "I" and "destitute", when no misunderstanding may arise (e.g. in: "I saw a wretch"). With regard to the 5771st year, they may say: tash'a, or even tash-'a (if not: tav shin 'ayin aleph), but I've never heard tash-a, probably beacuse tash-'a is clearer (most of the speakers being able to pronounce the 'ayin correctly), and because tav shin 'ayin aleph is much more common. Eliko (talk) 19:57, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

So what is the "proper pronunciation of ayin?" In Hebrew School in the U.S., we were told that both aleph and ayin are "silent letters." -- Mwalcoff (talk) 20:33, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Hear. Eliko (talk) 10:51, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Sounds like a French "r." Certainly nothing like I was taught. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 23:30, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

No. Hear the French r (which is identical to the r in Modern Hebrew), and now listen again to the Hebrew 'ayin. Eliko (talk) 08:17, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

French Language learning

OK I know I should be studying instead of hanging around here, so let me ask this quick question then get out of your hair. My school recently lost the French program :( I've already had 4 years and I want to continue learning French on my own, but obviously I won't have many contexts to actually have a spoken conversation. My best resources are limited to recordings of native speakers talking (via the internet and the library) and to other French-speakers on Facebook/chat where I can type out conversations. What would be the best way for me to continue my French education without spending any money? 76.230.209.53 (talk) 01:55, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Get Skype so you can have real conversations with your heretofore online friends. Read a lot—that's my advice for building vocabulary in any language. Lastly, look for a local French society. Even Milwaukee has its French Alliance. PЄTЄRS J VЄСRUМВА ►TALK 02:13, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

There must be web sites intended for the use of people learning French, where among other things they can ask questions. Use Google..... Michael Hardy (talk) 06:33, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

RFI have free podcasts on their website on a huge variety of different subjects, including all their news bulletins. They have a Journal Français Facile podcast which comes with a transcript, this might be too easy for you though. Tinfoilcat (talk) 10:35, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

This might interest you, [3] . Rishi.bedi (talk) 19:11, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

communication

what is impression management in non-verbal communication?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tapyboi (talk • contribs) 06:12, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

See Impression management -- Q Chris (talk) 10:30, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

give up, etc.

To give up does not mean to donate in a vertical direction. To set out to do something does not mean to place things in an external location. Etc. The English language has lots of phrasal verbs of the kind that consist of a verb followed by a small word that in other contexts may usually be used as either a preposition, an adverb, or a conjunction. In some cases it matters whether the latter word comes before or after the object of the verb; e.g. "I see through him" does not mean the same thing as "I see him through". And then there are cases like "I overlooked it" and "I looked it over".

Two questions:

• Is there a list of such verbs somewhere? On the internet or in a book?
• Is this a result of the Germanic roots of English? In particular, is it really the same phenomenon that manifests itself in the form of verbs with separable prefixes in German?

Michael Hardy (talk) 06:39, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Regarding your first question, in the "external links" section of our article on phrasal verbs there are some links which seem to be lists of phrasal verbs, although I can't vouch for their completeness. Maybe one of them will help you? — QuantumEleven 07:16, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Some books I happen to have include "A Dictionary of Idioms for the Deaf" (ISBN 0-8120-0613-5) and "English Verbal Idioms" by Frederick T. Ward (ISBN 0-671-47894-X ??). As for the historical linguistics question, English has two residues of the ancient Indo-European adverbial / adpositional modifying verb construction: Where the preposition is compounded as a prefix to the verb ("to understand"), and where it's a separate word after the verb ("to give up")... AnonMoos (talk) 17:10, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

The word "up" is sometimes used a a preposition ("He went up the ladder") but in "give up", I don't think it makes sense to call it a preposition. Wikipedia's article on phrasal verbs does say that things like "give up" are related to German separable prefixes. Michael Hardy (talk) 00:52, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

"I see through him" is not exactly a phrasal verb like "look up", "call up", etc. For true phrasal verbs, a pronoun can't follow the particle (c.f. "*look up him" vs. "*look up his number", "*call up her" vs. "call up her roommate", etc.). Also, in phrasal verbs the particle is not actually a preposition and doesn't contribute much semantically to the verb, whereas in "see through" there is definitely some semantic contribution of the "through". rʨanaɢ (talk) 17:15, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Osmosis

What, if anything, is the verb form of "osmosis"? Osmose? Osmote? Osmosize? And if there is no verb form, why the bleep not? 71.104.106.143 (talk) 07:16, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Wiktionary has osmose Rojomoke (talk) 07:21, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. 71.104.106.143 (talk) 07:35, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

"Osmose" definitely feels like a back-formation (in particular, there's a mild desire to laugh at it. Back-formations do that. I remember how hilarious an Arab thought it was when I told him the etymology of the Swahili word darasa.). Is it? Michael Hardy (talk) 17:11, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Have no idea on that, but one often-repeated example is that English "keep left" was supposedly borrowed into Swahili as kipilefiti "traffic sign", and the ki- interpreted as a class prefix, giving the plural vipilefiti... AnonMoos (talk) 17:22, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

If you understand ki- and vi- in Swahili, then you might appreciate this one: the plural of "darasa" (classroom) is "madarasa", from the Arabic "madrassa". Michael Hardy (talk) 00:49, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Osmose is actually the older word; it was originally a noun, then turned into a verb, while the noun changed to "osmosis". Lexicografía (talk) 17:58, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Why is "Jew boy" considered derogatory?

It is perfectly acceptable to refer to a boy who is Christian as a Christian boy, a boy who is a Muslim faith as a Muslim boy, and the same for most other religions. Why is it considered offensive to refer to a boy who is a Jew as a Jew boy? Is it the history of usage or is there an alternative meaning? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.38.213.226 (talk) 07:22, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Why is "Democrat Party" considered derogatory? -- AnonMoos (talk) 08:42, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

It's considered offensive because it's intended to be offensive, regardless of the claims of the speakers notwithstanding. Everard Proudfoot (talk) 20:31, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

The adjective form of the noun "Jew" is "Jewish," and there's nothing at all wrong with referring to a boy who is a Jew as a Jewish boy. "Jew boy" has historically been used as a taunt or insult. 71.104.106.143 (talk) 07:34, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Consider, although they do not have the same history colouring them, "Christianity boy" and "Islam boy". While they lack the powerful feeling of having been used despicably in the past, they still have less dignity and more of a derogatory feel than "Christian boy" and "Muslim boy". 86.164.78.91 (talk) 14:57, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Those would correspond to "Judaism boy," surely. And actually I think they sound like superheroes. The difference between "Jew boy" and "Muslim boy" is that Muslim is definitely a noun adjunct, and Jew might not be, since there exists the adjective Jewish. Calling somebody by an unexpected noun often sounds like an insult, desk-reader. 81.131.68.139 (talk) 16:06, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

I agree with 71.104.106.143. AnonMoos points to a parallel in American politics. "Democrat" is a noun ("I am a Democrat," as in, "a member of the party") but is often used as an adjective where Democrats themselves would use "Democratic" ("the Democrat Party" rather than "the Democratic Party"). Former Senator Bob "Democrat Wars" Dole, always adept with the rhetorical shiv, enjoyed both the usage and the reaction of his more easily-riled opponents.

When the people being discussed wouldn't use the same label, and when the one using it leaqps quickly onto the High Horse of Disingenuousness ("Isn't the boy a Jew? Isn't the senator a Democrat?"), there's more going on than simply description. --- OtherDave (talk) 16:14, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

"Jew boy" has often been used as an insult, and is not often used in any other sense, so it is insulting. A Jewish mother would more likely refer to her son as a "Jewish boy," or "Steve." It isn't insulting because of the grammar- it's insulting simply because the people who use it are using it as an insult. In the same way, no one uses "Democrat Party" except Republicans who are trying to be insulting, and so it is insulting. The insult is in the intent, and in the most common usage. Black Boy, which is neutral when referring to a child but insulting when referring to an adult, is a pretty good novel. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 18:03, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Hmmmm...I've lived in US all my life and never realized that "Democrat Party" is considered derogatory. Of course, I never heard of "kike" until that Michael Jackson song. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 18:12, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Being oblivious to the meaning of insults is not necessarily a bad thing. :) Republicans say "Democrat Party" to imply that the Democrats don't believe in "democracy", while the G.O.P. supposedly does. (G.O.P. stands for "Grand Old Party", but Pat Paulsen said it stood for "Group of Old People"). ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:37, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Early documented usage in English was already derogatory, according to M.E. Sharpe, An Encyclopedia of Swearing: The Social History of Oaths, Profanity, Foul Language, and Ethnic Slurs in the English-Speaking World, 2006 - Language Arts & Disciplines, page 270:

"The literal origin of jew boy is explained in a British Police document of 1796. ”Jew boys Boys . . . go out every morning loaded with counterfeit copper, which they exchange for bad silver, to be afterwards coloured anew, and again put into a circulation.“ Within a few decades the term was used offensively of grown-ups. The sense that the Jews were ”different“ or ”alien“ is shown in the considerable number of compounds such as Jew-butcher, Jew-physician, Jew-pedlar, and Jew-fencer (buyer or seller, generally of stolen goods)." ---Sluzzelin talk 18:31, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Note: I mistakenly spelled "boy" with a minuscule initial letter. The text I was quoting has "Jew Boys", and so do other quotes of this document I found. I'm pointing this out because the capitalization might be evidence that it is indeed used as a label, not as a synonym for "Jewish boys". ---Sluzzelin talk 07:51, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

As a rule, referring to any adult male as a 'boy' will be considered insulting, regardless of race, because it implies that the person should (for some reason) be treated as incompetent and irresponsible, without the consideration and respect that adults receive. Adding a racial qualifier of any sort only serves to imply that the man in question should be treated as a child because he belongs to that race, which is an inherent racial slur. the same is true of 'girl', of course, but most societies are historically less sensitive about asserting that women should be treated as children (see patriarchy). --Ludwigs2 18:54, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Ludwigs2: I don't know where you live, but here in the US it's common for women 18 and over to be referred to as girls in casual settings and not considered offensive or to mean they should be treated as children. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 19:12, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

In America, notably in the south, white men often refer to other white men as "boy", and it's considered folksy and friendly; but calling a black man "boy" (especially with a certain tone of voice) is highly insulting. Likewise, across America, women often refer to each other as "girl", while men have largely gotten away from that except in certain contexts that are considered safe. "Girlfriend" and "boyfriend" are still in common usage regardless of age. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:34, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Even "man" isn't used a lot in informal contexts. People tend to use "guy" instead. I'm in the midwest US. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 20:38, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Guys and gals. Informally, I think I hear "man" more often as part of an exclamation than anything else, like, "Oh, man!" or "Hey, man!" (much the way "dude" was used before it took on a more specific implication). ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:51, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

"parashah" + "portion" etymology

Is there an etymological link between these two similar-sounding and similar-meaning words? ╟─TreasuryTag►estoppel─╢ 12:04, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

According to Wiktionary Portion traces back to a (similar) Latin word, which strongly suggests it's Indo-European. Parashah seems to have a long history as a Hebrew word (predating the Greek and later Roman hegemony over the region), and there is an evidently cognate Pasha in Arabic, another Semitic (i.e. not Indo-European) language, suggesting this is unlikely to be an IE->Semitic loanword. Such resemblances in sound and meaning between two words in unrelated languages are statistically likely to crop up occasionally. However, a definitive answer would require the input of a knowlegeable historical linguist. (87.81 posting from . . .) 87.82.229.195 (talk) 13:02, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

The word "Portion" didn't even have a "sh" or [š] sound until relatively recent centuries. In French, it had an [s] sound, in early medieval French or Late Vulgar Latin it had a [ts] sound, while in classical Latin it had a [t] sound. Also, Hebrew etymologies proceed by triconsonantal roots, except in certain out-of-the-norm cases (loanwords, etc.), so the basis of parasha is actually p-r-sh... AnonMoos (talk) 16:35, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Looking for a Spanish word

I've been trying to find a word in Spanish that has the same shades of meaning as English "run". I.e. running, and perhaps (but not necessarily) running away. Do any of y'all know of such a word? Lexicografía (talk) 12:10, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Do you mean a single verb that is used in all the different ways that "run" is used in English? Or just a subset? Because "run" is pretty diverse:[4] It comes from old English, and the common ground of all of the usages is the idea of "flowing", as with a stream or river. My Spanish/English dictionary has a full page of different words that relate to the English "run". Correr, "to run", seems to be a fairly diverse word in Spanish, and its root connection to English words like "courier" and "course" seem fairly obvious. However, to run something in the sense of managing a business are terms like dirigir (to direct, also cognate with "dirigible") and administrar. Likewise, idioms such as "run away (from)" don't use those terms, they use more specific terms, such as fugarse (de) (obvious cognate with "fugitive") and evadir (obvious cognate with "evade"). You can also use correr and fluir for "to flow". I don't think there's a single word that answers your question, but the family under correr might be the closest. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:21, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Note that there are no phrasal verbs in Spanish (or if there are, they are tiny exceptions). English creates lots of verbs from a core verb and prepositions, Spanish uses instead a huge number of different verbs, each one with its own specific meaning. MBelgrano (talk) 20:38, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Indeed. You can go back to the old English root and see what the original usage was, and the subsequent diverse usages can generally be tied together. And of course we use both approaches in English, it being a hodge-podge of Latin-based and Germanic-based words. We "run" things or we "direct" things or we "administer" things. How foreigners ever figure out how to speak English, without going crazy in the process, is a wonder. I noted with some amusement that the book translated "to run well" as ir bien. That literally means "to go well". I wonder if the languages arrived at that expression independently, or if one borrowed from the other. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:44, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

No, not all of English "run"'s senses, just those two. I found "huir" but it doesn't seem to have the sense of merely running, and not running away. Lexicografía (talk) 21:29, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

According to this[5] huir is derived from the Latin fugere, probably via another route than the one that created fugarse. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:38, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

How go languages deal with template messages?

It is quite common for software systems to provide templates for messages, which have parameters.For example a template might say:

Dear ${title} ${surname}
Thank you for your order. Since you have specified that you want to collect the order from a nearby
store, it will be sent to our ${storename} store, the closest to ${address.town}. Please let us know if 
we can assist you or ${spouse-title} ${surname} in the future....

The idea is that a different template could be used for different languages, but the parameters stay the same. Someone pointed out to me that in some languages verbs, etc. change ending depending on the gender of the person, and in others the name ending itself may change depending on the context in the sentence. Is there a way of wording template translations in these languages to avoid this sort of problem? Is it something that people are used to computers "getting wrong" where the language has these additional changes? -- Q Chris (talk) 14:07, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Article is Mail merge, but it doesn't seem to have directly useful info or pointers... AnonMoos (talk) 16:28, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

I would imagine that, when someone creates a Chinese (for example) version of this template, he would have to add a new parameter specifying the gender of the recipient, and that parameter would control the way the pronouns are displayed. As for things like discourse factors you mention, that shouldn't be a problem, since the actual translation from one language to another would have been done by a human and thus any discourse-critical stuff would already be hard-coded into the wording of the template; the only stuff that's variable is stuff linked to the names in the parameters. rʨanaɢ (talk) 16:45, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Chinese, being an isolating language, is easy. The thing is that in order to make it work correctly for inflected languages, the database of recipients would have to contain the complete declension of their names (or at least, some indication of the declension paradigm), and the template would have to do stuff like "Dear ${title-vocative} ${surname-vocative}" and "we can assist you or ${spouse-title-dative} ${surname-spouse-dative}". Sounds like lot of hassle, and like something which could not be readily used for several languages simultaneously. I don't know how they actually do it in practice.—Emil J. 17:04, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

(Yeah, Chinese [traditional] was just the first example I could think of in which the pronouns in question have different variants for genders. For other languages, of course, there are other issues to consider.) rʨanaɢ (talk) 17:21, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

In Finland the usual approach is to word the text so that declined word forms are not necessary. Basically, names are used only to say "Dear {recipient}". It helps that Finnish doesn't have a special vocative form for names. It would probably be too much effort to have data entry clerks enter declined forms of names in any case. 130.188.8.11 (talk) 08:41, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

What is a hyponym to another hyponym?

Dear Wikipedians! I have a problem in my English class... I've been explained the relationship of hypernyms and hyponyms, but a nuisance of a nuance attempted to avoid my focus! What, pray tell me, is a hyponym to another hyponym? Such as... I wouldn't know, "teal" to "aurora", under their hypernym "blue"? If the colours are slightly unlike each other, nevermind please! What I know is they -may- by some stretch be synonyms, but I am more concerned with a hyponym-to-hyponym relationship. Is there a term coined for this yet? If not, can I please get to name it? Badassinym, they would be called. Much obliged for any answer! 88.90.16.109 (talk) 19:28, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

According to the article WordNet, they're "coordinate terms". That's a bit of jargon unique to the context of WordNet, though, I think. Badassinym still has a chance to take root. 213.122.12.95 (talk) 20:30, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

We use "coordinate term" on Wiktionary too. —Internoob (Talk · Cont · Wikt) 22:53, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

If you want to be specific on the fact that there are exactly 2 levels of hyponymy between them, we could coin the phrases grand-hyponym and grand-hypernyms, based on grand daughter / grand-father etc. --Lgriot (talk) 08:07, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Chinese phrase - what is a proper translation?

What is the specific meaning of the phrase 自有永有. The best I can come up with is "perpetual self possession," but I'm sure this is incorrect. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 22:01, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't know the best English way to translate it, but what it seems to mean is basically "innate"--自有 means something is innate and 永有 means it always will be that way. For instance, God's line "I am what I am" from the Old Testament is translated as "我是自有永有的" (I am 自有永有). This search on baidu zhidao (like Yahoo Answers for China) turns up a lot of uses of the term, including one explanation that basically describes it as "something that just is, and will never change, like 2+2=4". rʨanaɢ (talk) 23:52, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

That's very interesting. As a Korean, it's easy to reach the wrong conclusion: in Korean it means "To have freedom forever." I guess it's totally different in Chinese. --Kjoonlee 08:33, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Hm...in [old] Chinese that might be 自由永有? Almost the same but not quite. rʨanaɢ (talk) 18:29, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

It might help if I told you the context in which the phrase was used. The Chinese history forum I belong to has an "off topic" area where anything can be discussed. One member posted an online article about Stephen Hawking's new book where he claims God was not needed to create the universe. I posted that, as an atheist, I am always interested to hear about the most current scientific theory on the subject. Another member posted that my comment "hinted even atheists can not avoid 自有永有." The member is a polite intellectual, so I doubt it was directed in anger. I just want to make sure I have a firm grasp on his implied meaning meaning I reply. --Ghostexorcist (talk) 18:42, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

September 7

You don't dip your bread in, you mean?

What on earth does "You don't dip your bread in, you mean?" mean? The context is an interview written up in a UK newspaper: Morrissey interview: Big mouth strikes again. More fully:

Interviewer: "And presumably it would be a problem now, walking down Deansgate. Because of the fame?"

Morrissey: "Yes, but I don't really do all the things that famous people do."

Interviewer: "You don't dip your bread in, you mean?"

Morrissey: "Yes. That's very well put. I can see why Faber jumped on you."

Clearly I shall never work for Faber --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:04, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

To "dip your bread in"; It seems to be (somewhat rare) British slang for "be involved in" from a quick Google and Google books. Lexicografía (talk) 00:50, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

My guess is that the reference is to the practice of fancy restaurants of giving their guests a pre-appetizer of bread with a dish of very high-end olive oil or some fancy sauce to dip it into. I suppose it means passing up on luxuries that are available as free temptations to famous people. Looie496 (talk) 02:06, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Could it be a reference to Morrissey's famous celibacy? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.171.56.13 (talk) 09:47, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

The general sense of the reported interview is that Morrisey feels he is not acceptable in 'famous' society. For this reason I strongly suspect that The interviewer was referring to an old 'low class' English hadit of dipping bread which was frequently stale into whatever drink was in use in order to soften it. I have even seen it done by modern day 'lower class' people as a way of softening the crust on their bread. As this habit is common knowledge in Britain and as the sense of the comment is about being socially unacceptable, this is the only interpretation that I think fits. Gurumaister (talk) 11:37, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

PS: Dipping a biscuit (US = 'cookie')in one's tea in order to soften it, is still a common habit in Britain and is also not acceptable in 'polite society'. Gurumaister (talk) 11:43, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

There's an article, of course. Bazza (talk) 14:15, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Yeah but that doesn't make sense in the context of the interview snippet quoted by the OP (I also read the interview and wondered about that). What Moz is saying is not that he's not acceptable in famous society, but that he hasn't fallen for many of the trappings of celebrity that other famous people have. The phrase remains a puzzle to me, although I like Looie496's guess. --Viennese Waltz 15:05, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure he was speaking metaphorically. Reading it in context, it seems to me that he's saying he's tempted to partake of the luxuries that fame and wealth allow, but doesn't actually do so. I haven't heard the phrase used that way before (I'm in the UK), but, again from the context, it seems that he congratulated the interviewer for coming up with a phrase that was "well put" and novel. But that's all WP:OR! Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:20, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Reading it again and the comments in this thread, I think I finally get it. The line "I don't really do all the things that famous people do" sounds a little snobbish (especially because Morrissey can come across rather arrogant in interviews), and the interviewer took that one step further by saying, right, you're not like the proles who dip their bread in. (The joke being that Morrissey is from a working class background himself.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.171.56.13 (talk) 19:42, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't think that's right. He's saying "I don't really do all the things that famous people do" and [I] "don't dip [my] bread in.." "Dipping bread" is not something that "proles" do, it's a metaphor covering the things that other famous people do. Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:58, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

In the modern world we have reality TV stars and people who are famous for being famous, so it's certainly possible to look down on the other famous people as being ordinary, gluttonous and crass. (Looking down on them is made easier by being Morrissey, I suspect, to whom looking down on people comes naturally.) 213.122.34.79 (talk) 13:36, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Red (given name)

Under Red (given name) there is an impressive list of people named Red, mostly from the USA. What is the origin of the name Red? Is it a native american name or a translation thereof? Your virtually, 134.96.51.209 (talk) 09:08, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

The three people I know called Red all got the name as a nickname because of their red hair. A look at many of the links under Red (given name) show Red in quote marks, telling us that it's a nickname, so quite possibly the same connection. As an Aussie, I have no idea about any Native American use of the name. I suspect that's an entirely different thing. (Of course, again as an Aussie, I also know two people with red hair who have the nickname Blue. We do that kind of thing here.) HiLo48 (talk) 09:27, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

I'd agree that it usually has to do with hair color. Red Buttons mentions his red hair and Red Barber says that he was first called the "Ol' Redhead". I didn't see anything about his hair but he did work as an announcer for the Cincinnati Reds. So there's a possible (probable) connection there. Although rare(from my experience) for a black man, Redd Foxx had reddish hair and that was actually his stage name and not his legal name. Red Grooms was given the nickname "Red" by a friend according to his article but it doesn't say why. And you're partially right in that there are a few Native American names on the list. Dismas|^(talk) 09:54, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

"Aussie" – that word reminds me of Ossi, a nickname given to former residents of East Germany -- Irene1949 (talk) 09:59, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

So far, I have found one Red < Redmond (which is a place name as a given name, as popular in the anglophone world; or maybe a connection to the Old German name Ratmund), namely Red Symons. As Aussie, incidentally, although born british. 134.96.51.209 (talk) 10:17, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

It could have some connection with the name Rufus. I don't mean the obvious fact that Rufus means 'red' in Latin. But maybe some relatively modern-day people named Rufus were nicknamed 'Red'. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 10:34, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Willow was nicknamed Red by Spike on Buffy the Vampire Slayer. Quadrupedaldiprotodont (talk) 14:10, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Let us not forget Eric the Red, whose son had early American connections, but who was certainly not a Skraeling. 87.81.230.195 (talk) 17:06, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Mocking the "Red Scare" of the 1950s, The Wizard of Id once featured Eric the Red. They asked him why he was called Eric the Red. He said, "You go to a few meetings, and you're marked for life!" ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:31, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

"Red" as a nickname (as with "Whitey") nearly always has to do simply with hair color. It can get funny when guys whose red hair turns gray or white and they're still called "Red". Nothing to do with "redskins" (Native Americans) as such - with one exception I can think of. I recall reading an interview with Redd Foxx, who said his nickname came from being relatively light-skinned, not to do with his hair. He said "Red" was a common nickname among black people for lighter-toned African Americans. He made it a double-d and double-x just as a "brand". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:16, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Must be dating myself, can't believe no one has mentioned Red Skelton yet. PЄTЄRS J VЄСRUМВА ►TALK 17:19, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

He was a great entertainer. There are some youtube clips from his old TV shows. He was popular in radio before that. Another "Red" that comes to mind is Woody Allen, who had reddish hair when he was younger, and in his standup days told of a classmate who taunted him by calling him "Red". He never used that as a nickname, though. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:29, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Red Barber called himself "The Old Redhead". That refers to hair. His broadcasting for the Cincinnati Reds was a coincidence, and their "Red" referred to their stockings - hence their temporary nickname of "Redlegs" during the Red Scare of the 1950s. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:50, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Ballplayers named "Whitey" included Whitey Lockman, Whitey Herzog, and Richie "Whitey" Ashburn. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:52, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

The character in The Shawshank Redemption Ellis Redding is usually called Red by the other characters, presumably adapted from his last name. rʨanaɢ (talk) 18:33, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

The blues pianist Rufus Perryman, who was an African American albino and (I assume) was so named when his condition was recognised at birth, became known as Speckled Red, and his younger brother Willie, also an albino, became known as Piano Red. Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:38, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Re Bugs's comment on "Red" being a common nickname among black people for lighter-tone African Americans. Often, this actually did have something to do with hair color as well. The most famous example is perhaps Malcolm X who was nicknamed "Red" for his reddish hair during childhood and adolescence. Jazz musician Red Rodney was not African American, but he was billed as an African American named Albino Red when touring the South with Charlie Parker's combo (all other members were African American, and they had to pretend that Rodney was too, because of Southern customs of racial segregation on stage during that time. This anecdote is also featured in the movie Bird). ---Sluzzelin talk 19:07, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

I was merely reporting what Redd Foxx said, but it could certainly be true that either reddish hair or reddish skin could encourage that nickname. Same with "Whitey" and "Blondie". You don't hear "Brownie" or "Blackie" too much, probably because those are more common hair colors. (Although there's an old song about women titled "Vanilla, Chocolate and Strawberry".) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:16, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Middle name derivative. This may concern only a very few of the people named "Red". But there is a tradition of giving the mothers family name as a middle name to the firstborn child. (Or similar naming conventions elsewhere.) Then there's another tradition to keep first names or middle names through several generations. These names occasionally got shortened and eroded and some families switched around middle name and first name between generations. So surnames like "Reddick" ended up as someone's middle name or fist name "Red". 99.11.160.111 (talk) 07:58, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Up and down, the verbs

I used the expression "up the ante" on another desk a few minutes ago, and it got me thinking. We "up the ante" and "up the dosage" (of a medicine), but I can't think of any other ways of upping things in the sense of increasing them. Are there any others?

Then there's the verb "down". We can "down a beer", but that means "drink whatever's left in the glass". Is "down" ever used to mean "decrease", cf. "up" meaning "increase"? -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 21:21, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Wiktionary has other examples for "down", but not in the sense of decrease (wikt:down#Verb). For "up" in the sense of increase it has "up the volume". (wikt:up#Verb). ---Sluzzelin talk 21:27, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

How about "downsize"? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:02, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

"Downgrade" too. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:37, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Also "downplay". --Frumpo (talk) 10:13, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

To down a proposal (to defeat it); to down a helicopter (cause it to fall); to down a(n American) football (to cause it to be out of play). None of this is really like decrease; it's a bit of a stretch to say you're decreasing the helicopters. --- OtherDave (talk) 00:53, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

"Up the priority" --Frumpo (talk) 10:15, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

I think you could up the pressure. --Tagishsimon (talk) 10:26, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Up the Irish? Probably a loose translation from Gaelic, though, so it might not count. Etymonline [6] has a few others under "up (v.)". Well, one other: up the price. Seems you can generally rely on being able to up any type of amount; but you can't down them. 213.122.34.79 (talk) 12:56, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

September 8

Japanese pronunciation

At Japanese language it says:

Some Japanese consonants have several allophones, which may give the impression of a larger inventory of sounds. However, some of these allophones have since become phonemic. For example, in the Japanese language up to and including the first half of the 20th century, the phonemic sequence /ti/ was palatalized and realized phonetically as [tɕi], approximately chi ; however, now /ti/ and /tɕi/ are distinct, as evidenced by words like tī [tiː] "Western style tea" and chii [tɕii] "social status".

Have these distinctions evolved only to allow loanwords (especially English loanwords) to be pronounced more accurately, or do they affect native words too? For example, are any native Japanese words now pronounced with /ti/ as distinct from /tɕi/? 86.184.238.200 (talk) 11:52, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

The /ti/ does exist in native words, but only jokingly or when spoken childishly. Same with /si/ (actually many people pronounce this more like /sɯi/). Both of these sounds, however, do exist in modern Okinawan dialect/language. --KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 14:16, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Do you know whether the joking/childish /ti/ and /si/ pronunciations (as opposed to the pronunciations in loanwords) has also arisen only since the second half of the 20th century? Do you think it is under the influence of sounds appearing in loanwords, or do you see it as a separate phenomenon? 86.185.79.68 (talk) 18:34, 8 September 2010 (UTC).

Xury

In Robinson Crusoe, there is a Moor boy named Xury. May someone know how his name is pronounced in Arabic or English? Thanks. --Omidinist (talk) 13:43, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

If the spelling is meant to be English, then [z] would be the most traditional pronunciation; if it's meant to be Portuguese, then presumably [š] would be most likely... AnonMoos (talk) 16:18, 8 September 2010 (UTC)