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

October 5

Pronunciation of Camberwell

A book I'm reading talks about the part of London called Camberwell. Sometimes in England, not all letters in a placename are pronounced, and I would like to know if it is pronounced as spelled (with 3 syllables) as it would be in the US, or is slurvianized to "Cam'brel." Edison (talk) 03:50, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

It's pronounced exactly as spelled.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:27, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

So is Camberwell, Victoria, Australia. (In case anyone cares.) HiLo48 (talk) 07:50, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

I care. I used to live not far from there, and the Burke Rd strip was one of my favourite weekend haunts. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 08:31, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

You can hear Gertie Millar singing about it here. Apart from the old-fashioned quality of the "a" vowel (the recording is nearly 100 years old) that is how it's pronounced now. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 18:52, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

A fine old recording, and very helpful. She says it something like "Cahm-buh-well" as opposed the the US pronunciation where the "r" would be sounded by a typical midwestern speaker. Thanks. Edison (talk) 19:28, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Slightly tangential to the topic, but there is a butterfly named after it: the Camberwell Beauty. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.213.83.178 (talk) 20:59, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

As a native Londoner, I agree that it is pronounced as spelt, with the emphasis on the first syllable, like camber. Local people speaking in the Cockney dialect, might barely pronounce the double "L" at the end, replacing it with a "W" consonant. I'm sure there's a linguistic term that describes this; however, it is regarded as non-standard. Alansplodge (talk) 21:48, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

I see that our "Cockney" article calls it "Vocalisation of dark L" and gives the example [ˈmɪowɔː] for Millwall. Gosh, I wish I was that clever. Alansplodge (talk) 21:55, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

For future reference see also List of places in the United Kingdom and Ireland with counterintuitive pronunciations.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 05:55, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Excellent! I have noted that in my sandbox for future reference. Edison (talk) 22:34, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

"Churro" used as an adjective in European Spanish

Hi there, everyone:

I live in Spain and speak Spanish as a second language, but am more used to Latin American variants of the language than how the language is spoken in Spain. Where I lived before, "churro" was used as an adjective to describe someone who was good looking, but my housemate (from Extremadura) here used the word in a different context - he said that madrileños speak in a "churro" way. What does this mean?

All the best, --31.4.63.225 (talk) 12:51, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

According to the Spanish Wiktionary article churro#Adjetivo, it can refer to people speaking Spanish with a distinct Aragonese influence. This sense of "churro" is grouped with other meanings pertaining to Churra sheep and their wool. The meaning of "attractive" is indeed limited to "Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Río de la Plata", one entry lower in that article. ---Sluzzelin talk 13:04, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Aha, the Spanish article on Castellano churro is far more informative regarding your housemate's use of "churro". ---Sluzzelin talk 13:17, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the link, Sluzzelin. I heard about Castellano churro before, but I don't think this is the meaning he was referring to - it is spoken mostly in Valencia, and he was talking about Madrid people. He also said that Madrid people act churro, whatever that means. All the best, --178.139.99.190 (talk) 16:00, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Are you sure he wasn't saying 'chulo', a word very much associated with Madrid. It means 'cool', 'good looking', 'well-mannered', 'well dressed'. In some contexts it is a bit like 'cockney' is to London. The phrase "Que chulo" means "whoa, great" or "that's terrific" or "really cool". Richard Avery (talk) 09:00, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

October 6

Dutch spellings of place names

On the List of cities, towns and villages in Drenthe the place names Zeyerveen and Zeyerveld appear thus, but in the Dutch Wikipedia are spelled on their respective pages nl:Zeijerveen and nl:Zeijerveld. Are both versions acceptable? What dictates the choice between spellings? if one is more current, should the pages indicate the older version "until [year]" or is this a sweeping change in Dutch orthography reform that needs no particular mention? -- Deborahjay (talk) 09:10, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Our article on IJ (digraph) discusses this. They are basically just variants of the same letter, although "ij" is preferred in "proper" Dutch. Adam Bishop (talk) 10:06, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

The article most certainly does not say that. In modern Dutch, the letter Y, which is separate from IJ (and has been so since at least the 19th century), only occurs in foreign loanwords. The above mentioned spellings are therefore archaic, and should be changed. EDIT: To more completely answer the OP, there isn't any need to indicate a change date, as there would have been a gradual change in spelling, and this is common in all such place names. Fgf10 (talk) 16:35, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

For what it's worth, both Google Maps and Open Street Map use the spellings "Zeijerveen" and "Zeijerveld" in their labels. Deor (talk) 16:40, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Meaning of the sentence

May I know the meaning of the following sentence:

        She observed that it is getting late.

Does it have only one meaning "She noticed that she was getting late." or some other meaning also? 14.139.82.6 (talk) 10:33, 6 October 2013 (UTC) Sukhada

There are a couple problems here.

First, the sentence is grammatically wrong. It should read "She observed that it was getting late." 'Observed' and 'was' agree with each other but 'observed' and 'is' don't.

Second, the sentence you provided and the sentence you have in quotes do not necessarily mean the same thing. The first sentence, in general, means that it was getting late in the day. Possibly too late to get something done or too late to still be at work/out at a social function/etc. The second sentence, the one you have in quotes, means that she was running late for something or that she needed to be somewhere else and would arrive after some agreed upon time. Dismas|^(talk) 10:43, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Alternatively, she may have been observing a clock with batteries on low power, resulting in the clock losing an increasing amount of time. Plasmic Physics (talk) 10:52, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Ignoring the syntactical problems you didn't ask about, "to observe" can also mean to state something. See meaning 3 at wikt:observe.
So she could be saying "It's getting late". Rojomoke (talk) 10:46, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Quite so, but if it's indirect speech, as it is, the tenses still need to agree as per Dismas. If it were direct speech, then it could be She observed, "It's getting late". -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 19:14, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

As noted by others here, "getting late" could mean late in the daylight hours or late at night or approaching some kind of deadline. And "observed" can mean either watching or commenting. Without more of the text, we can't tell. Although it reminds me of these two Yogiisms: "You can observe a lot just by watching." And in reference to the sun angle in Yankee Stadium's left field in the autumn, "It gets late early out there." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:16, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

The name for this phrasing structure

What's the term for phrasing FAQs (and other documentation) in a personalized way, e.g. "Q. I want to find answers to factual questions. A. Visit the reference desk".

I'm sure there's a name for it, but I got lost in dozens of tabs branching out from grammatical voice and E-Prime. >.<

Once the name is known, I can find the studies about how it's beneficial to use this writing structure in documentation (which I'm also sure I've seen somewhere, but need the keyword to find it again!). This is related to a question at Help talk:Contents#I not want "I want" about the way we're phrasing each of the headers in the Help:Contents page. Thanks! –Quiddity (talk) 20:47, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Subjective versus objective? μηδείς (talk) 21:16, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Hmm. I was thinking there was a more specific term, possibly in Educational or User-Interface-design specific terminology? The only alternative I can conjure up is "1st person call to action", but I thought there was something better. Thanks anyway. –Quiddity (talk) 02:27, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

I suspect you may be right, don't assume my answer is anywhere near the best, although it fits as a starting point. μηδείς (talk) 03:00, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Quiddity -- It's somewhat of a repurposing of the structure of old catechisms, but I don't know that there's a snappy linguistic name for it... AnonMoos (talk) 23:48, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

"One of the best films of this or any year"

There have been probably hundreds of movies that have been lauded as "one of the best films of this or any year".

One of the best of this year, that claim I can accept (in some cases). But when they add "or any", are they not claiming it's one of the best films ever made? In the entire history of cinema?

If not that, what is it we're supposed to be believing? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 22:32, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Absolutely, that's what they're claiming. Of course you're not obliged to agree. --Trovatore (talk) 23:11, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Of course, it should be phrased "or any other year". But that's another issue. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:51, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Why should it? Logically it's the same. --Trovatore (talk) 23:57, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Stylistically, it's a clunker to present two alternatives, one of which is a subset of the other, at least IMO. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:32, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

It's more fundamentally wrong than that. A film made in 2013 might be the best film of 2013, and it might even be the best film of all time, but it will never, never be the best film of 2012, 2011, 2010 .....1977, 1976, 1975 ..... 1946, 1945, 1944 .... because it is not a member of any of the sets of films made in any of those years. A proper claim might be "the best film of the past decade", or even "the best film, not just of this year, but of all time", but the trite formulation the parrot-like idiots trot out unthinkingly is meaningless. That's why I asked the question. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 07:46, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

The Leonard Maltin annual movie guide has well over 10,000 entries, but let's suppose it's an even 10,000 and that the number of films alleged to be among the all-time best is 1,000. 10 percent is stretching the concept of "all time best" pretty far - but even that concept leaves 90 percent which aren't. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:55, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

The redundant use of "this or any" is just an intensifier used as a marketing device. It is similar to expressions such as "forever and ever".--Jeffro77 (talk) 03:35, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Oh dear, what comfort can I find?/None this tide/Nor any tide/Except he did not shame his kind/Not even with that wind blowing, and that tide.

I suspect it's used as a way of avoiding "of all time", which is overused and hyperbolic in the extreme. It's silly to talk of the best film "of all time", because it's a medium that's only existed for a bit over a century. "All time" is a bit longer than that. --Nicknack009 (talk) 09:14, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

I sort of dispute your reasoning. Our List of longest-reigning monarchs says This is the list of the longest-reigning monarchs of all time .... Obviously, we know nothing of any monarchs before recorded history, so "all time" here refers to the period during which we know there have been monarchs. Likewise, the greatest films of all time refers to the period since they first started making films, because it would be pointless to consider any period before then.

But that gets to the nub of the question. Do these people making these claims seriously expect us to believe that virtually every second movie made is greater than almost any of the hundreds of thousands of other movies ever made previously? Does anyone pay any attention to such puffery? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 10:58, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't think they necessarily mean "of all time". It could be one of the best films of this year simply because the competition happens to be particularly bad. Instead, they say it would be among the best in any year, meaning it's a good film, not just better than the rest. On the other hand, the statement does not necessarily imply that they expect the film to have the long-term effect that would make it one of the best films ever. --Wrongfilter (talk) 11:52, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I think I'm getting it. It's so good that, not only is it one of the best of this year, but it would have been among the leading contenders in any other year regardless of the competition, had it been made in any other year, which it wasn't. That's an extremely weird and pointless claim to make, and it's no wonder I could never see it. It is still tantamount to saying it's among the best films ever made, which is a claim I expect to hear very, very infrequently, not a dozen times a year. Thanks for the enlightenment, I think. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 18:55, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

No, I don't think you need the counterfactual, really. Saying that it's the best film in set X means that, for any film f in X, the film in question is better than f (unless it is f). The "any year" part just means that you're considering f to range over the films from all years. Makes perfect sense to me.

As far as being surprised to hear the claim a dozen times a year that a film is the best of all time — really, that surprises you? --Trovatore (talk) 19:05, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Frankly, yes it does. I know only too well how film plaudits have become an art form in their own right, and I read reviews to glean the latest developments in said art. Not that I necessarily believe all of them, or even any of them, because to do so would mean spending all your time and money at the movies, and when everything is so superlative, that means nothing is so superlative. Plaudits themselves can be entertainment enough, without ever leaving the house except to buy the paper, or pick it up from the front yard. That's all good, and it's a necessary part of the marketing process, without which they may as well never make the films in the first place. But it is a total abrogation of the (?) plaudist's/plauditor's art and skill to make such a stupid claim as comparing a film to others. At all. Even to others made just this year, let alone to all others made in the past 100-odd years. It's empty, hollow, meaningless, untestable, and incredibly lazy and boring and vacuous. It's the film equivalent of "My Dad's better than yours. - No, mine's better than yours". If they can't think of anything more substantial to say about the movie than that, they should get out of the plaudit industry and go and mow lawns or pluck chickens for a living or something. Yes, it does surprise me. If I were a film maker, I would be ashamed and embarrassed to have my quality product associated with such a jejune claim as "the best film of this or any year", and I would insist it play no part in any marketing campaigns. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 19:46, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

"dark L"

The previous question about "Camberwell" brought up again this notion of "dark L", which I've never really understood. The dark l article suggests (a little unclearly) that American /l/ is always "dark", which might explain why I wouldn't get the distinction. What does a "clear" /l/ sound like? --Trovatore (talk) 23:14, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

American ells are dark at the end of syllable with back vowels, like gold and fool. The ell of well might be dark in some dialects, but it isn't in mine. μηδείς (talk) 23:26, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm afraid that doesn't help much. I can't tell whether my "well" has a "dark l" or not, based on the descriptions given and even the sound files in the articles. --Trovatore (talk) 23:39, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't understand what the article is saying. This much I know from observations: Most Americans pronounce "well" with the trailing L enunciated. Some, especially in certain east coast areas, pronounce it the way Elmer Fudd would, with a trailing L that sounds more like a W. Some Brits say it that way too. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 23:51, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Dark ell, or the velarized ell is pronounced without the tip of the tongue touching the front of the roof of the mouth. The ells in lick and hell are dental (or apical, or whatever term you like) and in them the tongue touches behind the upper teeth. The Fudd ell (and arr) is velarized, often to the point of becoming a semivowel (w). Amewicans don't do that. μηδείς (talk) 23:58, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Um, but I think I do touch the roof of my mouth with my tongue when saying "gold" and "fool" (at least, carefully), and you say those are dark. --Trovatore (talk) 00:04, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Yes, you may, but with the middle of the tongue to the roof of the mouth, not with the tip of the tongue to the back of the teeth. (Gold's not the best example, in fact it's a bad example, since the dee sound itself requires the tongue touching behind the teeth, itself being a dental.) You can say fool without the tongue even touching the roof of the mouth at all. Try conrasting "lick" and "fool" for a good example. μηδείς (talk) 00:08, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, that's some help I guess. I can't manage to render "fool" without touching the tongue, though. --Trovatore (talk) 00:19, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

You could if you pronounced it more like "foo". As with "goad" for "gold". That's not at all unusual for some east coasters and southerners. Not so in the Midwest. If someone talks like Elmer Fudd in the Midwest, it's probably an actual speech impediment. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:26, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

A much better example is milk for the dark ell. Be aware also that in English these sounds are allophones, and it is often possible to pronounce a light ell where in normal speech you would find a dark ell without noticing the difference. In Russian, however, they are separate consonants. I once pronounced the name of the city L'viv to a Russian speaker with a dark ell, and she had no idea what I was speaking about. The apostrophe in the spelling indicates it is a palatalized light ell. You will also find you can say the ool in "fool" clearly with the tip of your finger on the cusp of your tongue, but you cannot say lick properly this way. μηδείς (talk) 01:30, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Every now and then someone mentions to me that "Don" did or said this or that, and I can't figure out who is being named, until it occurs to me that it's actually Dawn. --Trovatore (talk) 02:56, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

That's called the caught-cot merger, and it's typical of the West and some areas of the North and Midwest. The merger occurs in Boston, where the caught vowel is generalized. (My Nephews get yelled at when they call my sister "mawm", as in Somerset. In the west the "Don" vowel is generalized. This is a little different from an allophone, since allophones differ without causing a distinction of meaning. (Saying "milk" with a light ell may sound odd or accented, but it won't be mistaken for another word.) In the caught-cot merger, the words are distinct phonemes for speakers without the change, and there is confusion if someone says Dawn, caught and bought for Don, cot and bot. I once worked as a receptionist for about a year, and got in trouble when I told potential advertising callers who wanted Don that we had no one named "Dawn" in the sales department. μηδείς (talk) 03:33, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

I suppose they did not understand also because the city is named in Russian as L’vov.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 18:24, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

No, actually it was in a American business setting. As her account manager I asked for her last address, which she said was Ukraine. I said, "Oh, I have an uncle in Lviv." She said, "Where?" I repeated, "Lviv" (I had never had occasion to say the name before--and grew up knowing it as Lvov in English) and she said, "OH, you mean L'viv!" and I said yes, "L'viv," once I heard her. I am sure nglish speakers find this impossible to follow. μηδείς (talk) 20:23, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Those with the surname Ng would have no problem. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 21:54, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

October 7

Glottal stop

This doesn't make any sense. Why is this considered a sound? How can anybody 'hear' this? Does it need a vowel to be 'pronounced?' I don't get it. --66.190.69.246 (talk) 08:35, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for my poor IPA skills, but I can confirm to the OP that I can very easily hear the difference between butter, buʔer (with a glotal stop instead of a t sound) and bu-er (with no glotal stop or consonant at all). So I can hear it. All consonants are easier to hear if they are adjacent to a vowel, including the glotal stop. Are you a native English speaker? I am only asking because your answer may help us to understand your confusion and maybe we can help you out better. --Lgriot (talk) 12:38, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

See Cockney Grammar lesson No 1: BUTTER. We'll soon 'ave yer talkin' proper. Alansplodge (talk) 12:46, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I am a native Anglophone. I’m not exactly disputing the existence of this thing, just the claim that it’s a sound. A sound makes vibrations in the air. Do glottal stops make vibrations in the air? --66.190.69.246 (talk) 14:50, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Do k or p make vibrations in the air? Are they sounds? Gabbe (talk) 15:38, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

On the contrary, 66. Sounds like /k/ and /t/ and /b/ are sometimes called stops by phoneticians precisely because there is a momentary interruption to the sound. What distinguishes them from each other auditorily is the formants just before and after the stop, but at the moment when the stop is articulated there is no sound. A glottal stop is another one of these, where the closure is in the glottis rather than the lips, teeth or tongue, so it is auditorily distinct from each of the other stops. --ColinFine (talk) 20:15, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Yes, they make vibrations since a little pressure is created in or with the mouth. I don't think that any pressure is created with a glottal stop. --66.190.69.246 (talk) 20:19, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

As a Londoner and occasional user of the glottal stops, I can confirm that the "pressure" is created in the glottis - hence the name. Londoners can pronounce "hot", "hut" and "hat" without any conventional consonants, but the vowel is ended with a definite "stop" as Colin says above. See also Occlusive. Alansplodge (talk) 21:00, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Those are only the ones you notice because they're different from other varieties of English. In English (all varieties, as far as I know), any utterance that nominally begins with a vowel sound, or (in careful, slow speech) any word that begins with a vowel sound when the previous word ends in a vowel sound, actually begins with a glottal stop. --Trovatore (talk) 21:09, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

• Uh oh. μηδείς (talk) 01:56, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Not all - there is the Linking and intrusive R and vowel dropping "you-nd me" -- Q Chris (talk) 13:24, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

I still don’t hear it. It just feels like a mere pause to me. Also, why are you responding to me? --66.190.69.246 (talk) 11:52, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

66.190.69.246 -- In the older Semitic languages, the glottal stop functioned in linguistic morphology as a consonant (as part of consonantal roots etc.), and in all of the alphabets that existed before the 9th century BC (the early Semitic consonantal alphabets, sometimes recently called "abjads") there was a separate letter to represent the glottal stop sound... AnonMoos (talk) 00:11, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Term for political issue

What do you call a political issue that creates a lot of emotion and hot discourse but in a overall perspective is insignificant? I thought it was a political football issue but reading the article it clearly does not mean what I thought it did. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.214.166.6 (talk) 13:08, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps a tempest in a teapot, although this expression isn't unique to political issues. The same is true of Much Ado About Nothing. I've also simply seen commentators call them "distractions". If the distraction is intentional, it can be a case of (the tail) wagging the dog. StuRat (talk) 13:14, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Or a "make a mountain out of a molehill" may also apply ... personally I like Swift's use of "Big-Endians" v. "Little Endians". Collect (talk) 14:29, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

In Australian political discourse the word "affair" seems to fit at least part of that definition. The Craig Thomson affair was a seemingly big drama for some time recently, but now the government he was involved with has gone, so has the affair. So too was the Peter Slipper affair, although that doesn't work in its entirety as a Wikilink. The Profumo affair is well known British politics. I'm sure there are many others. HiLo48 (talk) 22:00, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

In the US it's has become the fashion to add the suffix "-gate" to any scandal, ever since Watergate. Of course, some of those scandals may be significant, while others are just politicians of the other party trying to whip up a scandal out of nothing. StuRat (talk) 13:40, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

The Australian love affair with "affair" had a similar if different genesis. I have no doubt the Gair Affair of 1974 was so named because of the headline writers' perpetual love of pithy wordplay (it was also called "The Night of the Long Prawns"). I don't remember any earlier Oz political crisis/issue/furore/scandal/controversy being called anything "affair", apart from the 1954 Petrov Affair; but the Gair Affair was the start of what seems like an unending series of them. After that came the Loans Affair (1975) and then "affair" was set in stone like -gate. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 18:56, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

"hot-button issues" (often linked to Dog-whistle politics)? --Orange Mike | Talk 01:09, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

I like some of the suggestions and I also came up with a new potential one, red herring. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.214.48.200 (talk) 13:56, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Youthful cheering on sports teams

Hello!

I have noticed that when fans cheer on their team, or players motivate eachother, they say lads/boys/guys/girls, youthful words, even if they are grown adults. Why do they use these words and not women, ladies, men etc? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.150.31.143 (talk) 13:24, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Sounds like the process of neoteny, to me. That is, sports players are thought of as if they were kids, which includes them playing games, often wearing kid's clothes, like shorts, and acting like kids, as in having tantrums and such. Facial hair was also traditionally discouraged on sports teams. StuRat (talk) 13:33, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

The guy pitching for A's the other night looked like he was about 15. It's often the case that writers who are a generation or more older than the athletes think of them as kids. As with the famous book about the Brooklyn Dodgers, The Boys of Summer. And in my age bracket, looking at pictures of old-time ballplayers in their prime, they do indeed look young. I recall also a couple of old-time ex-Cubs, one in his 90s and one in his 70s. The older one referred to the younger one as "the boy". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:48, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

This looks to me like a middle school class picture. --Nelson Ricardo (talk) 15:28, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

People often do this for a peer group, especially a single-sex one. The lads at work. An evening out with the girls. Itsmejudith (talk) 18:01, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

As I noted here last week, Australian football players always refer to each other as "the boys". Always. It seems to be compulsory. I don't know that this happens so much with cricket, hockey or other team sports. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 18:38, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Heard a couple of players from the Sunday's winning team in Australia's National Rugby League Grand Final repeatedly refer to their fellow players as "my mates" when being interviewed yesterday. (Then, when thanked by the interviewer at the end of the interview, said "Thanks mate.") HiLo48 (talk) 21:51, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

My mother worked in various offices in London and always referred to her female colleagues as "girls" (a lot of office jobs were restricted to women back in the day). It came as a bit of a surprise when one of the "girls" had a retirement party. I could also mention some military songs such as Rally 'Round the Flag, Boys!, Come Cheer Up, my Lads and Boys of the Old Brigade. Nothing to do with thinking of each other as children in my opinion. Alansplodge (talk) 19:31, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

I once asked a group of twenty-something women in the office why they referred to each other as "girls" rather than "women". The answer came back in unison: "Women are old." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:15, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

You get the same thing in Japanese, with women objecting to being called onna, preferring onna-no ko (lit. "child woman"). There seems to be an almost inevitable correlation between intimacy and condescension in many languages. A man calling a woman a "girl" may be seen as disrespectful, but the respectful term "lady" is just as bad in the opposite direction, as it's what boys call their elders.

It would be interesting to investigate the difference between, say, Come on, boys! and Come on, men! in the military. Does boys suggest camaraderie? Or maybe paternalistic protectiveness of their commander? What connotation would it signal to change the form of address to men? — kwami (talk) 02:07, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

I take it as simply expressing affection. It sounds kind of odd used of the opposition. "Kick their asses, boys!" makes a lot more sense than "Kick those boys asses!" We don't have tu/vous, so we improvise. μηδείς (talk) 03:04, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Yes, definitely camaraderie, and that seems to be the case for "girls" in the office too (and thus not really appropriate for men, who aren't one of the girls). Just wondering if there isn't also a paternalistic connotation in the military. — kwami (talk) 03:10, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Stress in Greek names

Anyone know where the (English) stress is in these names? I can't tell whether the Greek vowels are long or short:

Anaxo, Diobesi, Electryon, Elpeus, Erythras, Eurycyda, Euryte, Hyrieus.

Thanks, — kwami (talk) 15:44, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't know where the stress is in the English pronunciation of these names, but I do know that the location of stress in the English pronunciation of these names will not tell you anything about the length of the vowels in Greek, nor will the length of the vowels in Greek tell you anything about the stress location in English. Aɴɢʀ (talk) 20:30, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

I think if we need the English pronunciation this is more useful.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 00:42, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Horse and cart/wagon/buggy/carriage/whathaveyou

What is the difference between any of these things?

• horse and cart
• horse and wagon
• horse and buggy
• horse and carriage 164.107.102.31 (talk) 15:53, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

(1) A cart carries cargo and usually has two wheels, I think; (2) a wagon carries cargo and has four wheels; (3) a buggy carries passengers and is usually open on top, I think; (4) a carriage carries passengers and is usually enclosed. But I don't think any of those distinctions is hard and fast. See horse and buggy, carriage, and cart. Looie496 (talk) 16:12, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

See also our list of seventy-something different types of horse drawn carriage. Whoa!--Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:33, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Some of those carriages are even horseless. μηδείς (talk) 18:02, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Finding place name rhymes

Can anyone suggest a source for geographic names that rhyme with a particular word? E.g., enter "seeds" and the source suggests Leeds.

I tried to search for a website that does this but only found suggestions of words that rhyme with "geographic" or "place".

Thanks. CBHA (talk) 19:51, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Speaking of rhyme

Is there any word on earth that rhyme with orange? I cannot find anything. Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 19:53, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

That's a classic. See orange_(word)#Rhyme. ---Sluzzelin talk 19:58, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Oh, thanks. Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 20:20, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

The answer is a very old joke: "East Orange". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:10, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

There is an article "List of English words without rhymes". --Theurgist (talk) 21:36, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

When I was a candidate for the Trans-Atlantic Fan Fund, Dave Langford promised to take me to Blorenge, so that I would finally see something that rhymed with me. Alas, I lost my race. --Orange Mike | Talk 01:12, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

There's no reason to have one. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:26, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

I was once told that "lozenge" was the answer to this question. It is in some dialects of English but not all. --TammyMoet (talk) 13:17, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Not in mine. I'd go with "door hinge". StuRat (talk) 13:45, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Door hinge doesn't work in my native dialect, although Carhenge is close. "Orange, ooh!" and "Aren't you?" rhyme. μηδείς (talk) 18:31, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

This is way too difficult for me. Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 18:50, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

According to their dialect, some people pronounce orange as if it were spelt arange, I am one of them. The closest you could come in Spanish would be órinch versus árinch. μηδείς (talk) 01:39, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Those would be the folks who pronounce one of the biggest orange-producing states "Flahrida". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:20, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Yes. Last time I was in Flarida someone flang an arange down the carridor and hit me in the farhead. μηδείς (talk) 20:55, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

/-ɪndʒ/: binge challenge cringe fringe hinge impinge infringe lozenge scavenge singe syringe tinge twinge unhinge.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 02:13, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

That looks good, except that rhymes have the same stressed vowel + whatever comes next. Not just the same final vowel (unless the final vowel bears the main stress, such as intense, exert, assure, indeed ...). The stressed vowel in orange is the o. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 02:22, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

What sources say that it has to be stressed?--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 13:48, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

What do you mean "has to"? It is the stressed vowel in that word, all dictionaries that show stress agree on this. Are you making some point about the stress being moved for metrical necessity in a poem? μηδείς (talk) 16:17, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Why should the rhyme vowel be stressed? The last syllable of the words has the same vowel as well as the same consonants it's quite enough to rhyme with orange.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 16:24, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

I see what's going on here. When we say that Word A does or does not rhyme with Word B, the default assumption is that we're considering only perfect rhymes. There is no perfect rhyme for 'orange'. However, there are other types of rhymes, such as general rhymes, and the list supplied by Lüboslóv are all general rhymes for 'orange'. It's curious that the non-specific use of 'rhyme' is the one that's not the 'general' rhyme, but that's the way it seems to be. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 18:04, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

The other point we all seem to have missed (including me till now), is that Miss Bono asked for "any word on earth", not just any word in English, that rhymes with 'orange'. There could be a word in Urdu or Quechua that fits the bill, for all I know. Is there some massive tome containing all the words in every language and dialect on Earth, all their varying pronunciations, and which rhyme with which? No, I thought not. Time to get started, methinks. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 18:18, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

W and V as English-language vowels

Years ago, I was taught the usual "A, E, I, O, U, and sometimes Y". I was taught that loanwords like "crwth" and "cwm", and archaic words like "svrd", "vlm", and "vrn" were vowel-less. Our article seems to tell me that a vowel is a sound, rather than a written letter. Are these words vowel-less or are W and V considered vowels in these situations. Joefromrandb (talk) 20:48, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

I remember being taught "sometimes Y and W". But I think the W isn't so much about cwm and crwth (the letter w is used as a vowel in those words, but the orthography is Welsh rather than English, so all bets are off). It's more about law and bow. As for the archaic spellings with "v", those v's are really u's (as recently as Shakespeare, there was no clear distinction — you can find "love" spelled "loue" in manuscripts from the time). --Trovatore (talk) 21:46, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

It depends. How is "vlm" pronounced? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:11, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

"Elm". Joefromrandb (talk) 21:13, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

What do "vlm", "svrd" and "vrn" mean? --Theurgist (talk) 21:16, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

They are centuries-old spellings (OED) of "elm", "sword", and "urn", respectively. Joefromrandb (talk) 21:36, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Using "v" as "u", sort of? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:39, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Or "o" or "e", I suppose. Joefromrandb (talk) 21:44, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Sort of. "V" and "u" were the same letter in those days, as was "j" and "i". My copy of the OED only has "ulm" and "swrd", though it does have "vrn". These were just typographic variants, like "ɑ" for "a" or "ɡ" for "g". — kwami (talk) 01:57, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

There is an article English words without vowels. --Theurgist (talk) 21:17, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for that, although I'm still unclear whether the "w" in "crwth" is considered a vowel or a "vowel-sound". Joefromrandb (talk) 21:44, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

"Vowel" by default means "vowel sound". --Trovatore (talk) 21:47, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

It's a normal vowel letter in Welsh. It's highly unusual in English. — kwami (talk) 02:00, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

To answer Joefromandb directly, "w" in Welsh is usually a "u" type vowel, and "y" is a schwa or an "i" type vowel when used as the only vowel in a syllable. (It's complicated and varies by dialects.)

The "v" you have seen above in older English spellings is just a v standing for a u vowel as you see in monuments, like SENATVS POPVLVSQVE ROMANVS. Originally the two were stylistic variants in printing/writing and did not consistently stand for two separate letters, since in Latin the difference depended (almost) entirely on context. The letter v in Latin sood for a "u" by itself and for a "w" in front of vowels. Confusing, and the reason we now have u, v, and w all from Latin v. μηδείς (talk) 03:15, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Whoever taught you that those words were vowelless was using a definition of "vowel" to mean "letter that does not conventionally represent a vowel in current English orthography". While this definition is in common use, these are cases where it breaks down, because the words are clearly not vowelless in any useful sense. As for whether they are "considered" vowelless, I don't consider them so. Whose consideration are you interested in?

Who is "I"? -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 11:24, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Looks like User:ColinFine 11:14, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:36, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Am I missing something here? Joefromrandb (talk) 23:27, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

ColinFine neglected to sign his post. JackofOz asked who had written the unsigned post. Baseball Bugs answered Jack's question. You didn't miss anything. ---Sluzzelin talk 23:38, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Oh. Joefromrandb (talk) 00:17, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

In languages using abjad writing systems, such as Arabic and Hebrew, all words are vowelless unless they contain matres lectionis (per this definition). For example, the name of Qatar is spelt in Arabic with three letters, all of which are consonants: Q, Ṭ, and R. --Theurgist (talk) 18:19, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

I would reword that to state: "...all words are written vowel-less unless they, etc." The words do have vowels, distinguished by the diacritics of Niqqud in Hebrew and similar marks in Arabic. -- Deborahjay (talk) 11:29, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

That's why I specified "per this definition". --Theurgist (talk) 11:49, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Poetry and/or songs in sign languages

Do they exist? If yes, what features of sign languages are analogous to rythm, meter, and other features that distinguish songs and poems from ordinary speech? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 21:17, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Yes, they do. "An Overview of Sign Language Poetry" by Rachel Sutton-Spence might be a good start. ---Sluzzelin talk 21:28, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Why is Rocio a girl (in Spanish)

I thought that -o means masculine in Spanish, but then you have names like Rocio who are girls. OsmanRF34 (talk) 23:39, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Short for La Virgen del Rocío. μηδείς (talk) 00:05, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

That makes sense. Incidentally, the article on Rocío Dúrcal reads like it was lifted from somewhere. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:13, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

You also have lots of men with Maria as one of their names, though that's presumably not the name they go by. — kwami (talk) 01:52, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

That's usually as a middle name. There are various other apparently masculine Spanish first names for girls. I think Dolores, in English or Spanish, is one of the most beautiful of all names, except for what it means. μηδείς (talk) 02:57, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

It mean pain Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 12:28, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Of both the physical and emotional kind. It's said to be short for Maria de los Dolores or "Mary of the Sorrows",[1] yet another referback to Mary the Virgin Mother of Jesus. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:24, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

We had a similar question about the name "Rosario" last year (here. "Conseulo" is another example. Adam Bishop (talk) 09:36, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

There are women named José -which tends to be a male name -. Rubí is another female name that means Ruby. As for Rocío... there was this amazing singer with the same name. Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 12:28, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Another name that end with -o and it's a name for a girl is Lucero -- which means bright star. Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 12:46, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

The name "Rocío" means "dew".—Wavelength (talk) 00:42, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Yes. It's from Late Latin roscidus / roscida, which Google Translate says means "bedewed" or "dewy". There's an obscure English word, "roscid", obviously taken directly from the Latin, and which likewise means "dewy". The Spanish for "dewy" is rociado / rociada. What "dew" has to do with that particular statue of the Virgin Mary is not clear. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:03, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

That's the source of the "rose" in the name of the plant rosemary: "sea dew", ros marinus. μηδείς (talk) 01:34, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

I know a girl named Rosemary. Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 15:01, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

And also “Pilar” (coming from Santa Maria del Pilar, in “la Catedral-Basílica de Nuestra Señora del Pilar de Zaragoza”) , though a pillar is not a very feminine symbol...But this christian name is also given to boys in central Spain (just passing by, adding my salt grain). T.y. Arapaima (talk) 08:25, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

For female pillar see Caryatid. μηδείς (talk) 16:14, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

October 8

Assistance of/from

Is there a difference (in meaning) between the following sentences? Also, should I use the article "the" in the first sentence?

1. I completed the project with (the?) assistance of Mrs. Williams.
2. I completed the project with assistance from Mrs. Williams.

—Such a gentleman 09:13, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

No, there's no difference in the meanings of the sentences. You have to use "the" in the first sentence, otherwise it's incorrect grammatically. Biggs Pliff (talk) 09:32, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Yes, the first sentence needs "the". But I would say "with the assistance of" and "with assistance from" mean slightly different things. "With the assistance of" means you and Mrs. Williams were both equally responsible for completing the project. "With assistance from" means you were mostly responsible, but Mrs. Williams helped you in some way (but did not do as much work as you). Adam Bishop (talk) 09:33, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

To me they mean exactly the same thing, that Mrs. Williams did less than half the work, in either case. Also, the "the" in the top sentence is required in US English, but I'm not sure if it is in UK English. StuRat (talk) 13:37, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

It is necessary in UK English aswell.Biggs Pliff (talk) 13:48, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

I personally read a slightly different meaning between the two. "with the assistance of" implies to me that the project could not have been completed without Mrs. Williams' contributions, regardless of what percentage of the overall work they entailed. "With assistance from" sounds to me like Mrs. Williams made completing the project easier, but that the person speaking could have done without her if necessary. However, I don't find any documents that support my hearing them that way, and find quite a few that use both within the same document. --some jerk on the Internet (talk) 16:40, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Troodeloo (?) in Rebecca (1940 film)

Hello Learned Ones ! In Hitchcock's Rebecca (1940 film) , sleazy Jack Favell (George Sanders) takes his leave (after sneering at the other characters), by saying a cooing word who looked to my old ears something like "Troodeloo" . He'd say nowadays "See you", I think. Has something an idea about that word ? Thanks a lot beforehand. T.y. Arapaima (talk) 10:09, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

More likely to be toodle-oo, I think. (Which I now know comes from the French à tout a l'heure.) AndrewWTaylor (talk) 10:18, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

It may come from à tout a l'heure, but that's far from settled. See World Wide Words. --ColinFine (talk) 11:21, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Ah, you're right. The OED gives "Origin unknown; perhaps < toot n.", with no mention of the French phrase. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 13:25, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Indeed. I've edited the Wiktionary entry accordingly. --ColinFine (talk) 20:44, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Aw yes !... Now you say it, toodle-oo has some slight resemblance with « à tout à l'heure" . Another word brought back by the Tommies, I think...And, paraphrasing (approximately) Voltaire , I'd say : "...sans doute. Mais il faut avouer qu'en venant de là jusqu'à nous, il a bien changé sur la route" » (..."well , yes, sure. But one must admit that, while coming from over there to us, it has changed a lot on the road"). Thanks a lot A.T. & Colin. Toodle-oo ! Arapaima (talk) 08:29, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Appears there are three toodle-oos in Rebecca. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 17:44, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Clarification needed about an African Language

I met this African guy who comes from Cameroun (if I remember well), and being a language lover I started to try learning his language, which is a Bamileke language. I searched Wikipedia for info on the phonology of the language, which he says is called Kwa, but not only did I find nothing: I also found info contrasting what my friend said. Indeed he specifies his language does NOT end with an apostrophe (i.e. is NOT called "Kwa'", but rather "Kwa", without the '), because the apostrophe means the vowel is "fatter", which probably means breathy voiced or something of the likes, whereas Wikipedia says Kwa is Nigerian and Kwa' is Camerounian, but he comes from Cameroun, so he couldn't speak a language from Nigeria. I submitted an article on this language with what I managed to get out of my friend, referred to in that article as "my consultant", but someone declined the submission saying it was more a request for clarifications, which in part it is, though in part it's an attempt to put information gathered from a mothertongue on Wikipedia which ended up as a submitted article because of the problem above. That user redirected me here. So could someone help me clarify 1) What the apostrophe in "Kwa'" means and 2) Where I should put the phonology info I gathered from him which can be found at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Kwa, admitting that by the time someone answers the article, submitted for creation approximately in April 2013, hasn't been deleted in the meantime so I can finally put the info where it belongs? Thanks. PS Maybe the information is somewhere on the Web but I'm not good at searching outside Wikipedia so I wasn't able to find it anywhere. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MGorrone (talk • contribs) 14:56, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

I can't tell you anything about the languages and their spellings beyond what can be found on Ethnologue and here, but about your last question: much as I appreciate the fruits of your fieldwork on your informant's phonology, and much as our existing articles are in need of expansion, according to our WP:no original research policy we won't be able to accomodate these findings in our articles. Our articles need to be based on published research literature, not on our writers' own investigations (interesting as they may be). Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:12, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Take notice that in Africa the state borders never correspond to the ethnic/linguistic ones (apart from Madagascar, maybe). So saying "Kwa is Nigerian" is wrong strictly speaking, the Kwa languages spread in several West African countries. Though in Cameroon they're indeed practically absent.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 17:56, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Ethnologue says that Kwa' is the language of Cameroon which we have a stub for at Kwa’ language and Kwa is the language mainly in Nigeria. Rmhermen (talk) 20:05, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Africa has somewhere between 1500 and 2000 dialects depending on the source. I can say from "field" experience, having had various speakers tell me, that the Fula language is actually called Fulani or Pulaar, or a whole host of other things. The same with Olof/Wolof. I studied Zulu with a native speaker whom most Zulu would insist is Ndebele. There is a desperate need for published material in most African languages. Although I know nothing of Kwa, I can competently suggest that Wikipedia is not the place to work this out. I suggest contacting a local university. μηδείς (talk) 01:53, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

"Making out"

Since when did the term "making out" change meaning from "sexual intercourse" to "heavy petting or sexual foreplay"? I have been searching everywhere for the change in etymology of this term, and it's so @#%& time-consuming that I thought I might ask it here. I just know it means sexual intercourse, but apparently some people do not believe me, insisting that "heavy petting and sexual foreplay" is the standard, widespread usage for this term. I don't want to sound like an idiot, yet if two people are engaging in sexual foreplay, I would quickly assume that they are having sex, because most of the time such activities - as portrayed in the movies - lead to sex or the intention to have sex. 140.254.70.33 (talk) 19:41, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't know that it has ever meant what you think. Nor does every kiss lead to "nod, nod, wink, wink". See Urban Dictionary's definitions: [2] Rmhermen (talk) 20:07, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

"Making out big time" usually means intercourse. Just "making out", not so much. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:12, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

In respectable mass culture the power of euphemisms seems degrade over time. That's why I stick strictly to unrespectable lumpenproletarian expressions for fucking. Also, it seems like you're subsuming a lot of fucking under genital intercourse, last time I checked Kinsey the undisclosed private variety of human sexual conducts exceeded what Fonzie did to Richie while "parking" &tc. Fifelfoo (talk) 20:30, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Making Out has never meant more than kissing and petting where I live since I have been aware of the expression. Urban Dictionary agrees with this. μηδείς (talk) 21:57, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Likewise. "Making out" strictly means hugging and kissing. In the old days "making" by itself was a lot stronger, hence the censored line in "Hooray for Captain Spaulding". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:32, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

The line Bugs is referring to is towards the end of this page (but it's well worth reading the whole page).--Shantavira|^{feed me} 07:43, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

So the OED has [3]: "9 d. intr. slang (orig. U.S.). spec. To succeed in seducing, gain sexual satisfaction, have sexual intercourse (with).This expression seems to be have arisen as a specialization of sense 9c; cf. quot. 1939 for 9c there. There is some overlap with sense 9e (which is now the commoner meaning), and in some sources it is difficult to tell which sense is intended. For a discussion of this and related usages see A. F. Moe in Amer. Speech (1966) 41 96–107."

The 9c quote referred to is: 1939 I. Baird Waste Heritage vii. 99 "Oh, say, how'd you make out with Hazel?" And 9c is: " intr. colloq. To make shift, get along; to succeed, thrive; to get on (well, badly, etc.)." 9e of course is: "intr. slang (orig. and chiefly U.S.). To engage in sexual activity (with another person) which stops short of intercourse, esp. kissing and caressing."

You can get the Moe 1966 at [4]. I'll give you a quote from page 100:

"At least since the First World War, and probably earlier, the expression make out has been a popular double entendre. The dual usage was in the form of a question asked of one who had just been out on a date: "Did you make out with (Mary)?" The question, so phrased, was considered to be a discreet inquiry which allowed the one so questioned to interpret it, at his discretion, to be an inquiry either as to the compatibility of the date or as to the successful accomplishment of sexual intimacy. By some, the question was considered to be more discreet if it was prefaced by "How" rather than only by "Did." Even the reply of the sheik, snake, or skirt-chaser of that period (or of his successor, the wolf—or the more recent successor, the make-out artist) was ambiguous, as it was invariably boastful in nature, regardless of the facts. The double-barreled usage with the apt retort was part of the repartee of the day that was considered as being clever."

You can imagine some 1930s hepcats: "So, Johnny, how'd you make out with Hazel? / Oh I made out just fine. / He's lying! He may have "made out", but he definitely did not make out." So how exactly one "made out" would be left to the imagination of the audience of the braggart; so whether it referred to sex or just kissing would not be strictly distinguished. --Atethnekos (Discussion, Contributions) 20:13, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

And exactly when a certain activity ceases being "fooling around/foreplay/making out" and becomes "sex" is a matter of subjective opinion, has never been defined anywhere, and probably shouldn't be. As I discovered a few years back, when I got involved in a heated and protracted discussion that saw two lifelong friends come almost to blows. One insisted that unless a penis was actually being inserted into someone's orifice (and mouths didn't count), it could not legitimately be called "sex" (which meant that lesbians, whatever they do, never have sex, unless they jump the fence once in a while and get it on with a guy; and that gay men who are not into anal sex never have sex either). The other, of course, disagreed. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:55, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

October 9

Using the word "Mississippi" as a device for measuring time

Does anyone know how or why the word "Mississippi" came to be used as a device for measuring time? For example, when we want to time some event for, say, ten seconds, one might count aloud "one Mississippi, two Mississippi, ... ten Mississippi". Where, how, and why did this practice originate? Also, is there anything here on Wikipedia about that topic? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 18:19, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't know the origin, but I did find a list at Wiktionary Appendix:Words used as placeholders to count seconds with some referenced examples, but nothing on the origins, sorry. ---Sluzzelin talk 18:34, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

The oldest published use of "one Mississippi, two Mississippi, ..." I found at Google Books is from 1936: How to Use Psychology in Business by Donald Anderson Laird. This can be gauged individually, without the help of a stop watch, by counting: " One — Mississippi; two — Mississippi; three — Mississippi; etc." This comes close to indicating a second on each count. Your question has been asked at various forums, but usually people only commented on the obvious fact that it was chosen because of the length it takes to utter "Mississippi" for most people at "normal" speed, while pointing out that plenty of other words could fulfill this function as well, and some people reported that they indeed had used different ones while growing up, such as "hippopotamus" or "alligator" or "one one-thousand, two one-thousand", and so forth. But no one had anything on origins, except (intentionally) silly speculation. ---Sluzzelin talk 22:38, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately, this led to the name of the state being pronounced as muhsip in my childhood dialect. (Wummuhsip, twomuhsip, threemuhsip, fawmuhsip, fahmuhsip, simmuhsip, semmuhsip, eymuhsip, nahmuhsip, temmuhsip.) μηδείς (talk) 04:00, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

The word Mississippi is a little too long for this purpose, unless you rush it. The one thousand phrase works better. --Trovatore (talk) 16:37, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

I feel like we used to have an article on the concept of using various words to mark seconds of time. Maybe it got deleted for lack of references... Or maybe I'm imagining it. Dismas|^(talk) 16:32, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm reading a history-of-cooking cookbook, and one of the first recipes that specifies a cooking time says to cook for "two pater nosters"; the editor indicates this would be about two minutes. That's not a word, of course (they weren't thinking of elevators), but a universally known phrase, which kinda counts. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 17:38, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

I think that the editor was referring to the prayer, the "Our Father" ("Pater Noster" in Latin). Reciting the entire prayer twice would likely take two minutes. Reciting the phrase "pater noster" twice certainly would not take two minutes. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 19:13, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Um, duh?--jpgordon^{::==( o )} 01:49, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Um, duh, what? Your prior statement specifically made reference to repeating the "universally known phrase" (i.e, the phrase "pater noster"), not the prayer (i.e., the Our Father). The prayer itself is not a universally known phrase; the phrase itself is. So, again ... um, duh, what? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 02:12, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Isn't "Um, duh?" a universally-known 1997 one-hit wonder by the boy band, The Fransons? μηδείς (talk) 02:31, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Describing facial expression

How can I describe (writting) a facial expression that looks like this but without the eyebrow lifted. Like when two friends are talking:

A You did X

B No I didn't do X

A Yes you did.

B NO, I didn't. I was with John Doe when that happened

A [who had been with John Doe when X hapened gives the look I want to describe and tells to his friend] Really... Are you sure?

So. How can it be described? Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 20:24, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

For reference, the photo is of someone being supercilious, or perhaps (super-sibilantly) silently semi-supercilious. Super (L.), above; cilious, from cilium (L.), hair. The word has come to mean arrogantly superior; showing contemptuous indifference; haughty, or hubristic, but it can also mean a simple expression of surprise or shock. That's how I generally use it. I'm a left-eyebrow raiser from wayback, but I wouldn't think the dictionary definition applies to me. Others are free to disagree, but I am haughtily indifferent to the opinions of others.  :) -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 20:43, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Incredulous? Abecedare (talk) 20:57, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Skeptical? Aɴɢʀ (talk) 21:10, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Quizzical expression? - Cucumber Mike (talk) 21:32, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

look of suspicion Such a gentleman 22:17, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

On second thoughts, it is not much of a suspicion, but "A" at this point has realized "B" is clearly lying. So, perhaps he is going with the "O RLY?" expression — a relevant example. (Disclaimer: O RLY is also used as a sarcastic response to an obvious fact) —Such a gentleman 22:24, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

I'd call it a glare. Deor (talk) 22:44, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

• It's a skeptical look, with a cocked eyebrow. μηδείς (talk) 01:26, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Miss Bono said "looks like this but without the eyebrow lifted". Deor (talk) 03:24, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Well then I have no effing idea. Perhaps she means this? μηδείς (talk) 03:59, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

When I cover the left side of his face (our right), I see "gazing intently". Glare (Deor) suggests some strong emotion behind the eyes, like anger, which I don't see here. -- Jack of Oz ^{[pleasantries]} 04:13, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Well, I was also going by the little dialogue that Miss Bono supplied. If I were person A, I think I'd be glaring by the end of that. Deor (talk) 04:41, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

I question the notion of knowing the expression "without the eyebrow lifted". One can't respond to what one can't see. I am trying to simply duplicate one side of the face with the other. But I am not really analyzing the overall face due to the necessity of suppressing an unwanted cue. I think we are underestimating the vast amount of information communicated by a face, and the infinite subtlety of its cues. Bus stop (talk) 02:53, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Woops! Sorry the late reply, I was on holidays! It's like O RLY!. I tried to search for a face like the one I was suggesting here but I found nothing except for that image... Miss Bono ^{[hello, hello!]} 12:14, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

October 10

Plural of Golem in Hebrew

What's the plural form of Golem in Hebrew? Wiktionary says גולמים \ גֹּלְמִים, but I can't read that, so I'd prefer a romanized answer. --BDD (talk) 19:00, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Golmim. (Stress on the final syllable) --ColinFine (talk) 23:56, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

October 11

Chinese names of fictional characters

Hi! What are the Chinese names of the fictional characters in The Nine-tailed Turtle? Kang Jisheng, Wang Suqiu, Zhang Qiugu

Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 06:45, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

The first seems to be 康己生 Kàng Jǐshēng, according to ch.79 of the online edition. The second is 王素秋 Wáng Sùqiū, named in ch.115. The third is 章秋谷 Zhāng Qiūgū, likewise mentioned in ch.115. Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:29, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you WhisperToMe (talk) 08:39, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

May I also have the name of Chen Wenxian, the girlfriend of Zhang Qiugu? Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 09:11, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Can't find it that quickly. Do you know which chapter it would occur in? Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:08, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Actually, there seems to be a person called 陈文仙, Chén Wénxiān, introduced in ch.8. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:20, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! WhisperToMe (talk) 13:36, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Translation of Spanish with misspellings/nonstandard forms

I've been asked to help translate a Spanish text (probably from South-America), and am having some problems: "Se me llorociaron los hojos y me erice completemente...". The ellipsis is part of the text, and indicates that the sentence is intentionally unfinished. Another sentence follows (which I understand). I assume "hojos" should be "ojos", and that "llorociaron" maybe is a nonstandard 3rd person plural past tense conjugation of llorar (It gets some 350 google hits). Google is of no help in translating "erice", too many irrelevant hits. The text has been written by a native speaker, but for confidentiality reasons I can't give much context. My attempt at a word-by-word translation is: "My eyes cried and I ____ completely...". Does anyone have any idea of what "erice" might mean? And is "llorociaron" a variant of "lloraron", or is there a difference in meaning? Thanks, --NorwegianBlue ^talk 17:21, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Mooki Ana Low-Hey song translation

Could anybody with the competence in Hawaiian (?) translate this song? There is the lyrics but in Anglicized spelling unfortunately.--Lüboslóv Yęzýkin (talk) 17:29, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Cyrillic Polish

Do people ever write the Polish language in the Cyrillic alphabet? --66.190.69.246 (talk) 18:22, 11 October 2013 (UTC)