Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language

Reference Desk

Science Mathematics Computing/IT Humanities Language Entertainment Miscellaneous Archives
How to ask a question Search first. It's quicker, because you can find the answer in our online encyclopedia instead of waiting for a volunteer to respond. Search Wikipedia using the searchbox. A web search could help too. Common questions about Wikipedia itself, such as how to cite Wikipedia and who owns Wikipedia, are answered in Wikipedia:FAQ.
Sign your question. Type ~~~~ at its end. Be specific. Explain your question in detail if necessary, addressing exactly what you'd like answered. For information that changes from country to country (or from state to state), such as legal, fiscal or institutional matters, please specify the jurisdiction you're interested in. Include both a title and a question. The title (top box) should specify the topic of your question. The complete details should be in the bottom box. Do your own homework. If you need help with a specific part or concept of your homework, feel free to ask, but please don't post entire homework questions and expect us to give you the answers. Be patient. Questions are answered by other users, and a user who can answer may not be reading the page immediately. A complete answer to your question may be developed over a period of up to seven days.	Do not include your e-mail address. Questions aren't normally answered by e-mail. Be aware that the content on Wikipedia is extensively copied to many websites; making your e-mail address public here may make it very public throughout the Internet. Edit your question for more discussion. Click the [edit] link on right side of its header line. Please do not start multiple sections about the same topic. Archived questions If you cannot find your question on the reference desks, please see the Archives. Unanswered questions If you find that your question has been archived before being answered, you may copy your question from the Archives into a new section on the reference desk. Do not request medical or legal advice. Ask a doctor or lawyer instead.
After reading the above, you may ask a new question by clicking here. Your question will be added at the bottom of the page.
How to answer a question Be thorough. Please provide as much of the answer as you are able to. Be concise, not terse. Please write in a clear and easily understood manner. Keep your answer within the scope of the question as stated.	Link to articles which may have further information relevant to the question. Be polite to users, especially ones new to Wikipedia. A little fun is fine, but don't be rude. The reference desk is not a soapbox. Please avoid debating about politics, religion, or other sensitive issues.

See also Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language/FAQs for answers to frequently asked language and usage questions.

If you would like to have a text translated, you might want to post on this Wiktionary page.

June 21

dolphin language?

what language(s) do dolphins speak?--Bee(y)^Ti 02:08, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

See Cetacean intelligence#Communication. —Keenan Pepper 02:47, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Portuguese. Definitely Portuguese. Loomis 22:14, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Help in translating a Korean sentence

Hi there, I'm learning Korean and I'm trying to translate this sentence. I've done some of it, but if someone who speaks Korean could help me translate this sentence completely, explaining each word if possible, that would be very much appreciated.

제5회 태국 채널 V 뮤직비디오 어워드에서 처음으로2관왕을 차지한 그룹 동방신기도 붉은악마에 가세했다.

Fifth time Thailand channel V music video awards-[from?] first time [2 crown kings?]-[object particle] take up a group Dong Bang Shin Gi (a band name) [in?] Red Devil [did help?]

A quick question as well, why does 동방신기 have a 도? Does that mean "also"? Alex Ng 07:55, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

You've almost got it finished.

• -에서 can mean "at" as well.
• -으로 means that it's a description of manner. (Not to be confused with -으로, describing a destination.) It's kind of like the English word "with"; it has several uses. 1. Together with. 2. Using. If you clean house with your friend, you're doing it together. If you clean house with a broom, you're using the broom. -으로 can mean "how they did it" or "where they're going".
• 2관왕 is a combination of 2 crown king, but it actually means they "won two medals/awards/etc." at a single ceremony.
• 차지 means to take or to claim as one's own.
• Correct. -도 means "also." Someone else must have joined/helped/got together with the Red Devils as well.
• -에 means destination.
• 가세 means to join forces with someone.

So in full, it would be "Dongbangshingi, who won two awards at the 5th. Thailand Channel V Music Video Awards for the first time, joined the Red Devils as well." --Kjoonlee 10:57, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks so much, Kjoonlee! Now I can actually understand this sentence x.x

I have another question, would you use Sino-Korean counters or Native Korean counters when counting number of times (회) and awards (관왕)? I tried looking at the Korean count word article, but it merely acknowledges the fact that there are two sets of numbers, without saying which one is used to which. Alex Ng 21:07, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I'd use Sino-Korean numbers with both, since 회 and 관왕 are Sino-Korean as well. I wouldn't call 회 or 관왕 counter words.

In general, for small numbers, you use native Korean numbers together with counters. If the numbers get big, like 50 or 100, then sometimes you can use Sino-Korean numbers together with counters.

However, there's no hard-and-fast rule for picking which system to use; I think the article used to mention a rule, but I think I edited it out. --Kjoonlee 02:26, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Okay, thanks so much again Kjoonlee! Alex Ng 03:39, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

inquiry v. enquiry

Is the difference only in English v. American spelling, or in its use?

If it is used differently, what is this difference?

Thanks. Sinead

AFAIK, that's it. —Wayward ^Talk 12:41, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

There can be a difference. 'Inquiry' is used to mean a formal investigation into some matter of public concern. You wouldn't use 'enquiry' in that context. --Richardrj 12:49, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

To continue from that comment, 'enquiry' simply means a question. Thus you make an enquiry about a friend's health, but the police launch an inquiry into a crime. This difference is slowly blurring, however - it's becoming far more common to see the inquiry spelling for both (but that doesn't mean it's right, dammit!). It might well be that "inquiry" is used in both senses in the US, but the two forms are differentiated in this way in International (i.e., British and Commonwealth) English. Grutness...wha? 12:53, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I looked up enquiry in Chambers 9th ed., since my American dictionaries only indicated a British variant of inquiry, and it states "inquiry or enquiry (or esp US /inq'kwi-ri/) n the act of inquiring; a search for knowledge; (an) investigation; a question." —Wayward ^Talk 13:02, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

In British English, the two words should usually be used quite differently. An enquiry is simply a question; an inquiry (on which we have an alarmingly long article) is an investigation. However, the Concise Oxford does say that enquire tends to be preferred in the context of an academic investigation.--Shantavira 18:15, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Pronunciation also differs transatlantically. In American English they're stressed on the 1st syllable, but in British it's the 2nd. JackofOz 08:33, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Brackets

Hi there, I have a question regarding square brackets when used in a single letter of a word. I know that when used in the middle of a sentence it usually indicates a word that is absent from text but was implicit in the situation. Also other uses as explained in the bracket article.

But more than once I have seen it like this:

[T]he word the here has only its first letter in brackets.

This appears on Sallie Baliunas comment here

I can't recall if it's just on the t on the that I've seen this, it just might be.

So, could anyone explain what these brackets are supposed to mean? VdSV9•♫ 11:51, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

An educated guess: it means that, in the original text, the phrase quoted was part of a longer sentence, hence the t in The would have been in lowercase. Since you're quoting only this fragment, it would look strange if you began with a lowercase letter, so you start in uppercase, but put it in square brackets to indicate that you are not quoting exactly. — QuantumEleven 11:55, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

It does make sense, but then shouldn't one use bracketed ellipses in this case?

[...] and you too have been slacking around at the office all morning, eh?!

VdSV9•♫ 12:08, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Ellipses are not usually needed at the beginning or the end of a quotation. However, if deliberately omitting the ending of a quotation results in a grammatically incomplete sentence, use an ellipsis. —Wayward ^Talk 12:38, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

The bracketing means that the case of the first letter has changed. This is done, especially in legal writing, when a writer wants to quote his source with the greatest possible fidelity. Doing so is required, for legal citation, by the [Bluebook] manual of legal citation style.--192.35.17.11 14:12, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Sometimes when I am communicating with friends in English-speaking countries that are not the United States, I will write something like "colo[u]r", but I suppose that's something like original research. --LarryMac 19:24, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

The more common way to punctuate that would be "colo(u)r". Square brackets are usually reserved for editorial changes. - Nunh-huh 04:36, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Please translate the German phrase "Sonnen- und Mondgleiche"

It comes from the article de:Astronomische Uhr#Straßburg which I translated at Strasbourg Cathedral#Astronomical clock. The full sentence is:

Der astronomische Teil ist von außergewöhnlicher Genauigkeit; es werden Schaltjahre, Tagundnachtgleiche, Sonnen- und Mondgleiche und viele weitere astronomische Daten angezeigt.

Schaltjahre means leap years, Tagundnachtgleiche means equinoxes, but I can't figure out Sonnengleiche and Mondgleiche. Thanks! --Mathew5000 19:42, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm German and not completely ignorant in astronomy, but I have no idea what those are, either. Googling didn't help, so I forwarded your question to the German reference desk equivalent, de:Wikipedia:Auskunft. This certainly needs an explaination in the German article, too... —da Pete (ばか) 21:05, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Judging by the etimology of the word, I think it shouldn't be taken as two words (Sonnengleiche and Mondgleiche) but as one (Sonnen- und Mondgleiche), just like the word "Tagundnachtgleiche" that's also mentioned. That said, I think it may refer to the time when the Moon is in conjunction with the Sun, see New moon, and Dark moon. At least that's my guess from looking at how the word is formed. --RiseRover|^talk 21:26, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Correct is Sonnen- und Mondgleichung. -- Martin Vogel 21:39, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

See solar equation and lunar equation in Computus. -- Martin Vogel 21:47, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks very much, da Pete and Martin! --Mathew5000 04:15, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

alphabet

I have a good friend where I work. He is Wiccan. For my birthday he wrote something down on a rock in this language. I have no idea what it says and am dying to figure it out. If you could send me the alphabet so I can hopefully figure it out or even a link that I can go to to look it up I would appreciate it very much. My e-mail address is [not here anymore. questions are answered here on the desk] Thank you, Jamie

Hi Jamie, Wicca is not a language. it is "a Neopagan religion and a religious movement" (that's from our article, accessible by clicking on the preceding link). That article is not one of Wikipedia's best, but it might give you some resources, although I suspect your friend might be pulling your leg. --LarryMac 20:24, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

He probably wrote it (or thinks he wrote it) in some kind of Runic alphabet. Adam Bishop 22:13, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

One approach would be to scan your rock and post the photo here. Odds are someone would know what to make of it. - Nunh-huh 04:35, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Right. I know how to read "Five feet high the door and three may walk abreast," in Futhork. --Kjoonlee 04:44, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Maybe you can take a picture of the rock. --Proficient 22:33, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps Ogham?--The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 00:59, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Plural of "dwarf"

Is the correct plural "dwarves"? I seem to recall a documentary some years ago about the making of Walt Disney's 1937 animated film about Snow White and her friends. Walt used "dwarfs" in the title, but some English teachers were upset. Walt replied that "dwarfs" just sounded better to him. Is either spelling acceptable? 66.213.33.2 22:20, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Dictionary.com seems to think dwarves isn't a real word...EvocativeIntrigue _{TALK | EMAIL} 22:29, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

The article says "Its plural was traditionally dwarfs, but Tolkien used the plural dwarves, which has gone into general usage". Trollderella 22:37, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Dwarf (looking at Wikipedia first is good) says that dwarfs is traditional and that Tolkien, whose impact would postdate Disney's Snow White, perfered dwarves, which has become popular, but as per Dwarfism, dwarfs is popular for real-life people.--Prosfilaes 22:40, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Right. Also, if you look at fantasy novels, you'll probably notice that "dwarves" has replaced "dwarfs" as the plural form in the genre. --Kjoonlee 04:34, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Tolkien wrote a note about it in The Hobbit explaining how he preferred 'dwarves' and now, as has been said, that's come into acccepted usage.

June 22

De dicto vs. de re

Suppose someone asks, "What's the Dow Jones Industrial Average?" I could answer this in two ways:

1. "It's one of several stock market indices created by Wall Street Journal editor and Dow Jones & Company founder Charles Dow."
2. "It's 11,079.46."

Is this an example of a de dicto/de re distinction? Seahen 01:52, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

"It's one of several stock market indices created by Wall Street Journal editor and Dow Jones & Company founder Charles Dow...but that's not important right now." Have you looked at De dicto and de re? Adam Bishop 02:42, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

the article doesn't actually say anything, it's all just hot air. so, sure, it's a "de dicto/de re" distinction. Likewise, if I say "What is the Dow Jones Average" and you answer that it is the second-best known symbol of the performance of the American stock market (after NASDAQ), it also could be "de dicto/de re". If you ask someone "what is the Dow Jones Average" and they curse you out and steal your wallet, that is also a de dicto / de re distinction. It's all a bunch of postmodern claptrap not worth the paper it's written on. It's a good thing Wikipedia is not paper..

I think the de dicto/de re concept could become something meaningful if it were more clear. Or do you mean the Dow Jones isn't worth the paper it's written on? Seahen 12:09, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Jack, Jacques... Joaquín?

I believe the English name Jack is equivalent to the French "Jacques," but are they in turn related to the Spanish "Joaquín" or another name I'm missing? Thanks, - Draeco 03:42, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

That's the name Joachim, while Jacques comes from Jacob. Adam Bishop 03:45, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

French "Jacques" is equivalent to English James (or Jacob), and to Spanish Santiago. Santiago comes from "Saint Yago", (Yago coming from Jacob). Yago is also still used (or used as pet form of Santiago), so it's another Spanish equivalent to Jacques/James. --RiseRover|^talk 04:58, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Jack is closely related to John, not to Jacques. Jack (name) gives some background. JackofOz 06:16, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Santiago is specifically related to St. James of Compostela. In general, the Spanish version of James is Diego. As in San Diego, which refers to an entirely different saint altogether. User:Zoe|^(talk) 01:53, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Diego alternates with Jaime and Jacobo as the cognate of James and Jacob, much like in English, Mitchell and Michael are doublets. Joaquin was the maternal grandfather of Jesus (of course I'd like the meet the paternal one ;). James/Jacob was a disciple.

I have a cousin and uncle by the name of Joaquín. My cousin's nickname is 'Wacky' the other one is 'Kingky'.( Joaquín just fyi is pronounced hwakin with Spanish spelling.)--Jondel 06:36, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Wacky and Kinky? Sounds like they're second cousins of Itchy and Scratchy. (lol) JackofOz 08:28, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

People from the same town

Compatriots is the name given to people from the same country; is there a name to refer to people from the same town? --RiseRover|^talk 08:22, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

townsman?

Looks like it! Thanks. :)--RiseRover|^talk 11:55, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Pronunciation of the name Barlaam

Hello,

I'm curious as to what the proper pronunciation of the name 'Barlaam' would be.

Thanks

Adam s 09:32, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I would assume it's pronounced as follows: "bar-lamb"...EvocativeIntrigue _{TALK | EMAIL} 12:41, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Why would it have a B on the end? I would have thought "bar-layem" more likely if it's Hebrew, but I don't know for sure, I'm afraid.--Shantavira 14:33, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

You may be interested in our article on Balaam, as I would imagine you are interested in him. His name is spelled בלעם bil‘ām, which may be pronounced /bilˈʕaːm/. — Gareth Hughes 14:48, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

In English, his name is usually pronouned /ˈbeɪləm/ (to rhyme with Salem); however, there's no reason to think Adam s wasn't actually asking about Barlaam. Especially since he's asked the same question at Talk:Saint Josaphat. User:Angr 15:09, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Jumbled Words

1. was/the/Twain/American/writer/in 1986/sent/India/to/country/describe/the.

2.in/nearly/pen/defeat/threw/he/his/away.

3.wonders/decided/the/he/to/land/call/of/simply/it.--Saksham Sharma 10:34, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

1. Describe India, the country the American writer Mark Twain was sent to in 1986.

2. He nearly threw his pen away in defeat.

3. He decided to call it simply the land of wonders.

You might also be interested to know that solving such problems has a very perceivable effect on our short-term psychology, which I read about in Blink. So, it's a "trick question" since the test really isn't on solving these problems, but the subconscious effects of doing so. (Students solving such problems revolving around the idea / terms associated with "patience" afterwards waited almost indefinitely for a professor's attention who ignored them, talking to a colleague, whereas the control group did not wait for such an unreasonable time (15 minutes plus!) for the professor to turn to them.)

actually, I solved the first one wrong, but it doesn't really matter. the test isn't really on solving these, but rather on the psychological effect of doing so. (For example, the second sentence makes you think of defeat. I would expect students to perform worse (by a large, statistically significant margin) after solving question 2 than a control group solving a sentence about success or triumph.

here's my second try at question 1 : "Was Twain, the American writer, sent to describe the country India in 1986?" Likewise you can transpose "was twain" to "Twain the American writer was sent" so it is not a question. likewise you can put "in 1986" in a number of places. etc. as I said, it doesn't matter.

'All's fair in Love and War'

This is one phrase i've never understood fully. Is it used as an excuse for treacherous behaviour i.e. a boy is after a girl and his friends knows this but still decides to go after her too, using as his justification 'All's fair in Love and War', or is it infact that opposite, saying that love and war are two things where everything must be done fairly, and not treacherously? i hope i've been clear enough there, i'm aware i tend to sort of ramble on in questions. thanks. --Alex.dsch 11:22, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

it's the first version. "anything goes". likewise: does "waste not want not" mean if you don't waste anything you won't desire anything, or if you don't waste things, you won't be wanting in things. (short of things).

That's an interesting proverb. It reminds me of a Chinese four-character idiom. Bhumiya (said/done) 16:16, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

No news is good news! Tesseran 06:06, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

It means "Faint Heart never won Fair Lady", and such a faint heart would never win a war of any other kind either.

In Russian, it's "All means are good in war and love". It's a justification. Conscious 19:21, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Artemis Fowl

Could you help me out and tell me if Artemis Fowl is set in the distant future, near future, or now? Thanks --86.139.216.231 13:18, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

When I read it, I was given the impression of "now, but with gadgets", like, you know, James Bond or something. I'm not 100% sure, though.- THE GREAT GAVINI {T-C} 16:55, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Questions for Commonwealth English speakers

I have a few subjective questions, sort of an informal survey. Which regional variety of North American English do you find most pleasant? Which do you find most prestigious? Which do you find least pleasant/prestigious? Of non-North American varieties, which strikes your ears as most/least pleasant/prestigious? Responses from North American English speakers are also welcome, but please do identify your place of origin. I'm primarily interested in the perceptions of British/Australian/NZ speakers. Thanks! Bhumiya (said/done) 16:15, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I dunno, they're all kind of similar. - THE GREAT GAVINI {T-C} 16:57, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I am a frequent visitor to the US but I cannot answer the question posed as I don't know all the variations on offer. Wasn't it Winston Churchill who suggested that Britain and America were two countries divided by a common language? As to the second part of the question inviting non-North Americans to indicate their perceptions of spoken English, let me explain that as a North East of England citizen of the UK, who has lived in Scotland for the last 32 years, in my opinion, the best and most attractive form of spoken English I have ever heard is to be found in a town in Inverness-shire in northern Scotland called Beauly (Byoollee). It is the clearest and sweetest sound to emerge from the lips of humans; not quite a song, more of a lilt, with never any vagueness of diction or intent. I cannot vouch for the story I was told when I first visited there over 30 years ago, but it was held out to be the case that when the newly created BBC were struggling to choose which British dialect to use as BBC Broadcast English, "scouts" were sent all over Britain charged with bringing back recommendations for which regional dialect/s might be most readily understood by all the regions. The end result was apparently a very close won decision in favour of Oxford University English as against the Beauly Dialect, which in my opinion, even though I speak as an Englishman living in Scotland, was entirely the wrong choice. But you would have to judge for yourself.

(George Bernard Shaw, actually. --Kjoonlee 19:13, 22 June 2006 (UTC))

He's got it - he's got it, I do believe he's got it !!!

Don't take this the wrong way, but I consider the idea of a prestigious North American accent to be rather amusing. I'd say a Canadian accent is the least unpleasant/vulgar, but I suspect my opinion is tainted by ideological rather than purely aesthetic considerations. Texas or valley girl would tie for the worst, for similar reasons. New York has pleasant associations of Woody Allen, but beyond that I'd have trouble telling the difference. Henry^Flower 19:20, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

You'd probably hate my accent (Cleveland+Richmond), but I'd probably like yours. I consider a Scottish accent, particularly the Edinburgh variety, to be the finest in English. I'm not familiar with Aberdeen's sound. I also like non-rhotic southern accents such as AAVE and my own Virginian (Vuhjinyuhn) English. Of course, I don't necessarily connect "pleasant" to "prestigious". I consider the Iowa/Tom Brokaw accent to be the most prestigious, but I find it very dull and grating. Likewise, I don't particularly care for Estuary English or BBC English. It's interesting that most Britons seem to find American accents uniformly unpleasant and scarcely distinguishable. To my ear, American regional varieties seem to have great variety (which is natural, I suppose, for an American listener).

And Henry, what do you mean by "ideological considerations"? Do you dislike the Texan twang because of its unfortunate association with the one who shall not be named? If that's the case, you ought to prefer the Massachusetts accent, given its political associations. Bhumiya (said/done) 23:09, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Of course! GHWB was born in Brookline, MA, so to me the Massachusetts accents is the finest US accent of all. ;) Loomis 02:42, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

From my limited contact with North American English listening to news programmes, television shows and films, I only have two distinct classifications for the accents and dialects: Southern USA drawl and not Southern USA drawl. Road Wizard 19:27, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Ach! I didn't answer the rest of the question. I am from North West England and I don't really have any accent I consider to be most pleasant or prestiguous. I have a few which grate on my nerves, but I am not going to mention them in case I provoke an argument. :) Road Wizard 19:31, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Jorja Fox's accent is pretty irritating. Jameswilson 23:33, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

She has an accent? User:Zoe|^(talk) 01:57, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Everybody has an accent. See idiolect. --Kjoonlee 04:06, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

My (pretty intentionally) sarcastic comment meant that I don't hear her having any different accent from General American. User:Zoe|^(talk) 01:55, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I know; that's why I replied like that. Nobody speaks General American; everybody speaks slightly differently. --Kjoonlee 11:51, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Personally, I thought Andie MacDowell's performance in Groundhog Day was very pleasant. --Kjoonlee 05:07, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

FWIW, I find Canadian accents and Northeastern US accents fairly pleasant, and dislike southern drawl. Worst, though, are the voices used on US television documentaries that seem to assume that the viewer has a mental age of four (obvious joke deliberately avoided here). Their voices either strive to sound "hard hitting and authoritative" while actually sounding dogmatic and slightly dense (news documentaries) or "cute and appealing" while actually sounding offensively patronising, puerile and childish (human interest/nature documentaries). I think the worst North American voices I've heard though are radio announcers - particularly those involved in soprts talkback. Ten seconds of that is enough to have me trying to claw my ears off. Grutness...wha? 05:53, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

How about AAVE? And what about west coast accents, such as that of California? Bhumiya (said/done) 06:47, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't mind Californian too much, though - as I said - I tend to prefer northeastern accents. AAVE is slightly annoying to me, but not so much in itself, more for the fact that a lot of people who use it seem to be doing so for effect. If it sounds natural, then it's no problem, but it's very easy for it to sound phoney. I must admit that my feelings towards AAVE are coloured (no pun intended) by the fact that urban Maori and Polynesians in NZ tend to use something that is influenced by it - and that is often very much a pose rather than natural.

I have to add that more often than not, a particular voice is either pleasing or annoying in itself irrespective of the accent. James Earl Jones could do his worst possible Cockney imitation a la Dick Van Dyke, and he'd still be more listenable to than Fran Drescher, whose voice is like nails down a blackboard irrespective of (although not helped by) her accent. Grutness...wha? 09:53, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

What's so great about Andie MacDowell's accent? I like how Christopher Walken speaks. What region is he from? --Mathew5000 07:18, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Walken is from New York, and has a fairly thick New York accent, but he also has a unique, clipped way of talking. Bhumiya (said/done) 08:36, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I tend to notice "extreme" accents - the southern drawl/twang, the New York-Jewish accent, the Connecticut accent, the Massachussetts accent, the Minnesota "yah" accent, and the Hispanic accent being some of the most obvious examples. I'm Ok with all of these, but the first can get tiring. The rest of the American accents tend to merge into one aural soup for me, although city accents are usually different from rural ones (or maybe that's just a Hollywood stereotype). Anglophone Canadian is more-or-less indistinguishable from soup-American except for words like "about" (which sounds like "a boat"). The only "accent" I particularly dislike is more associated with an age group (in my mind, anyway) than with a region. Hard to describe it - words like "do" and "to" sound like "dyeew" and "tyeew"; words like "engine", "started" and "Moses" (whose last vowel is normally a schwa) become "en-jin", "star-tid" and "Mo-zizz". Really, really horrible. JackofOz 09:57, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I find that annoying too. I think it may come from California. It's associated in my mind with young women who also happen to pronounce "-ing" as "-een". Could it be Valley speech? Bhumiya (said/done) 01:43, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

The "dyeew" and "tyeew" pronunciatons are East Coast pronunciations. The other, I don't think I've ever noticed. User:Zoe|^(talk) 01:58, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I enjoy particular dialects which form a distinctive minority in pronounciation and vocabulary, such as Cockney and Ebonics, but beyond that, I don't have much of a bias in the realms of aesthetics. I'm often tempted to ask people where they are from because of their accent, but of course I have to hold back this pulse of curiosity. Sometimes I'll try slurring or distorting words as a sort of experiment to see if anyone will notice, and they usually don't (i.e turning I don't know but you could ask them into ɑ' n' oʊ' bə' tʃɯ' kʊ' dæs' kɪm').--The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 02:31, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

As a Canadian, I'm both a North American English Speaker, as well as a Commonwealth English speaker. Best of both worlds, right? No? Oh well I tried. In any case, my opinion should be taken with a grain of salt, as personally, I tend to be fascinated by the most incomprehensible and/or unusual, working-class forms of English.

I love Cockney, as I can't comprehend a word of it. Same with hard-core Glaswegian...but those are both British, so I'm veering off topic.

Newfoundland English has got to be the oddest form of North American English in existence. It's fascinating to listen to. I also have quite a fondness for blue collar Ontario English. It's the most "typical" Canadian English, the kind most people associate with all of Canada.

"I don't know, eh,...so I's been sitting on my couch, eh, and next thing I knows, eh, is my wife comes in and tells me she's leaving me, eh, so I'm like freakin' out, eh,...so I right away call my good friend Doug, eh, and I tells him to bring over a 2-4 of Labatts, eh,...so we're like drinkin' the 2-4, eh, and next thing I knows is my wife comes back, eh?..."

Well I hope you kind of get the idea. I just plain like the oddest and most idiosyncratic forms of English, but that's my thing. Loomis 03:11, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, I think that it probably has less to do with the sound of the accent more than it has to do with associations of the accent with stereotypical cultural characteristics, in the same way a France-French accent is considered "sexy". On the other hand, I believe to a lot of Anglophone Canadians, a Quebecan-French accent is considered the opposite, because of again stereotypical cultural characteristics. --ColourBurst 06:41, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

I actually prefer Québecois French to European French. European French is so damned cold and pretentious, while the Québecois are such a warm people. Of course it's a lot more difficult to understand, but then again, as I said, I'm fascinated by incomprehensible dialects. And of course, you'd probably think I'm biased because I live in Quebec, but in reality, most of my fellow "anglos" totally disagree with me on this one. Loomis 22:10, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm a North American, and I'd just like to say that the "rural Utah" dialect is the most annoying. It sounds like a combination of southern and Scandinavian accents, not to mention the copious grammatical errors. --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 18:35, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Looking for a term in printing: Black marks in galley proofs

When a typesetter finds something that needs further clarification she usually puts a special mark such as a thick black bar into the galley proof in order to catch the author's or proofreader's eye that something is missing and especially alert the printer that the typescript is not yet ready for print. In German, such a mark is called a Blockade, as it is so thick and black that a printer will notice even with a casual glance that this typescript is "blocked", i.e. not cleared for print. How is this mark called in English? Simon A. 16:22, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Pages that are not ready to be printed should never be sent to the printer, only to the proofreader and the author. As far as I am aware (and I've been a typesetter for 20 years) we don't have an equivalent to the blockade, but a highlighter could be used to draw the reader's attention. Any outstanding queries are normally circled in the text, and a note such as "to be checked" would be circled in the margin. Pages that are not to be used would have a diagonal cross right through them. --Shantavira 18:01, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I've finally remembered: it's called a slug. 18.250.2.10 10:37, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Simplified phonetic transcription for Lithuanian

The page in the title is a phonetic transcription system which seems to be used in around six articles here on Wikipedia. The relevant talkpage only has three comments all suggesting a switch to IPA. I know this is probably not the right place, but it is one frequented by people who know IPA so I am seeking help in switching the phonetic guide on these articles, or commenting on whether they think this switch is a good idea. The articles are Mindaugas, Klaipėda, Kęstutis, Algirdas, Panevėžys and Kaunas. Then there are the examples on Lithuanian language. Stefán Ingi 18:20, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

You could explain on the talk pages, then tag the article with {{Cleanup-ipa}}. The English approximations should be replaced with proper IPA as well, IMHO. --Kjoonlee 18:38, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Ah, there is even a template for it, thanks. -- yes, when the IPA is there, it seems pointless to have an IPA-esque approximate pronounciation. Stefán Ingi 19:21, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Chinese??

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&q=42+39+19+N,+94+10+02+E&ie=UTF8&ll=42.655274,94.167219&spn=0.004947,0.013561&t=k&om=1 What does this say in Chinese??--Sonjaaa 22:32, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Apparently it's "Long live chairman Mao!"--Sonjaaa 23:32, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

毛主席万万岁！
mao2 zhu3xi2 wan4wan4 sui4!
[May] Chairman Mao [live for] a hundred million years! --Cam 23:36, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

See Ten thousand years for the expression. —Keenan Pepper 00:12, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

It looks like a forgery to me. It is a computer touch up instead of a real physical feature on the ground. --Chan Tai Man 13:58, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Don't assume so quickly. It appears to be real, and at approx 300m, it's entirely feasible. Very cool!  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  16:15, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

For more cultural revolution jollity, see http://sun-bin.blogspot.com/2006/06/new-google-earth-beta-better.html . 1960s China was a pretty surreal place. Henry^Flower 16:23, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

It does look photoshopped to me, and Google does have controversial dealings with the Communist Party of China (see Internet censorship in mainland China#Search engines). On the other hand, it wouldn't be the first such message discovered by aerial photos; see forest swastika. Seahen 16:44, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

The Chinese government may be nasty old buggers, but the idea of them asking Google to put Cultural Revolution-era slogans into satellite images is a bit of a stretch. Henry^Flower 17:06, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Why go through all that trouble when they could just pay people to paint it on, anyway? --ColourBurst 19:12, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

As someone else suggested, the picture looks like photoshopped. The words do not look 3D nor they follow the countour of the hills, but prefectly orthogonal to the satellite viewpoint -- which is highly improbable in the real world. --Chan Tai Man 13:31, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Microsoft's satellite service also shows this sort of thing, apparently. I would think that Google and MSN get their photos from different sources; it only makes sense that they would put exclusivity provisions in their contracts. Anyway, compare the images at the following two URLs. In the Google image you can zoom in and see that it is Chinese writing; the Microsoft image is much lower resolution but from a distance you can just make it out:

• http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=42.542,94.3278&spn=0.08,0.12&t=k&om=0
• http://local.live.com/default.aspx?cp=42.542~94.306&lvl=13&style=a&v=2

--Mathew5000 18:58, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I thought it was common sense but some people seem to be doubting so I guess it has to be said explicitly: the figures in those images are real. They were created during the cultural revolution, presumably to be seen from overpassing planes. They carry various messages, some communist and others, "learn from the mistakes of the war", not so.  freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ  07:05, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

June 23

Thin ear needed

I'm moving this from Talk:International Phonetic Alphabet.

Hi, I'd like to invite a phonetics expert with a thin ear to resolve some doubts we have on Talk:Serbo-Croatian language. Basically, we agree that we hear different L's in Bulgarian and Serbian versions of a text, but can't find out what's the phonetic source of the difference. Thanks in advance, Duja 13:02, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm not an expert, but if someone can upload two speech samples of "a same word" spoken by a Bulgarian speaker and a Serbian speaker, then I can try spectrogram analysis with Praat. --Kjoonlee 04:10, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Yikes, I've taken a look at your link, and the discussion is way over my head, and it would take me a lot of effort trying to figure out what velarization &c. looks like in spectrograms. I doubt I can help, but sound samples would help the real experts, I guess. --Kjoonlee 05:27, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

We already kind of figured out that Serbian is dental, more like English (tongue tip between the teeth) and Bulgarian alveolar (tongue tip at alveolar ridge), more like French. The IPA does not distinguish the symbols though. Duja 07:21, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Actually, the IPA does distinguish between dental and spot-on alveolar if necessary, by putting a diacritic below the symbol [t̪] if it represents a dental consonant, and leaving out the diacritic if no distinction is made.  Denelson83  07:26, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Spectrographic analyses of /l/ are difficult, but if there's a word that is identical in the two languages, I would be able to do it. To give an English example, lull in isolation or holding phonetic context constant, pronounced in different dialects in English may have different variants of /l/, and you could distinguish them spectrographically by seeing how high the second formant is. However, if the phonetic context is different, then it wouldn't work because both preceding and following sound influence the /l/, and even worse, the //l influences them. It becomes a mess very easily. If you're still interested, I'd have a look, but I need an /l/ that is a perfect match because I dont' have time to sort it all out. mnewmanqc

Greek names

Hello, I want to know whether Plato's name (Πλάτων) is in the form of the masculine plural genitive declension. Thanks.--K.C. Tang 04:06, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

It is masculine singular nominative, declined like this. --Cam 05:21, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

I see, thanks a lot! the Ancient Greek grammar doesn't cover that...--K.C. Tang 06:02, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Disclaimer: I don't know Greek. I see now that the link I gave is talking about Modern Greek, so proceed with caution, the declension may not be the same in Ancient Greek. --Cam 06:37, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it is masculine singular nominative, third declension, declined Πλάτων, Πλάτονος (nominative, genitive). Cf. here for more info. Hope this helps -- Smyth is a good reference manual. --Anon.

In case the previous links didn't make it clear, that means that Πλάτων is nominative masculine singular, and it declines:

Πλάτων, Πλάτονος ὁ

Nom Πλάτων
Acc Πλάτονα
Gen Πλάτονος
Dat Πλάτονι

Nom Πλάτονες
Acc Πλάτονας
Gen Πλάτονων
Dat Πλάτουσι(ν) with ν if it is at the end of a sentense or preceding a vowel

Hope that clears every thing up. Daniel (‽) 18:53, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

"Πλάτονων" would appear to violate the usual accent-placement rules... AnonMoos 19:04, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Quite right, it does. It should be paroxytone. Maid Marion 10:11, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Swedish?

This advert for a pleorama seems to be for some kind of panorama or myriorama show. Can anyone see any more specific details about the entertainment, please? And can someone translate "Rörlig bild som framställer ett landskap som det visar för en förbiseglande" which I think is about moving panoramas? Many thanks --HJMG 07:34, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

The passage you quoted means 'moving images that represent a landscape as it's seen by someone who sails past'. I can translate the rest for you in a few minutes. :) - ulayiti (talk) 13:26, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Here goes:

If weather permits, we will show at the Kupittaa well salon (?), for the first time on Saturday 22 May and the following days between 4 and 10 pm, a large pleorama and depiction from the newest battlefields and largest cities in Europe and America.

Programme for the first showing:

1. The battle of Isly (?) on the 14th of August 1844 (a 24-foot painting, by Horace Vernet).

   This scene gives an excellent and satisfying overview of the Moroccan-French battlefield. An army, nearly four times stronger than the victors, must give way here to the effects of the newest methods of warfare, even though the Africans fought with the most furious desperation, a fiery hate and a fervent religious fanaticism. Hundreds of bodies cover the battlefield, which is filled by Frenchmen under Marshal Bugeaud, Africans and Kabyles. The battle is raging and the rush of people is unpleasant, especially around the tent of Sidi Mohamed and his son Abberhamann, and the scene is terribly beautiful, as everywhere there are fleeing Africans, running Kabyles and victoriously advancing Frenchmen, while creating great and piquant formations.

2. Overview of Florence and surrounding regions in Italy.
3. The conquest of Vienna

   the night of 1 November 1848 (or 1818?).

4. The large battle by Sinope

   between Russians and Turks, where the Russians won.

5. Jerusalem

   the capital of the ancient Jewish kingdom in Asia Minor. This large painting is copied from a crafty oil painting completed in 989, which is kept in the Royal Bavarian Art Gallery in Munich, and it shows the holy city in the way it will have been in Christ's time. Besides many significant things, the whole story of the Passion with its consequential events is depicted on the painting. Gethsemane, Golgata and the Saviour's grave remind the viewer of great and sacred events.

6. View over inner Kingston in North America

   during the yearly market event, with around a hundred entertainments among other things.

7. The holy Grave Procession in Jerusalem

   a procession of Roman and Greek priests, which takes place every Good Friday.

8. A large sea storm by Gibraltar in 1854.

The collection is shown daily from 4 to 10 pm in brilliant lighting.

This panorama is one of the largest to be shown until now (between 60 and 70 glasses) and the glass is of its own class and best quality, and will not harm your eyes.

The entrance fee is 40 silver kopeks.

For the benefit of the public, every visitor will receive a free gift.

Dogs must not be taken along. - Smoking cigars is not permitted.

- ulayiti (talk) 14:24, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

• Wow, ulayiti, thank you so much! It's very generous of you to translate the whole thing - and very helpful. (It all sounds sensational!) Thanks again :) --HJMG 15:46, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Translate: Vulnerant omnes, ultima necat.

Please would you help with the following:

I wonder if there is a definitive translation into English from the Latin: Vulnerant omnes, ultima necat. I recall seeing it scribed on the faces of old clocks.

Your help would be much appreciated. It is particularly at times such as this that I wish I’d had the opportunity to learn Latin at school!

Would you mind replying to: [cut]

Best wishes.

Every (hour) wounds, the last kills. (from a google search)--Andrew c 14:36, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

or a bit more faithfully, "All (hours) wound, the last kills". - Nunh-huh 14:40, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Rather found on gnomons than on clocks. There must be a collection of such sayings somewhere over the net (googlimages does not show engraved tests). --DLL 20:25, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Omnes means all, vulnerant means wound, how strange that the word 'hour' is not included, is a reader just expected to fill that in himself? Evilbu 17:16, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

If it was written on a saucepan, yes, it would be hard to use the context. --DLL 21:03, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I think that it doesn't mean 'hour' specifically (as in time), but refers to 'experiences' in life. With 'OMNES' meaning 'everything', this would make sense.CCLemon 06:08, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

But omnes doesn't mean 'everything'. That would be omnia. And yes, the reader is supposed to supply the word for 'hours'. The clues are (a) the context, and (b) the gender (feminine) of 'ultima'.Maid Marion 10:00, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

June 24

German pronunciation

In the word "zwanzig", is the final consonant a voiceless velar plosive or a voiceless palatal fricative? I was led to believe it was the latter, but I'm not sure. Thanks! Bhumiya (said/done) 01:55, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I was taught to say it as the latter (like "-ich") when final but "g" in words such as "Zwanzigerjahren". Jameswilson 02:26, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

me too--K.C. Tang 03:49, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

It varies; see German phonology:

Another common merger is that of /ɡ/ at the end of a syllable with /ç/ (after a front vowel) or, less commonly, /x/ (after a back vowel or /a/). In the case of the ending -ig, this pronunciation is prescribed by the Siebs standard, for instance wichtig [ˈvɪçtɪç]. The merger occurs neither in Austro-Bavarian German and Alemannic German nor in the corresponding varieties of standard German.

(I have a German song in which two different people use the word "traurig"; one uses the ich-Laut and the other just says /g/.) —Zero Gravitas 03:52, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, pronouncing final -ig as [ɪk] rather than [ɪç] sounds very Southern. However, Northern sometimes do it too as a form of hypercorrection, because in the North you hear [tax] for Tag and [tsʊx] for Zug. So when they're being careful about pronunciation, Northerners will remember to say [ta:k] for Tag adn [tsu:k] for Zug, but then will also say [tsvantsik] for zwanzig. This happened a lot in the Berlin choir I used to sing in; the choir director was always having to remind people to pronounce -ig as [ɪç]. User:Angr 05:59, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick responses, everyone. Bhumiya (said/done) 06:34, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

While on the topic of German pronunciation how is final "ng" pronounced? For example, is Zeitung pronounced [tsaɪtuŋ] or [tsaɪtuŋk]? I've read the phonology article, but it seems like I've heard the latter pronunciation. Or maybe I'm influenced by a faux German accent where they say "hello dahlink!" --Chris S. 18:26, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

It's normally pronounced [tsaɪtuŋ]. [tsaɪtuŋk] is very non-standard, but people do use it sometimes. Rueckk 14:12, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Pronouncing final ng as [ŋk] is a Northern German feature. Studies on it have shown it occurs at the end of intonational phrases (in laymen's terms, roughly when a punctuation mark follows in written German). Thus in the sentence Die Zeitung ist da ("The newspaper's here") it will always be [tsaɪtuŋ], but in Wo ist die Zeitung? ("Where's the newspaper?") it can be [tsaɪtuŋk] in the relevant accents. User:Angr 14:20, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Sounds about right. But I don't know, I still think it's non-standard even in the North. I only ever hear that from people speaking the local dialect (I live in Berlin). Rueckk 17:53, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

So do I. And I never said it was standard! :-) User:Angr 18:22, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Early romanization of Japanese

Is it true that the earliest improvised romanizations of Japanese sometimes made use of the letter L, such that "samurai" might be written as "samulai"? I read this years ago, but now I can find no evidence of it. Does anyone know if there's any truth to it? Bhumiya (said/done) 02:32, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, take a look at Non standard Japanese romanization. The fact that the japanese "r" is often a soft tap makes it resemble an English non-dark L more than than the approximated english "r." There are other differences too, like "tsu," "chi," and "shi" are often written as "tu," "ti," and "si" in order to make them fit related phonemes of the language.--The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 02:40, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! Bhumiya (said/done) 06:36, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I suspect this isn't true of the "earliest improvised romanizations" (i.e. from the 16th century), but of more modern ones. I think earlier Japanese r was a trill (still is in some dialects), which is hard to mistake for l. --Ptcamn 10:14, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Ancient Chinese Languages Writingwise

Could, for example, Old Hakka, Old Cantonese, Old Mandarin, Old Toi Shan, understand each other in writing SYNTACTICALLY?

Please, [removed email to prevent spam], thanks.

24.70.95.203 03:52, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

For most of the pre-20th century period, a standardized classical form of the language prevailed in writing, so I'm not sure your question really has too much meaning... AnonMoos 04:09, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Some people say the above stated languages are dialects, but it is true that language CAN ONLY be officalized via Mutual Unintelligebility. So I was just asking the question, because these modern languages can understand each other in writing; That means that the syntax of the languages are the same, but I/we can't determine if they are different languages, if I/we don't know if the Syntax of the OLd languages were mutually intelligebable. Now, the reason I did not say just '....other SYNTACTAICALLY....' but '....other in writing SYNTACTICALLY....' is because you can't understand the langages phonologically, anyways, so it I just put the '....in writing....' to clarify, but if it didn't help, then I guess that was too bad, we're all sorry, & I'm sorry for everything:'(

But thanks for the reply:-D

24.70.95.203 05:53, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

No, it doesn't mean that the syntax is the same. Written formal language is rarely if ever the same as the spoken language.--Prosfilaes 05:26, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Umm... I would say "yes" for your question. The dialects were not so different anyway.... -- Kahang^{Shall we talk?} 06:11, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks your for your reply. Now because of this new fact, how did it come to be that Chinese dialects became Mutaually Unintelligable, both Modern & the Old dialects?

199.126.157.249 21:42, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

This would be a history matter that I can't explain ;). I give it a try, but as a rough reference only:

Long time ago, the Chinese was located near the centre of now Chinna map (somewhere Shaanxi, Shanxi and Hubei). As the time changed, the country got populated and people started moving outward basically at all direction, but mostly to south and to east.

As a result, despite of language from now Tibet, Xinjiang and Mongol (people from those were always treated as the outsiders), Mandarin (language from the North) and Cantonese (language from the South) have the most difference between them. The languages from the places between have relatively less difference when compared.

It just like a gradient. Or a grayscale as eg, Mandarin is the black, Cantonese is the white, and other languages are the different grays between, the most near the North the darker, vice verse.

But in the old days, because the country was small, the languages had not varied too much. The writings were kept short in order to save ink and paper (and because Chinese hadn't got as many vocabulary as nowadays, too). So if some Chinese didn't understand the writings, the reason was always they hadn't been educated rather the meaning of the words. Another important fact is the whole China were using Traditional Chinese until 1952.

Remember, this is a rough explanation only. All the locations and facts have not been confirmed. You may wanna see History of China and Chinese Language. -- Kahang^{Shall we talk?} 12:59, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Kemal Atatürk

I am forwarding a request for somebody to put an IPA transcription of the name on the article on Kemal Atatürk. None of the other wikis seem to have this information. Is there perhaps a tag to ask for this? Stefán Ingi 20:17, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

I've added IPA: [mustafa kemal atatɯɾk] to the article. Usually, asking here does the trick, or you could try WikiProject Phonetics. — Gareth Hughes 21:16, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Stefán Ingi 21:30, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

It's [atatyɾk], actually. [atatɯɾk] would be spelled Atatırk. But I don't know where stress goes. Lexical words in Turkish usually have final stress, but names have their own rules of stress placement that I've never fully understood. User:Angr 22:59, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

June 25

Opposite of "Euphemism"

Is there a word that means just the opposite of euphemism. To call something good with a rather bad word?

What about dysphemism? Daniel Šebesta (talk • contribs) 12:28, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Dysphemism is a good answer. It's actually the opposite of a euphemism in the sense that rather than taking a bad thing and making it sound better, it takes a something that might be considered somewhat bad and makes it sound much, much worse. An example would be calling a TV an "idiot box", or a cigar a "cancer stick". That may be what you're looking for, but if you're looking for the term for referring to a truly good thing in a rather terrible way, you might be referring to sarcasm as in: "Oh I'm such a terrible person, I actually had the nerve to actually try to help someone by answering their question at the RefDesk at Wikipedia when they were no longer in need of an answer. I deserve to be shot." Loomis 21:57, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Another antonym would be "cacophemism." Brian G. Crawford 06:29, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Dysphemism doesn't quite look like an opposite of euphemism. Actually, one of the examples in the article, 'Pushing up daisies' for 'being dead' sounds more like a euphemism. As I get it, a dysphemism makes something bad worse, but the question is about a normally 'bad' word being used in positive sense. Such as the word 'bad' itself, as used by Michael Jackson - "who's bad?". Or when someone is pleasantly surprised they might say "Fuckin' hell, that's brilliant!". Both the words 'hell' ("hell yeah") and 'fuck' are occasionally used in a positive sense, though with fuck is a bit complicated because it basically refers to something very positive. Puritanism then made it into something negative, which then changed to a strong expression for emotion in general, which then came to be used in a positive sense on some occasions. Weird.

I don't know what this phenomenon would be called, though. DirkvdM 12:12, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Tsk, tsk. Calling somthing weird is very derogatory. I would think that you having an intersest in language WOULD NOT be so low class. Tsk, tsk.

199.126.157.249 21:07, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

major revisions complete

The Half-life computation article has undergone substantial revision which has hopefully addressed everyone's concerns. If you have any further comments after looking at the article again, please list the items you do not like, make whatever comment you have and please be specific and allow time for further revision. If there is any reason I can not comply with your wishes then I will let you know the reason why. ...IMHO (Talk) 12:16, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

It looks like it's already been deleted, and this is the wrong place anyway. Try Wikipedia:Deletion review. —Keenan Pepper 18:35, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Please do not post the same more than twice. (I you had posted only twice, my advice would be diferent). --DLL 18:51, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, looks like IMHO put this on all five reference desks. Not likely to win friends. —Keenan Pepper 19:06, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Disturbing Trend

I have been a teacher for over 30 years. In the last 15 years I have noticed that so many students simply don't use the contraction "you're". They write "Your my best friend" as well as "There is your dog." Sometimes I have corrected papers to change the possessive pronoun to the contraction, and they have crossed out the correction and changed it back! They seem not to know, and not to care to know. Did students always display such arrogance? What has caused this degradation of our language in the last few years? 66.213.33.2 18:30, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

First of all, it's not a degradation of language, it's a spelling mistake. Spelling has nothing to do with language. Secondly, I suspect this spelling mistake has been around for as long as the two words have been pronounced the same. User:Angr 18:39, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

I think perhaps you're noticing it more; I observe intelligent people in their 40s making the same mistake. I may be oversimplifying, but as a teacher can't you just devote a minute or two of your lessons to teaching this point? Or if it's some other teacher's purview, can't you discuss it with that person? It would certainly be good if people emerging from the educational system could spell more accurately. Notinasnaid 18:50, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Nothing has caused the degradation of language in the last few years. Degradation (as you put it) is simply one way of looking at the constant change of language. Look back in history and you will discover that people have complained about the way youth (in particular) destroy, main and otherwise mangle language ever since language developed. Language changes over time and the forces that dominate this change often appear, with the shallow viewpoint of the present, to be destructive. However I assure you that over time language will not devolve into grunts, however annoying your students may be. On the other hand, however, I agree that this is very annoying. Perhaps spend some time explaining to your students how the words should be used. While we're on the subject of pedantry, the word 'so' in your second sentence was unnecessary, your second example ("There is your dog") is perfectly correct (although you may have been using it as contrast), your fifth sentence lacks an object, and your sixth sentence would, in more natural English, be "Have students always displayed such arrogance?". Daniel (‽) 18:58, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Angr (well, except that I wouldn't say spelling has "nothing" to do with language--but it's certainly more of an epiphenomenon than any kind of core aspect of it). If the claim was that students "don't know" it--i.e., theyhave lost the distinction between the possessive and "you are", it would be a (fairly amazing) fact about language change. But it's much more likely thay just are spelling by ear and haven't learned the complxities well. Perhaps this is an indication of post-literacy more than anything. Adults over 40 making this mistake--I do it once in a while--I think indicates sloppiness and inattention more than anything else. A typo, in other words, which is even less significant that a misspelling.

As for arrogance--yes, students have always displayed such arrogance. :) · rodii · 19:05, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

In the past years students have been having more and more access to a certain reading material that's not always completely perfect grammar, vocabulary and spelling-wise: the Internet. In the past, what your students (anyone) read came from books, newspapers or media where some care was taken about this matter. Now the Internet has become a huge source of reading material, and the language there is not as carefully constructed - at least in some places (forum sites, chat rooms, not to mention sms language...). That's why spelling mistakes spread so widely and are seen as normal, since they're written all over the place. --RiseRover|^talk 20:02, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Though you're probably largely right, this has happenend before, in the Netherlands at least. As a kid (in the 1970's) I got very annoyed at the popularised use of language by newsreaders, not speaking proper Dutch. I can imagine the BBC would have stuck to proper English at that time, but they are now also popularising their use of language. DirkvdM 11:56, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Everyone has feelings, and anecdotes, about how the world or some aspect of it is going to hell, and language angst seems to be one of the more popular manifestations of this phenomenon. The adjective "proper" seems to be one way of expressing the idea, or prejudice, that one variety of a language is somehow more privileged than the others. But how? Is it because that's the way your grandma or your English teacher spoke, or the soi-disant educated classes speak or spoke, or the privileged classes, or people like you, or people with your political leanings, or what? "Proper" is a ubiquitous prejudice with nothing factual to back it up. If you try to observe language without that particular fixation, what you see is variation, change and socially meaningful norms; I submit that's a more neutral and empirical way to approach the subject than decrying change and identifying "disturbing" trends. · rodii · 13:22, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I suppose by 'proper' I mean 'standardised' (ah, is that with an 's' or a 'z' (and is a 'z' pronounced 'zet' or 'zee'?)). I don't care much which rules are used as long as they're consistent and everyone uses the same rules. Now with EE/AE the latter is a problem, but within one set of rules one should follow those rules. That said, one should also make an effort to understand those who don't follow them. Although that can be problem when some one asks about why lines have mains and later it turns out that he meant why lions have mains manes. I'm not making this up - this was a question at the science ref desk today. He had us thinking he was talking about electricity. :) DirkvdM 16:27, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

So the lions have electricity in their dens? Or was the person asking why lions have manes? Philbert^2.71828 00:23, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Oops, now that was a silly mistake .... :) DirkvdM 05:46, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

What do call a person who sets a bounty on something?

A person who attempts to claim the bounty is a bounty hunter, but what do you call the guy who creates the bounty in the first place? A bounty setter? I'm just wondering if there is a name for the concept already. 152.3.84.131 20:23, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

I can't think of a more formal name, but there may be one. I am not quite certain. --Proficient 20:31, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

I cannot think of an exact word either. However, some less precise terms that are sometimes used are; patron, guarantor, sponsor or financier. Hope this helps. Road Wizard 01:44, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

• Well...I think the bounty is set pretty automatically; the bounty hunter gets a percentage of the money the bail bondsman gets returned from the courts when the fugitive is brought in. (And they're often the same person, anyway.) --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 01:47, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Rabelais

What does "fay ce que vouldras" mean, and what does it have to do with Rabelais? (See Italian literature#The Renaissance.) zafiroblue05 | Talk 21:43, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

That'd be Fais ce que voudras, French for Do what you want. It's the rule of the Abbey of Theleme, see Rabelais#Rabelais and Thelema--RiseRover|^talk 22:13, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Your spelling, though (i.e., fay ce que vouldras) was okay; that's how it was spelled in the slightly less orthographically rigid French of Rabelais' time. —Saposcat 11:02, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

True, but it's more than just orthography. The /l/ in vouldras was still pronounced. The history of French is mainly one of consonant loss, vowel merger and syncope, as in Latin supercilium eventually turning into French sourcil. · rodii · 13:26, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Very true remarks ; they apply to plenty of languages and the opposite, adjoining consonants, is also true. E.g. in French : litterature, voudras (latin litera, volire ?) ; English litter (F. litière)).--DLL 17:59, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

June 26

ak u menically

Dear Wikipedia,

I was watching the movie "Pirates of the Caribean" and the work came up "acumencally" (sp?) I have been searching to find what this word might mean or relate to.

Thank you.

Presumably they were saying "ecumenically", but I have to say ecumenism doesn't seem like a fruitful topic for a pirate movie.--Pharos 06:38, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Pharos presumes correctly. The quote containing the word is "I think we've all arrived at a very special place. Spiritually, ecumenically, grammatically." [1]--Melburnian 06:56, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Origin of s-plural

I'm wondering if the addition of 's' to singular nouns to form plurals -- used in English, Spanish, and French, and probably other languages -- has a known origin whence it spread to those languages, or if it was independently developed by each? It doesn't come from the Germanic or Latin roots of those languages. Kundor 17:44, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

"S" was a frequently-occuring element of Indo-European plural case endings, so in that sense you could say that there's some overall general commonality of origin (though "s" did not always or only occur in plural case endings). The French and Spanish cases derive derectly from the Latin accusative plural endings (see Latin_declension). AnonMoos 19:00, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes indeed. French and Spanish plurals came from Latin accusative plurals, most of which simply add s, while Italian plurals came from Latin nominative plurals, so they don't add s, but instead change vowels (a -> e, o -> i). I want to say Germanic languages usually add n instead, but I'm not sure... —Keenan Pepper 19:06, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

It's in the sci.lang FAQ. Why do both English and French have plurals in -s? --Kjoonlee 01:46, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

In Dutch, plurals usually end in -en, sometimes in -s. Going through some plurals for things around me, I'd say especially borrowed words get the -s ending (computers, niveaus). But there are some exceptions, like 'hamers' (hammers), which I don't think comes from English (more probably a common origin - Danish?). One reason might be that verbs also end in -en, so 'hameren' means 'hammering', and that would be confusing. But another one is 'deksels' (lids, covers). That seems like a very Germanic word to me and there is no verb 'dekselen'. But by far most end in -en, though. DirkvdM 06:03, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Root, root, root, for the home team. If they, don't win it's a shame...

Up here in North America, we usually "root" for our home team, meaning that's the teaming we're "pulling for" or "favouring to win". With the world cup and all, would it be safe to say in Australia that Australian's are "rooting" for the Australian football/soccer team to win, or is it too close to that other meaning to be said with a straight face? (Or in mixed company without blushing?) Loomis 19:26, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

We say supporting, whats the other meaning of rooting? Philc _T^E_C^I 19:48, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm told "root" is in use in Australia as a synonym for to do the nasty. I assume that most Australians would be somewhat forgiving to my fellow North Americans who were unaware, in much the same way as when a stranger once asked an acquaintance in a British accent whether he could "bum a fag". Good question, though. --ByeByeBaby 20:15, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, there is the meaning "to insert a rotating probe into a pipe to grind up any roots that have grown into the line", as used in the name Roto Rooter, I suppose that could easily be extended to have a sexual meaning. StuRat 21:44, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Of course, "pulling" for a side could also be interpreted another way, too. JackofOz 00:58, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Lightbulb

How many linguists does it take to change a lightbulb? --Dweller 20:31, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

This question has been posted on all reference desks (except /M) --hydnjo talk 20:54, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

If you want to "change" (translate) it into every known language, it would take quite a few. StuRat 21:48, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

It's official. This board has the least sense of humour. Even the mathematicians pointed me at the lightbulb joke article which, in its own way, is kind of almost funny. Fyi, the scientists won. --Dweller 06:47, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Translate please

This just appeared on my wiki under the title English Language. What does is actualy say? Gerard Foley 21:58, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

[Dvoxlnv, znzgvfi hovfgsh. Gsrh rh lmob gsv yvtrmmrmt lu nb nzhhrev dliw hvzixs. Blf szev 5 ovggvih — mld tl urmw gsv ivhg. Gsv urihg kvihlm gl tvg zoo gsv pvbdliwh zmw fmolxp gsv hvxivg droo drm zm Cylc® drgs z xlkb lu Gsv Wz Ermxr Xlwv™ tznv, zmw z 2P Erwvl Tznvh kzxpztv...] Sviv'h z pvbdliw gl hgzig blf luu: evilxxsrl

Ru blf wlm?g zoivzwb pmld gsrh, gbkv rm blfi pvbdliwh zg gsvwzermxrxlwvtznv.xln

Mld tvg xizxprm', Hsviolxp! Nzie H.

Blfi mvcg xofv xzm yv ulfmw zg: nbglkirguizmxv.xln

welcome, amateur sleuths. this is only the beginning of my massive word search. you have 5 letters — now go find the rest. the first person to get all the keywords and unlock the secret will win an xbox® with a copy of the da vinci code™ game, and a 2k video games package...

here's a keyword to start you off: verocchio
if you don't already know this, type in your keywords at thedavincicodegame.com

now get crackin', sherlock!
marv s.

your next clue can be found at: mytopritfrance.com

· rodii · 22:23, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

It is a substitution cipher (reversed alphabet). It says:

"[Welcome, amateur sleuths. This is only the beginning of my massive word search. You have 5 letters - now go find the rest. The first person to get all the keywords and unlock the secret will win an Xbox(r) with a copy of The Da Vinci Code(tm) game, and a 2K Video Games package...]

Here's a keyword to satart you off: verocchio

If you don't already know this, type in your keywords at thedavincicodegame.com

Now get crackin', Sherlock!

Marv S.

Your next clue can be found at mytopritfrance.com" 128.197.81.181 22:26, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

oops, we posted at about the same time 128.197.81.181 22:27, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks very much!! Gerard Foley 23:15, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Did you win the xbox? DirkvdM 06:11, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Split Infinitives

I would like someone to explain to me why it's regarded so terribly to split an infinitive. Split infinitives often flow so much better than attempts to avoid them. I split infinitives all the time and I think it's fine time for English purists to give it up and recognize that split infinitives are indeed a valid form of English expression. I'd be interested for any of you to intelligently inform me (lol) why split infinitives are such a no-no. I think it's finally high time for the English language to [boldly and finally] acknowledge the legitimacy of split infinitives. Any ideas? Loomis 22:10, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Look over split infinitive, personally, I have no objection; from skimming the article, the reason that makes the most sense is that the infinitive is a single word in most languages and should be treated as one in English, too. Emmett5 22:13, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

The story I'd always heard was the "ancient Greek and Latin as ideal languages" reason described in split infinitive. Most people (including most grammarians) don't care any more, but there'll always be some prescriptivists who insist against all reasoning. Ziggurat 22:15, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

That article is really good. No wonder it's an FA, I guess. Anyway, I'd have to agree that common sense is more important than following a set rule - that example given really can't be written any better than with the split. As a controversial rule, it's probably one of the less followed (compared to avoiding singular they, for example), mostly cause when you say "split infinitive", people give you that blank "you're one of those sorts of people" look. -Goldom ‽‽‽ ⁂ 22:19, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I would give just such a look. Anyone complaining about not following such a silly rule is more concerned with showing everyone how smart they are than in communicating clearly, IMHO. StuRat 00:03, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

What "example" in the article are you all talking about? The first one from Star Trek "to boldly go"? I'm a bit confused as to what part of the article you all think I should give a second look. Also, I'm sure that a few centuries ago, the same controversy arose over the dropping of all of those archaic forms of the second person singular pronoun. I can just see the "purists" insisting to no end: "It's thou dammit! Not you! Thankfully, common sense prevailed and all those unnecessary pronouns were finally dropped from the language. Loomis 11:19, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I see nothing wrong with split infinitives. I mean, if one can't split infinitives why is it acceptable to split the preposition from a verb? Like to turn off. One does not say *turn off it but turn it off. I mean, it is a unit right? This is a one-word verb in languages like Spanish and French, where it's apagar and éteindre respectively. --Chris S. 02:38, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Exactly. JackofOz 05:12, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

"Bloody brilliant"

I'd like to get some British opinions on this. I read some comments on the CBBC Newsround website about the Queen's birthay party last Sunday and one of them complained about the boy in Mary Poppins' Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious song who supposedly sweared when calling her (Poppins) "bloody brilliant" and said that since it was performed in front of the queen the song should've been changed. IIRC, this phrase also appeared in the first Harry Potter film. If this is so objectionable, surely it would've been cut. Is "bloody" considered swearing in general to begin with? - Mgm|^(talk) 22:16, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

See Bloody. It is considered very very mild swearing in some circles. Ziggurat 22:18, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Probably like the American "Frickin'".--The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 22:23, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

It is very mild. I expect also they objected because it was a child swearing, which they are not supposed to do LOL. The traditional get-out was to hastily switch to "blooming" instead mid-word, as with "sugar", "fudge", etc. Jameswilson 23:31, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

To have an article on bloody and not mention George Bernard Shaw Iis a bit bloody stupid. The word caused a stir when used on stage in his play Pygmalion (play) but that was over 90 years ago. MeltBanana 02:27, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Would that line have caused the same furore today? Not bloody likely! FWIW, there has been a recent kerfuffle in the media in several countries (including the UK and Canada, IIRC) about an "Visit Australia" promotional advertisement with the tag line "So where the bloody hell are you?" Grutness...wha? 03:25, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

That's probably more due to the word hell than anything else. - Mgm|^(talk) 08:25, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

No, it's actually the word "bloody". This article by Michael Quinion discusses the issue in some detail. Bhumiya (said/done) 10:18, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Semi D

I saw in a ad for a house to share (in Ireland) this text : "3Bed Semi-D" . I am French and I wonder what "semi D" is? Can you help ?? Thank you very much.--Sebb-fr 22:30, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

My amaetuer opinion guesses it means sem-decent. But it could mean more. It appears to be a common phrase. Yanksox ^(talk) 22:32, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I assume it means Semi-detached. Ziggurat 22:37, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, semi-detached is correct. The other options are detached and terraced. Jameswilson 23:33, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I think it is semi-detached. Thanky you very much. I will create a redirect:-) --Sebb-fr 10:19, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

June 27

Hebrew infinitive absolute

What is the infinitive absolute used for in Hebrew other than certainty (e.g. Mot yamut = he will certainly die)? Mo-Al 02:38, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Please clarify... you cite Hebrew, implying Ivrit (modern Hebrew) but (and I'm no specialist)your example sounds like Classical Hebrew to me. --Dweller 06:45, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Either way - I have only seen it used in classical Hebrew though, but I don't know if it's used in Moder Hebrew or not. Mo-Al 15:23, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

In Class. Hebrew (and again, I'm no expert) it can also be used as an imperative "he MUST surely die", with slight vowel fluctuation to "mot yoomat". --Dweller 15:28, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Czech grammar issues

Hi, I have a few questions I haven't been able to answer myself.

1. Does the subject of the verb být, "to be", take the nominative or accusative case?
2. Are collective nouns, such as "the Simpsons" or "the Germans", treated as simple plurals or as some sort of singular? What kind of gender do they take?

Thanks! Bhumiya (said/done) 04:03, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm breaking my own rule here and commenting on a matter I have no specific knowledge of. But if I can use the general principle that applies in all languages I've ever studied, the subject of any verb is ipso facto nominative (I wish, you spoke, he walked, she will read, they were kissing, etc). However, you may have meant to ask about the case of the object of the verb "to be". Usually it is nominative because "to be", unlike most other verbs, equates two things (rather than having one thing doing something to another thing, which is where the accusative comes in). But I can't speak about Czech specifically. JackofOz 05:10, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

You're probably right. It works the same way in German. But I'm not sure about anything in Slavic languages. I've never studied a heavily inflected language and Czech is particularly irregular. Bhumiya (said/done) 05:27, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, Czech and Russian are related languages. Russian rarely uses its verb "to be" (in the present tense), but when it is used the subject is naturally nominative. Czech may be different, but I'd be very surprised. JackofOz 07:47, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Ah, in that case, it's almost certainly as you suggested. Bhumiya (said/done) 10:06, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

IANA native Czech speaker, but JackofOz is right. All Czech nouns use the nominative for the singular (except when the genitive is being used due to the "5 or more" rule). Být is unique in that its object also usually takes the nominative. The exception is the set-up of Být + instrumental, which is roughly equivalent to the English verb "become." (Bush byl presidentem v 2001.)

Nouns like Simpsonovi take plural verbs. (Simpsonovi žijou v Springfieldu.) -- Mwalcoff 04:26, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Oh, silly me. Russian has a similar rule about numerals greater than 4 taking the genitive case. So, the subject of a verb is not necessarily nominative - just almost all the time. In the Russian equivalent of "The bananas were on the table", the subject bananas is nominative, but in "Five bananas were on the table", five is nominative (but undeclined) and bananas is genitive. JackofOz 09:56, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Origins of American English

Does anyone know how and where exactly the American accent originated? I have a theory that it might have started when the Native Americans tried to speak English and they sounded like Americans today sound.-------Seclipse21 04:07, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Accents tend to change for a number of reasons, but generally when two populations are split geographically they 'evolve' in a different direction naturally (it's theorized that this is how new languages come about in the first place - see Language change) as a result of many social processes. In the case of the United States, speakers of Dutch, French, German, Spanish, Swedish, Scots, Welsh, Irish, Scottish Gaelic, and Finnish were also prominent in earlier times, and no doubt all of them contributed to the unique accumulation that is American English. Ziggurat 04:15, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Wow, thank you very much, Ziggurat.-----Seclipse21 04:51, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Nevertheless, If you compare "General American" and "Received Pronunciation", General American's probably closer to Victorian English. --Kjoonlee 05:09, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

If not Victorian English, then certainly Elizabethan English. In many ways, American English is more phonologically conservative, preserving rhoticity and not participating in the trap-bath split. A few hundred years ago, English English sounded much more like American English. Bhumiya (said/done) 05:43, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Also cause for some joking; "I say tomato, you say tomato, I say palmtree, you say palmtree". :) DirkvdM 06:32, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I think we need to be careful about claims of American or any variety sounding "more like" Elizabethan or 19th century English. While some varieties have more conservative tendencies than others, this is just not enough uniformity in change in English to make such claims.

First, there is arguably more diversity within either British and American English than there is between the standard varieties of either. In other words White Texas vernacular is probably different in more ways from White New York vernacular than upper middle class English is in London and New York. The variation in Britain is probably even more profound, and in the US if non-White racial dialects are considered (as they should be), there is even greater diversity in America.

Second, while US English is mostly conservative in /r/ maintenance and lack of a short a split, it also has innovations such as the caught/cot merger. There are also very widespread but still regional innovations such as the Nothern cities vowel shift and the southern shift.

Third, there are features such as the southern shift, which afffect regions in the US and Britain, and also southern hemisphere English.

It is better to say that both varieties are historical and linguistic developments from a common source. BTW, before asking questions here, it would be a good idea to check out American_english mnewmanqc

The Story of English has a chapter on American English. It's also available as a video documentary. --Kjoonlee 09:35, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Another question one can ask is "how do you know?" Are there any records of how English was pronounced in Victorian or Elisabethan times? Did phonetic writing exist then? And if so, how do we know how to pronounce that if it's pronunciation was defined by pronunciations of the time? A bit of a vicious circle and I don't see a way out. One of those things we have to accept we can never know? DirkvdM 11:21, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

You can ask the same question about how Greek, Latin or Sanskrit was pronounced, and the answer is, yes, we have detailed descriptions of how they were pronounced (although not IPA, of course, and sometimes there is a lot of scholarly debate about how those descriptions should be interpreted). · rodii · 12:47, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

To summarize What is known about prehistoric language?: A lot. The comparative method works well. --Kjoonlee 14:03, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

The comparative method tells us very little about "how languages were pronounced," though. It works at the phonological level, and the reconstructed proto-phonemes are abstractions phonetically. See Glottalic theory for an example of controversy over the most basic, well-established set of correspondences we have, the Indo-European stops; the standard model posits a whole different set of proto-sounds from the glottalic model. We're dependent on Panini, Varro et al. for descriptions of how those segments were actually pronounced, in terms of positions of articulators in the vocal tract. We also have evidence from various kinds of pronunciation-related phenomena, including rhymes (two words that rhyme can be considered to have certain similarities in sound), prosody (which allow us to discern stress and vowel-length patterns), speech games like Pig Latin, and so on. It's a tricky area. If your interested in the Classical issues, W. Sidney Allen's Vox Latina and Vox Graeca are standard references. I don't know what the equivalents are for the history of English. (And just to add a small voice of caution on the comparative method in general, try reconstructing Latin from the Romance languages without using what we know of Latin; it simply can't be done. The comparative method is no doubt valid, but it is limited in what we can discern from it.) · rodii · 15:00, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

To go back to the original question, I have never heard anyone make the claim that Native languages were a significant influence on the pronunciation of American English. English borrowed words from Native languages, of course, but that's about the exttent of the influence as far as I know. · rodii · 15:06, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

We know that rhoticity in British English had already disappeared by the time "Juggernaut" entered the english language. This is because it comes from the indian word jagannāth, where the first two "a's" in the indian word are pronounced like the "u" in but. So when it was transliterated in Britian, an "er" was written in place of the "a" because by that time the "er" sound had come to sound like "uh" in British English. "Er" became the british equivalent to the American "uh," they both sound like əː.--The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 15:10, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

re: the role of Native Americans. One interesting difference between the (future) USA and Brazil is that the Brazilian Indians spoke many languages but had a lingua franca that they used when speaking to members of other tribes (Old Tupi). Thus the early Portuguese settlers, although they regarded the Indians as primitive, all ended up learning Old Tupi too for convenience. Although Tupi was suppressed two or three hundred years later in favour of Portuguese, that language did have the chance to influence Portuguese as spoken in Brazil.

But as far as I know the same thing didnt happen in North America. There wasnt one convenient pre-existing Indian language that served as the general language of all the tribes for trading purposes, etc. So English-speakers never had any economic incentive to get to know the Indian languages. Jameswilson 23:00, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Webster made up American English. -- Миборовский 21:40, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

A US place-name

I listened to a radio show where I heard a US place-name, pronounced somewhat like /ˌp(ə)ˈkipsiː/. It's probably somewhere along the East Coast or nearby. What could it be? Thanks in advance. –Mysid^(t) 07:32, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Do you mean Poughkeepsie ? Lectonar 07:37, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Exactly. Thank you very much. –Mysid^(t) 07:53, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Pixellized movable type

I suppose this question concerns language. It could just as easily fit in the science or humanities reference desks. I was reading an article about Chinese printing which mentioned that Hanzi were not well-suited to movable type printing since hundreds of characters had to be carved. It struck me that the Chinese might have expedited the process by fashioning their type using a pixel-based system. When precisely was the principle of the pixel invented? Is there any evidence that they existed in the pre-electronic age? Bhumiya (said/done) 07:57, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I would think that in those days, using a pixel-based system without computers would essentially have been the same as copying the books by hand. – The word pixel, though not the concept of picture element, was invented by Frederic C. Billingsley in 1965. –Mysid^(t) 08:30, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Mosaic tiles could be described as pixels. —da Pete (ばか) 08:41, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Would knitting/crocheting patterns count as well? --Kjoonlee 09:30, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

pointillism? DirkvdM 11:30, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I wonder what the heck a "printing pixel" would really have been -- building up each separate character individually from dozens of tiny little metal squares would certainly not offer the quickness and convenience of Gutenberg-style moveable metal type, and the nature of Chinese characters is such that they generally cannot be constructed out of a small number of square dots while preserving any degree of faithfulness to correct shape, and aesthetic appeal. But anyway, you can look up Jacquard looms (which were invented after Gutenberg, though). AnonMoos

Well, I hadn't thought it through very well. I just thought that the principle might be useful in some way. Perhaps a bunch of needles of varying length could be assembled into a punch for imprinting characters into wood. It seems to me that this would be faster than hand-carving every piece of type. Keep in mind that Chinese characters can be represented fairly well on a computer, even at a somewhat low resolution. But that's all speculation. As far as ancient pixels, I hadn't thought about weaving. Certainly, many tapestries used the very same principle to create images. Bhumiya (said/done) 10:14, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

English words translated into Cantonese characters

I have a good friend whose birth name, in Cantonese, translates into "Ling Bird" in English. How would the name Ling Bird be written, using Cantonese characters and translation? Thanks, Leebo.

whyever

I would like to enter this word "whyever" into--24.56.224.140 17:22, 27 June 2006 (UTC) the encyclopedia. How do I go about entering a new word?

• You don't. Simple definitions of words belong at Wiktionary, a sister project of Wikipedia. Of course, neologisms are generally frowned on. Deltabeignet 18:06, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Code

What could this mean?

    Ecgb b bie be ebeb bml.

If someone can't break it, can they direct me to a code breaker? Thanks. schyler 17:41, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

• Well, I'm pretty sure 'b' is 'a'. Unfortunately, it's not a simple Caesar cipher, unless the first word is 'dbfa'. Deltabeignet 18:02, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
  • That would mane the second and third words "a a..", which is ungrammatical - it would be "an a..". Also, since it would make b=m (the only possible letter that would work with both be and ebeb), it looks like either gibberish or something not in English. Grutness...wha? 10:18, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

It is what I got from the side of the Covenant ship in the Halo 3 trailer written in Braille. I changed the letters into their respective "Covenant Letters" from the 7th letter of the Conversations of the Universe booklet by changing each letter from the above "code." The letter looks somewhat like english letters so each letter in the "code" that corresponds with the letter it should be (in English). I changed it to that.

    lOgB B Bpl Bl lBlB BRl

Could it make any more sense?schyler 18:44, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Japanese single-character country abbreviations

Is there a list somewhere of the single-character country abbreviations used in Japanese? 日 for Japan, 独 for Germany, 仏 for France, etc. I've had a look around Wikipedia and can't find one, but feel sure there must be one somewhere.

Thanks in advance! --Auximines 19:52, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I have had a look and can't find one either. However, my Kanji dictionary has an incomplete list so I can make a start on a new page sometime in the next 24 hours. If you need to know the specific character for a country before that, let me know and I'll give it to you if I have it. Road Wizard 23:33, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, that's great! --Auximines 07:59, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I am currently working on the text for the article, but I can't think of an appropriate name for it. Any suggestions would be welcome. Thanks. Road Wizard 15:38, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Dutch family names

I am writing to a Professor Theo van Rijn. I don't know him personally, so is it right that I write Dear Professor Van Rijn with a capital V? — Gareth Hughes 20:11, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Indeed it is. -- Ec5618 20:23, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. That's quick and to the point. I'll get on with my letter... — Gareth Hughes 20:30, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

The rule is that prefixes like van and den have to be capitalised when not preceded by the person's first name or initials. --Benne ['bɛnə] _(talk) 21:09, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I have a related question regarding "de". I know someone who is called "Foo de Bar". He always prefers Mr de Bar but not Mr De Bar. Apparently, most other Mr Xxx de Yyy use Mr De Yyy with a capital D. How much of this is down to convention and how much personal choice? --Chan Tai Man 08:12, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

As far as I know, it only applies to the Dutch language, and perhaps only in the Netherlands. In Flanders it might be different.

Such may be the official rules, but I, for example don't follow it. I spell my last name 'van der Made' with a small 'v'. I only learned about this rule when I started editing the van (Dutch) article, which gives some more insight into this. DirkvdM 08:27, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

That could be, but when writing a letter in Dutch to someone in the Netherlands, it is generally considered appropriate to do so. Not following this rule might leave the impression of not knowing the spelling rules. --Benne ['bɛnə] _(talk) 10:20, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Very yes-or-no question

Is "very yes" a grammatically valid construction? Seahen 00:29, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

• Very no. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 00:42, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

• The reason is that "yes" is an absolute, so you can't have more or less of a yes. (The phrase "a more perfect union" is grammatically flawed for the same reason.) Instead, try "absolutely yes", which means "I am absolutely sure the answer is yes". StuRat 01:17, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

It's not correct, but I don't even think it has much of a popular usage as opposed to the "a more perfect union." --Proficient 02:43, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

StuRat's reason is incorrect. The reason "very yes" is grammatically wrong is that "yes" isn't an adjective or an adverb, the only two parts of speech that can be modified by "very". As for "a more perfect union", it's perfectly grammatical, because saying "A is more X than B" doesn't have to mean "B is X, and A is even more so than B"; it can also mean "neither A nor B is X, but A is closer to being X than B is". This is shown by such statements as "Well, it isn't good, but it's better" meaning it's better (closer to being good) than it used to be, but it still hasn't reached a level I'd call "good". "In order to form a more perfect union" means the union wasn't perfect before, and it still won't be perfect after, but it will be closer to perfect. User:Angr 08:33, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I disagree. "To form a better union" or "a union more closely approaching perfection" or "a perfect union" would all have been correct (although the last one is clearly impossible). To say you want to form a "more perfect union" says that it was perfect, and now it's "more perfect", which makes no sense. There aren't multiple levels of perfection, but only one. StuRat 02:18, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I bet I'm not the only RD/L regular who winces every thime someone says "very unique", either... Grutness...wha? 10:23, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Isn't it

French uses "n'est-ce pas" to cover a wide variety of situations. I guess the sense of it is: "Is what I just said not the case". English has no such feature; you have to say "didn't she", "wouldn't they", "isn't it", "haven't I", "won't he", "couldn't you", "shouldn't we" etc, depending on the preceding words. There are probably many dozens of possible combinations. People from certain non-English speaking backgrounds (NESB) frequently say "isn't it" in all these situations, which can lead to humorous outcomes - "But you still love me ... isn't it?", Olga pleaded.

• What is this grammatical construction called?
• Is English the only major language where you can't use the same wording in different situations, à la "n'est-ce pas"? If so, why do we make it so hard for ourselves?
• Why do NESB people who have otherwise mastered English seem to find this feature of English a stumbling block? Is it because it is needlessly complex? JackofOz 04:22, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I can't help with the second two questions, but I can answer the first: they're called tag questions. That article does note that English is "untypically complex", but that doesn't go anywhere as to whether it's the only such language, or why...—Zero Gravitas 04:29, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

English isn't a language where you can't use the same wording in different situations. You know that, right? ;) --Kjoonlee 04:41, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Doesn't some form of British English use "isn't it" in this way? But pronounced and often spelled "innit"? As in "he's a right git, innit" (I don't know where I heard that but, not being British, it makes me laugh everytime). Adam Bishop 06:01, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Heh. The tag question article mentions it's a part of the London dialect, but I'd never heard that one despite having learned my English in Greater London. Quite fascinating, eh? --Kjoonlee 06:22, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, 'innit' is I think originally Cockney, though now widespread. The Welsh and an English teacher I once knew from Hong Kong both use the full form: "He's a right git, isn't it?". I take that to mean "isn't it the case that...", but I may be over-rationalising. Henry^Flower 06:25, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

It's not too widespread, at least in Northern England. The only time I ever hear it is when there is a television programme set in London, or an American is doing an over-the-top Cockney impression. Road Wizard 06:30, 28 June 2006 (UTC)*

I thought it had an Asian origin as I first heard it from Asian teens--hotclaws**==(81.136.162.4 06:55, 28 June 2006 (UTC))

I'd say "innit" is a stereotypically chav phrase, as well as being stereotypically Cockney. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 21:12, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

It makes me laugh every time as well, and I am British. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 21:12, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

So in which languages would you be forbidden from using the same wording for tag questions? There might be some examples, no? ;) --Kjoonlee 07:03, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

(1) As far as I know, "isn't it" is a general tag in Indian English (spoken by South Asians in general). I know I've read this in some linguistic work or other, and it's been personally confirmed for me by a friend from Sri Lanka who regularly says things like "You're coming to church on Sunday, isn't it?" (2) Irish forms tag questions the same way English does, i.e. the form of the tag depends on the form of the statement they follow. The difference is that Irish tag questions (like Irish answers to questions) drop the subject: Tá tú ag teacht, nach bhfuil? ("You're coming, aren't?"). I think Welsh is the same, though I'm not 100% sure. Whether English does this because the Celtic languages do, or whether the Celtic languages do this because English does, or whether it's just a coincidence, I don't know. User:Angr 08:39, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, "isn't it" is widely (ab?)used in Indian English in this sense. I think it's because in Indian languages we use pronoun-independent "correct?", "right?", "isn't?" etc., instead of "didn't she?" etc., -- Sundar ^{\talk \contribs} 09:02, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

My question was actually prompted by noticing how my Sri Lankan-born partner speaks. And I've previously noted Indian people (including Fijian Indians) saying "isn't it", and also some Europeans. JackofOz 12:03, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

June 28

Same word, different meaning, ¡en español!

What is the Spanish word for finally, as in "at last!" I know the word is finalmente, but I have a feeling that is for an order of events and my dictionary doesn't specify. Could someone help? Thanks. schyler 12:15, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I think the expression you're looking for is "¡por fin!" Also, "¡al fin!" --RiseRover|^talk 15:39, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Finalamente translates better as "finally" than "at last". Emmett5 19:59, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Por fin is the best choice for an interjection. - Draeco 04:51, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Creek word for Fear

Could you please give the Creek word for FEAR Thank you

Maybe those noble people had none. --DLL 21:39, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Fray or Friar??

To whom it may concern: while doing some editing of the Aztec related articles within Wikipedia, I was puzzled by the term "Fray", which appeared as something of a title or descriptive term in front of several names. I have since learned that "Fray" is a Spanish term meaning "Friar". I am wondering therefore if we should not be using "Friar" instead of "Fray" in, for example, this article on Fray Juan de Torquemada. I would suggest "yes" since (a) this is the English Wikipedia and (b) the term "Friar" is understood by more average readers than is "Fray".

Thoughts anyone?? Madman 17:31, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Frustratingly enough, there is nothing in Wikipedia or Wiktionary addressing this use of "Fray".

• A Fray is a title for friars, but the title in English should be "Brother", not "Friar". For example Fray Luís would be Brother Luís, but only in case you really want to translate the title at all. --RiseRover|^talk 19:11, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

As far as the article title goes, Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Western clergy) is not very helpful, but there is a general guideline that lower-level clergy don't have their titles in the article title. That would mean the article should be called Juan de Torquemada. Since there's another Juan de Torquemada at that address, I think that the Fray is a reasonable disambiguator (love that word) and should be kept. Henry^Flower 19:20, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Henry. Yes, I debated exactly how to disambiguate "my" Juan de Torquemada from the other, and I decided that adding "Fray" to the title was probably the best way.

And thanks, Rover. So perhaps to make this term intelligible to the average reader, the Fray Juan de Torquemada article should start out "Fray (or Brother) Juan de Torquemada was a Franciscan friar, missionary and historian in Spanish colonial Mexico." OK?? Madman 19:27, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Or, "Fray (Spanish for Brother) Juan de Torquemada was a Franciscan friar, missionary and historian in Spanish colonial Mexico." --RiseRover|^talk 19:44, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

"Val"

What does the Italian word "val" mean? I've seen it a few times, and it wasn't in any online dictionaries. I know it is in place-names fairly often (could it also mean valley?) but I saw it in the phrase "Val la pena litigare" which has me stumped. It doesn't seem to fit. Can anyone help? --Bearbear 18:35, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

• "Val" it's the simple present, third person singular form of "valere" which means to be worth. Val la pena it's an expression that means it's worth the trouble. It's worth to litigate, would be your sentence. --RiseRover|^talk 18:48, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

• I can't believe I didn't spot the connection with the French "valoir"! Thanks --Bearbear 09:35, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

• But in, say, Val d'Aosta it does mean valley, or vale. · rodii · 19:38, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

• Yeah, but that's not Italian... Val comes from the local language Arpitan; in Italian it'd be Valle. --RiseRover|^talk 20:05, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Does smoking harm Polish speakers?

hello English Wikipedia. Can you tell me what "Paleine tytoniu może uszkodzić nasienie i zmniejszać pŀodność" means, I found it on cigarettes, I assume in Polish language. Specifically, what does "zmniejszać" mean, and how do I pronounce it correctly? Looking at it as a word, I imagine it to be one of the most horrible-sounding words I've ever seen written (I don't read much Polish though, or Vogon poetry....hmmm, if anyone has a link to a text, or even better, to a soundbite, of the Polish translation of any Vogon poetry, then pray include it here). Anyway, I think I will give my pet mole rat the name "zmniejszać", should I ever get a pet mole rat. Thankyou. Unsigned comment.

"Smoking tobacco can damage sperm and reduce fertility." Zmniejszać means "to reduce". You could roughly pronounce it zmn-YAY-sha-ch. Which is hard for me to say. :o) --Cam 00:10, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

origin of the phrase "go soak your head"?

I've searched several sites, including Wikipedia, with no luck. I'd like to be able to answer a 13-year-old's question about the origin of this common phrase. Many thanks!

A mere 916 google results for the phrase suggest it is actually not so common. I for one had never heard it until just now. 128.197.81.181 22:53, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Can you say what country or state/county you are in? I have never heard of the phrase either, but knowing at least one location where it is used may help track the information down. Thanks. Road Wizard 23:30, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, I haven't found a locality as yet, but the meaning of the phrase appears to be similar to Get bent. Road Wizard 23:36, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I have found an entry at answers.com that says the phrase originated in the first half of the 20th Century, but it doesn't specify where it came from. Road Wizard 23:45, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Cassell's Dictionary of Slang says is late 19th century and from the US. Sorry no other detail probably just a way to deal with hotheads [mid 17th C]. MeltBanana 00:07, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

It might not be extremely common, but I think the majority of American English speakers would recognize it. Seems like something Archie Bunker would have said. --LarryMac 02:06, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Having been raised in Kentucky, I recognize the phrase though it's certainly not common. I know nothing about its origin but have heard it used like "go drown yourself" in playful banter. - Draeco 04:47, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Is it possible to talk in the second person?

Obviously it's possible to speak in the first person and third person, but is it actually possible to speak in the second person in some weird way? Perhaps by having a duel personality in which you talk to yourself? --SeizureDog 01:17, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

If nobody answers have you proved your point by talking to yourself. I expect when you realise how common it is to speak in the second person you will say to yourself "you idiot, why didn't you see that?" BTW the word idiot isn't covered by WP:NPA as this is the voice of your internal monologue. Actually maybe it is and maybe WP:NPA should be moved to Wikipedia:No interpersonal attacks. Sorry I'm going to bed now.MeltBanana 01:35, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I suppose your question relates to how people sometimes refer to themselves in the third person (e.g. Dave says, "Dave's going to bed because he's tired" instead of "I'm going to bed because I'm tired.") Of course, you could always talk to yourself in a mirror and thus be referring to yourself in second person. It's less obvious when talking with others, though, since the second person can make an ambiguous reference (e.g. people may have to look at your eyes to see to whom you're directing the comment, and it would be difficult to indicate you're referring to yourself).--El aprendelenguas 02:22, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Only people such as Alexander Hamilton, Pushkin, Lermontov and Eugene Onegin had duel personalities.  :--) JackofOz 03:30, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

You can write in the third person, as in the Choose Your Own Adventure books, and many interactive fiction games. --Cam 04:18, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Arrgh, I meant second, of course. --Cam 04:19, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

El aprendelenguas actually answers this indirectly with the sentence "Of course, you could always talk to yourself in a mirror and thus be referring to yourself in second person". We often use the second person to refer to hypothetical situations which could relate to anyone, the speaker included - a more stilted way of doing this in the third person is to use the neutral third person pronoun "one" (as in "one could write it like this if one wished"). Grutness...wha? 10:27, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Conversationally it's very common for people to talk about themselves in the second person, such as when they're describing their usual reaction to a certain kind of situation. For example, they might say "When someone shouts in your ear without warning, your heart beats and you get a shock and you almost shit your pants", whereas what they really meant to say was "When someone shouts in my ear without warning, my heart beats and I get a shock and I almost shit my pants". In psycho-babble I think it's called avoiding owning one's own experience. JackofOz 10:42, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

June 29

translation from english to chinese

Dear all,

I would like to translate the link of Aikido from English to Chinese. Anyone out there please teach me how to deal with the software so that I can do the translation for the benefit of all. Million thanks to all!

You could contact me at (e-mail removed, answers are posted at the desk) or (e-mail removed to prevent spam)

What does this Japanese pamphlet say?

I found a potentially tasteless but mostly just confusing instructional pamphlet which appears to be written in Japanese. I see that it says "one day you'll thank us" as well as urging the user to use a non-permanent marker to draw butt-circles, but aside from that... WTF? grendel|khan 02:30, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Looks like Chinese to me. Can't read it though. --Cam 04:11, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I think the pictures are a bit of a clue... --Bearbear 09:38, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Cam is right: it is indeed Chinese, not Japanese. --Ptcamn 10:32, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

(after edit conflict) It's definitely Chinese not Japanese. other than picking out the odd character here and there (the third character in the top line is "friend", for instance), my knowledge of Chinese in not good enough to translate it, though. And this probably needed a "Not for office use" warning... Grutness...wha? 10:37, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

question on percentage

Hi Guys and Gals! Wikipedia defines percentage as:

"...a way of expressing a proportion, a ratio or a fraction as a whole number,.

what if a percentage is expressed in decimal form? (e.g. 2.45%)

Is there an exact term to call it? Thanks for your help.

The definition at Percentage seems odd to me because it excludes just that, whereas I've always understood (and the dictionaries I can consult seem to agree) that a percentage does not have to be an integer; I've raised the issue at Talk:Percentage. Ziggurat 02:41, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

The article will have to be fixed up. I don't think there's a special term from 2.45%; it's just another percentage, isn't it? Melchoir 02:51, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I sincerely appreciate the exchange of thoughts. who would have known I can effect change in Wiki's definition. :-) how about calling it "decimal percentage" to suit my report? :-)

That's the whole point of a wiki. Anybody can initiate change, and if there's a consensus that it's a change we want, it stays changed. Until it's changed again, to something better, etc. The "whole number" thing is a complete furphy - a percentage can be an integer, a decimal, a fraction, whatever. JackofOz 03:26, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

english to coptic

hi yes i would love the saying into coptic language only...only new at this so not sure how to respond to you directly..my user name is mioullos....thanx mia

Getting a tattoo, eh? Do you want it in English (language) and coptic script, or would you prefer it translated into a language that uses that script natively? Ziggurat 03:11, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm afraid that no-one is listed at Wikipedia who speaks Coptic; the language itself hasn't been spoken since the 17th century, so finding a translator is probably going to be tough! Ziggurat 03:41, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

thats what i thought..is there a translator table like they have for egyptian heiroglyphics?? and yes it is for a tattoo..having problems finding anyone who can write in the old scripters...

Try this page. Ziggurat 03:46, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Before getting a tattoo in a foreign language, you must see the cautionary examples on [[2]]!!--Teutoberg 10:23, 29 June 2006 (UTC)