Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 23:39, 15 February 2006

Revision as of 00:07, 16 February 2006

Line 1:

{{/How to ask and answer|[[WP:RD/L]] or [[WP:RD/LANG]]}}

'''See also [[Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language/FAQs]] for answers to frequently asked language and usage questions.'''<!--Note to archivers: please do not move this section. -->

= February 8 =

== nunca jamás ==

what is the difference between ''[[nunca]]'' and ''[[jamás]]''. I can't find anything other than they both mean never. Do spanish speakers have a preference?--'''[[User:God_of_War|God of]][[User Talk:God_of_War| War]]''' 23:25, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

:From my understanding, ''jamás'' is more emphatic than ''nunca'', thus it's used less. But you know, I am more likely to say ''es la casa más grande que '''jamás''' he visto'' (it's the biggest house I have ever seen) rather than ''...nunca...''. Also, you can use the phrase ''nunca jamás'' which means "never ever." --[[User:Christopher Sundita|Chris S.]] 01:12, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

tha's right, 'nunca jamás' means 'never ever', but I don't think that jamás is more empathic than nunca

because from my personal experience it's the other way around, nunca seems more empathic to me, and I also don't think that nunca is used less, I guess it just depends on the person...and about the house, yeah, in that case you should use 'jamas'. it's not a rule but it's more of a thing that you get used to with time.--[[User:Cosmic girl|Cosmic girl]] 20:36, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

:By [http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/empathy empathic], did you mean [http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/emphatic emphatic]? [[User:Black Carrot|Black Carrot]] 00:25, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

== New York City dialects ==

Can someone please tell me the meaning of

"He was givin' me the one-two look with his eyes"?

--[[User:Ribsioli|Ribsioli]] 02:03, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

: My guess is that it alludes to a "one-two" or "one-two punch", which is a boxing term for a rapid pair of blows. So I take it to mean "He was looking at me like he wanted to punch me". --[[User:BluePlatypus|BluePlatypus]] 08:11, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

==O RLY?==

When someone says, "Are you busy?" and we respond, "No, not really." do we mean:

<table border=0 cellpadding=10><tr><td>

* No, that is not true.

''or''

* No, not very.

</td><td><font size="100pt"> ? </font></td></tr></table>

&nbsp;[[User:Freshgavin|<font size="-2" color="white" style="background:blue">&nbsp;freshgavin&nbsp;</font>]][[User_talk:Freshgavin|<font size="-2" color="white" style="background:blue">TALK&nbsp;&nbsp;</font>]]&nbsp; 03:55, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

:I would say it usually means you are somewhat busy, but not too busy to be interrupted for some worthy purpose. [[User:StuRat|StuRat]] 05:17, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

::Right ... but what I'm asking here is about the sort of dual-nature that the word "really" has. Technically it would mean the same as "truly" as the adverbial form of the word "real", but it also tends to mean something close to the word "very", as in "It's really tall!". It's not a critical issue but I'm just curious about the underlying (or original) meaning. &nbsp;[[User:Freshgavin|<font size="-2" color="white" style="background:blue">&nbsp;freshgavin&nbsp;</font>]][[User_talk:Freshgavin|<font size="-2" color="white" style="background:blue">TALK&nbsp;&nbsp;</font>]]&nbsp; 05:38, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

::: "really" in this context is just a modifier to give emphasis, and in that sense it's rather disconnected from the use as an adverb form of 'real'. There's a trend in all languages that some words tend to go and become general emphasizing modifiers, and lose contact with their original meaning. I know a very clear-cut example from Swedish, "jätte" (giant), which often used in words like "jätteliten" (gigantically small) or "jättesmal" (gigantically slim) without sarcasm. (Unlike English terms like "fat chance!" which were originally sarcastic, although they're not always expressed that way longer). --[[User:BluePlatypus|BluePlatypus]] 08:04, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

::::Nice examples. FRNKS! &nbsp;[[User:Freshgavin|<font size="-2" color="white" style="background:blue">&nbsp;freshgavin&nbsp;</font>]][[User_talk:Freshgavin|<font size="-2" color="white" style="background:blue">TALK&nbsp;&nbsp;</font>]]&nbsp; 03:40, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

== Use of indirect object pronoun when speaking to a person in spanish ==

I hesitate to use the direct object pronoun when speaking to a person about any kind of interaction between us, even when there is no tangible direct object involved. For example: I would say 'Puedo ayudarle' not 'ayudarlo/la', or 'Le llamo' not 'Lo/La llamo' or 'Tan amable a verle' etc etc. I have seen this pattern, but some argue that a strict application of the direct object pronouns is correct.

Is my sense that the form used when speaking to someone really ought to be 'softened' to the indirect object misplaced or just wrong?

::We need Cosmic Girl for this one really. In my experience part of the difference is regional. I learnt my Spanish in the north of Spain and it was always, always "-le" for a person but I've noticed in other places people use "-lo" with direct verbs. [[User:Jameswilson|Jameswilson]] 23:35, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

ok, I'll try to answer this one, I don't know what the direct object pronoun is... but, It's A LOT more common to say 'puedo ayudarLO?' or 'LO llamo' o 'tan amable verLO' the other way isn't used much, at least here in Perú... but it's mostly used when speaking to someone you barely know and is in a somewhat 'higher status' than you, because of age or whatever... but saying things like 'puedo ayudarLO' as opposed to 'puedo ayudarTE' is already enough politeness, I think.--[[User:Cosmic girl|Cosmic girl]] 03:29, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

See [[leísmo]]. --[[User:Christopher Sundita|Chris S.]] 05:38, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

== arbiter and arbitrator ==

What is the difference between and arbiter and an arbitrator? We did look them up w/ wiktionary, but not quite satisfied. Thanks if you can help us...

:My impression is that arbitrator is usually used in the technical sense of someone appointed to resolve a difference between parties in dispute. Arbitration, in a commercial context, is a recognised alternative to litigation. Whereas arbiter is, I think, never used in this technical, commercial sense, and instead refers to someone with the necessary taste, critical faculty or expertise to pronounce authoritatively on a disputed point. Both derive from the Latin verb arbitrari, to give a judgement. [[User:Maid Marion|Maid Marion]] 13:56, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

::Both words come from the same [[Latin]] root. ''Arbiter'' originally meant ''judge'', but could also be someone who witnessed a dispute between others. Therefore, in Latin, it could meen ''witness'' or ''umpire'' too. In some cases, the word is used to describe the organiser of something: ''arbiter bibendi'' is the master of the feast. This same root gives the [[deponent verb]] ''arbitrari'', which was used in the narrower sense of ''judge'', ''pass sentence'' or ''discern''. From this verb is formed the perfect [[participle]] ''arbitratus'', ''having judged''. It is from this form that the English words ''abitrator'' and ''arbitration'' come. In English, I believe an arbitrator is one who facilitates arbitration: the non-legal, yet binding, resolution of dispute. However, an arbiter is anyone who has the final say in a decision-making process. However, the distinction between these two related words is not clear, and they are often used interchangably. --[[User:Garzo|Gareth Hughes]] 16:14, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

==Education==

please give me an explanation on what this phrase means:

"We dont need no education"

and please help me to understand why we need an edcation.

:The phrase is a quote from "[[Another Brick in the Wall]], Part II" a song by [[Pink Floyd]] on their album ''[[The Wall]]''. As to why education is necessary, please read [[education]]. [[User:Angr|Angr]]/<small>''[[User talk:Angr|talk]]''</small> 15:49, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

I can think of two good reasons why an education is needed:

#To know that contractions like "don't" contain an apostrophe.

#To know that "don't need no" is a double negative and that "don't need any" should therefore be used, instead.

Hope that I helped bring a bit of dark sarcasm into your world. [[User:StuRat|StuRat]] 19:13, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

:What you all don't realize is really how smart Pink Floyd is. I believe they intentionally phrased the lyrics that way so that the kids would go "Woo! Screw grammer! We dun nead no edumacation!" and the grammatarians would go "Tee hee, 'tis a doubling negativity! Little dos they knoweth that they are promotionizaling our causum!" and the only people left unhappy are all the foreigners that don't get either. &nbsp;[[User:Freshgavin|<font size="-2" color="white" style="background:blue">&nbsp;freshgavin&nbsp;</font>]][[User_talk:Freshgavin|<font size="-2" color="white" style="background:blue">TALK&nbsp;&nbsp;</font>]]&nbsp; 03:30, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

::Hey! I'm one of those bloody foreigners and please don't tell me what I do or don't get! (Actually, I never looked at it that way, but that's not the point here.) [[User:DirkvdM|DirkvdM]] 10:05, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

::And it's foreigners ''who'' don't get either. Of course now you're going to tell me that was all clever and intentional, but I just beat you to that, so you'll have to come up with something different. :) [[User:DirkvdM|DirkvdM]] 18:29, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

:::I reserve my right to speak the modern language of Canadian youth! Either that or I blame the [[Australian]]s! &nbsp;[[User:Freshgavin|<font size="-2" color="white" style="background:blue">&nbsp;freshgavin&nbsp;</font>]][[User_talk:Freshgavin|<font size="-2" color="white" style="background:blue">TALK&nbsp;&nbsp;</font>]]&nbsp; 03:16, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

:That band really had an activist streak. The lyric makes sense if you consider the next one: ''"We don't need no thought control."'' So it wasn't like they didn't need to be educated, but that they didn't need to have an education that was full of things they would need to unlearn later. -[[User:LambaJan|LambaJan]] 03:04, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

::Apparently we Australians have more influence in the world than we have been given credit for. Even quiet achievers appreciate acknowledgement, so thanks Freshgavin. [[User:JackofOz|JackofOz]] 07:37, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

:::Don't take too much credit. I just live in a place where Ozzies are more numerous than my own kind their mannerisms are starting to seep into my routines. But you're welcome anyways. (And, as a Canadian, I'm ''proud'' to say anyway'''s'''.) &nbsp;[[User:Freshgavin|<font size="-2" color="white" style="background:blue">&nbsp;freshgavin&nbsp;</font>]][[User_talk:Freshgavin|<font size="-2" color="white" style="background:blue">TALK&nbsp;&nbsp;</font>]]&nbsp; 06:32, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

::::You must be mistaken, mate, we don't have mannerisms. It's all those bloody foreigners who have mannerisms, accents, idiosyncracies ...... Anyhow, I'll still consider you reasonably well educated despite [http://www.grammartips.homestead.com/anyway.html this]. Cheers [[User:JackofOz|JackofOz]] 06:50, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

:::::Thanks ; ). [[User:Freshgavin|<font size="-2" color="white" style="background:blue">&nbsp;freshgavin</font>]][[User_talk:Freshgavin|<font size="-2" color="blue">ΓΛĿЌ&nbsp;</font>]] 06:11, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

== Semi-deponent verbs ==

In answer to an earlier question on this page, Gareth Hughes gives a link to the article on deponent verbs. Out of curiosity I followed the link and came across a reference in the article to semi-deponent verbs in Latin. Apparently they are active in form in the present, imperfect and future, but passive in form in the perfect, pluperfect and future perfect. I can't for the life of me think of any such verb in Latin. Could someone enlighten me please? Thanks. By the way, perhaps we also need an article on defective verbs, which I see we don't have yet. I could write it in relation to Latin, but if the concept is relevant in other languages it will need someone cleverer than me.[[User:Maid Marion|Maid Marion]] 16:53, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

:I can think of two, and found two more in my grammar, (given in the present and perfect tenses):

#''audeo'' (I dare) — ''ausus sum'' (I have dared)

#''gaudeo'' (I rejoice) — ''gavisus sum'' (I have rejoiced)

#''soleo'' (I am unaccustomed) — ''solitus sum'' (I have been unaccustomed)

#''fido'' (I trust) — ''fisus sum'' (I have trusted)

:--[[User:Garzo|Gareth Hughes]] 17:08, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

::Thanks Gareth. I'd never really noticed that the perfect active forms of such common verbs as these are missing. By the way, on soleo you mean 'accustomed' rather than 'unaccustomed'. [[User:Maid Marion|Maid Marion]] 17:41, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

:::Ah, yes: thinking too hard! --[[User:Garzo|Gareth Hughes]] 18:47, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

::::Couldn't resist one final point. Checking this out last night in Gildersleeve and Lodge I found the four verbs you cite, apparently the only ones of their kind. But they also mention the reverse case: revertor is passive in form in the present, but 'reverts' (ho ho) to active in the perfect (reverti). [[User:Maid Marion|Maid Marion]] 08:36, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

:::::I can't say I've thought that much about it, but I would have thought that it was a straightforward third conjugation in ''reverto'', which my little pocket dictionary confirms — very odd! I also thought that, if we allow compound verbs to be counted, we could have the semi-deponents ''confidere'' and ''diffidere''. --[[User:Garzo|Gareth Hughes]] 11:48, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

== surname ==

I am looking for anyone who might know something about the surname Mocio. We think is Polish but then we think it might have roots from somewhere else, as it is not very common in Poland either (one of us is Polish but can't find any information)and I can't find either. For example, if you seach for Mocio in an Italian website, you get results, but nothing really related to a surname. I can't find anything in genealogy websites either.

Anyone who might have an idea about meaning, origin, anything at all and solve the mistery?

thanks a lot :)

:It seems Italian; when I google it some of the first results are for Stefano Mocio, the mayor of [[Orvieto]]. [[User:David Sneek|David Sneek]] 19:33, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

== frontispiece ==

Can a frontispiece of a book be a quote or does it have to be an illustration?

: I've found no references that say it can be merely a quote. But there's no reason why an illustration could not incorporate words. You could start off with a quote, illustrate the words, and that would qualify as a [[frontispiece]]. [[User:JackofOz|JackofOz]] 19:57, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

So, if I want to use only a quote and not an illustration, would I still put it where the frontispiece goes?

:Yes, but you call it an [[epigraph]], not a frontispiece. [[User:Angr|Angr]]/<small>''[[User talk:Angr|talk]]''</small> 20:25, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

* Hmm, this gives me another question: What do you call the title page that preceeds the title page? I mean when you have a page consisting of just the title (and possibly the author) followed by a more elaborate title page on the next page? I remember that there was a word for it in German, but what's the English word? Or does it qualify as a frontispiece as well? --[[User:BluePlatypus|BluePlatypus]] 06:41, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

:I think a frontispiece is by definition a picture. What's the German word? [[User:Angr|Angr]]/<small>''[[User talk:Angr|talk]]''</small> 06:49, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

:: I think it's "half-title" (see [http://dogbert.abebooks.com/abe/TextToHtml?t=Glossary&h=x&f=glossary.htm here]). [[User:JackofOz|JackofOz]] 07:16, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

::: As well as "bastard title" and "fly title". So many names, and I didn't know a single one! :) --[[User:BluePlatypus|BluePlatypus]] 07:43, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

:: "Schmutztitel" (dirt-title). --[[User:BluePlatypus|BluePlatypus]] 07:38, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

:::Admissions of lack of omniscience lend a person a certain ''je ne sais quoi'', BluePlatypus. [[User:JackofOz|JackofOz]] 07:55, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

::::My German dictionary glosses ''Schmutztitel'' as "half-title", so I think we have our answer. [[User:Angr|Angr]]/<small>''[[User talk:Angr|talk]]''</small> 07:46, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

== Lancelot ==

I know he's French, and I know his name is French, but I'm trying to translate the 'du lac' bit into Welsh. Since I don't know Welsh, I used a translator. Going from 'of the lake', I get 'chan 'r llyn'. Using 'du lac', I get 'unrhyw llyn'. Which is a better translation? [[User:Ductapedaredevil|Ductape]][[User_talk:Ductapedaredevil|Daredevil]] 20:58, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

:And is there any way I can crush it into one word, like Bedwyr's 'Bedrydant', 'of the perfect sinews'? [[User:Ductapedaredevil|Ductape]][[User_talk:Ductapedaredevil|Daredevil]] 21:02, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

::[[Welsh language|Welsh]] often signifies possession by placing the words together: ''y gath yr eglwys'', the church cat. --[[User:Garzo|Gareth Hughes]] 21:09, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

::::Yes, but you don't double the definite article. It's ''cath yr eglwys'', not *''y gath yr eglwys''. [[User:Angr|Angr]]/<small>''[[User talk:Angr|talk]]''</small> 06:09, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

:::But it's not posession. It's not Lancelot's lake, it's the lake he is from. [[User:Ductapedaredevil|Ductape]][[User_talk:Ductapedaredevil|Daredevil]] 21:27, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

:I wouldn't count either of them as a satisfactory translation - "unrhyw llyn" means "any lake", and I can't figure how you got "chan 'r llyn" - you don't get consonant + 'r anyway, and do you really mean "chan", mutation of "can", a song? I'd say "o'r llyn" anyway... - [[User:Arwel_Parry|Arwel]] ([[User talk:Arwel_Parry|talk]]) 22:07, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

::Like I said, I don't speak Welsh, so I used an online translator. (Sorry, just noticed the last part. Thanks!) [[User:Ductapedaredevil|Ductape]][[User_talk:Ductapedaredevil|Daredevil]] 01:06, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

:::I agree with Arwel. If the machine translator gave you ''chan'' as Welsh for "of", it's completely unreliable. (Even worse than most machine translators.) "Lancelot of the lake" meaning "Lancelot from the lake" is ''Lancelot o'r llyn'', while "Lancelot of the lake" meaning "The lake's Lancelot" (possession) would be ''Lancelot y llyn''. [[User:Angr|Angr]]/<small>''[[User talk:Angr|talk]]''</small> 06:09, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

::::Thank you! [[User:Ductapedaredevil|Ductape]][[User_talk:Ductapedaredevil|Daredevil]] 21:20, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

:I think [[Michael Lafosse|"Prince Michael of Albany"]] says in his book ''Bloodline of the Holy Grail'' that ''du Lac'' was really a mistaken form of ''del Acqs''. I have no idea whether mainstream scholars agree with this, though. [[User:Ardric47|Ardric47]] 00:12, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

::Coming a bit late to this, two things. First, there is at least one (and possibly more than one) web-based English/Welsh translation program whose results have been causing hilarity on Welsh mailing lists and and weblogs for a while, to the extent that people were feeding it song titles for entertainment. This looks a very typical sample of its output. Second, Lancelot apparently has his own name in Welsh: Lawnslot! This is according to ''Geiriadur yr Academi'', which is a big English->Welsh dictionary. (Alas, it offers no opinion on du Lac, sorry.) --[[User:Telsa|Telsa]] [[User talk:Telsa|(talk)]] 16:35, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

= February 9 =

Line 600 ⟶ 450:

Eternal glory awaits you, enlist (in the army) today.

Thanks a million!

= February 16 =