Wikipedia:Reference desk/Language
| |||||||||
How to ask a question
| |||||||||
|
| ||||||||
After reading the above, you may
. Your question will be added at the bottom of the page. | |||||||||
How to answer a question
|
| ||||||||
October 31
Cigarettes
"What's in a cigarette? Those which we call toxins, by any other word would be as deadly." Does that modified quote make sense and is gramatically correct? If so, what does it mean? Jamesino 01:35, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- I believe it's a play on Hamlet's "A rose by any other name would still smell as sweet" (paraphrasing here!). Insert a comma after word, because it's a clause by itself, and it's fine grammatically. --Wooty Woot? | contribs 01:41, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- Hamlet? I'm no Shakespearian scholar, but isn't that a Juliet quote? Hyenaste (tell) 01:49, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- Ah, yes it is WKQT. Whew, I thought I had been wrong all this time! Hyenaste (tell) 01:52, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- That should be "remove the comma after toxins". The word order is a bit poetic (as you'd expect) but grammatically fine. Tesseran 01:45, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Does the sentence make sense though? Or is it like...redundant? Jamesino 02:36, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- If your point is that toxins are lethal—whether we call them poisons or something more obscure and exotic like nitromethane or o-Toluidine, they are still deadly chemicals—then yes, it makes sense. Hyenaste (tell) 03:12, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- "Those" doesn't sound right to me. I would replace it by "That", and replace "word" by "name" if you want to be closer to the original:
- What's in a name? that which we call a rose / By any other name would smell as sweet;
- --Shakespeare, Romeo and Juliet (II, ii, 1-2)
- --LambiamTalk 06:56, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- You ask not just about the grammar, but also if it makes sense. The problem with toxins is that anything is potentially a toxin. The poison article says 'Paracelsus, the father of toxicology states-- "Everything is poison, there is poison in everything. Only the dose makes a thing not a poison".' It would make more sense to speak of toxicity or toxic dose. Even water can kill you if you drink enough of it. So it is at the very least misleading to say that toxins are deadly. It completely misses the point of toxicity. So no, the phrase does not make sense. Not to scare you, but if you use this phrase in the US you should be careful not to get sued - tobacco companies certainly have the money for that. Also note that the toxin article says that "Toxic substances not of biological origin are more properly termed poisons" So are you talking about additives and are they biological in nature? Depending on how and where you are going to use this, be very careful what you say. DirkvdM 07:29, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- As a paraphrase, it's not a good one. The original is making the point that names are just labels - it doesn't matter what you call something, it's still the same thing. (The context being Romeo's family name) But the paraphrase is doing something altogether different by equating two names for different things. "Cigarrette" doesn't mean the same thing as "toxin", so it does actually matter what you call it. All in all, it doesn't make its point well, and it sounds very strained and even pretentious - if you paraphrase Shakespeare you should know the text, and if you know it, you shouldn't have a problem finding a more suitable quote. --BluePlatypus 14:40, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- How about "O Cigarettes, Cigarettes! Wherefore art thou deadly?" Jamesino 23:15, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Looking for a word I can't remember
I'm trying to remember the word for the flat metal plate that can be installed on the outsides of doors to prevent the locks from being pried open. I've already looked at a bunch of lock security sites but they don't seem to even have them. I am pretty sure the word ends with 'al' and I think it might start with 'f'. I'm in Canada, and I guess the word could be local. I used and heard the word a bunch of times when I was on my Strata Council, but it's slipped my mind now. Anchoress 08:20, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- You mean like a Security Door Reinforcer? or a latch guard? Maybe it is a regional word. --Andrew c 17:13, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- It's like a latch guard, only longer. But weirdly, we called it an astragal in our Council meetings, and that word (which I found thru one of the links, thanks) has a different meaning from what we give it. Don't know if it's my property manager's mistake, or if it's a regional thing. Anyways, right or wrong now he'll know what I'm talking about lol. Anchoress 17:50, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- The doors have metal plates,
- fitted to the inside of the exit alleys to the front gates,
- Security's expensive,
- it can cost a fortune if you buy your locks
- (duh-doo-doo)
- from the wrong place
- (duh-doo-doo) (Sorry, was reminded of that song :)) --Wooty Woot? | contribs 04:05, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- It's like a latch guard, only longer. But weirdly, we called it an astragal in our Council meetings, and that word (which I found thru one of the links, thanks) has a different meaning from what we give it. Don't know if it's my property manager's mistake, or if it's a regional thing. Anyways, right or wrong now he'll know what I'm talking about lol. Anchoress 17:50, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Fetocide vs. feticide
At feticide, an editor has changed "(sometimes referred to as fetocide)" to "(sometimes mistakenly spelt fetocide)". I pointed out that we had cited sources of medical professionals using that spelling, and for us to call it a mistake, would not only be POV pushing, but also be spitting in the face of Wikipedia:Manual of Style#National varieties of English. So I am here to ask for a third opinion at Talk:Feticide to weigh in on these matters. Is it ok to call common variant spellings used by professionals in the field of study in question a spelling mistake?--Andrew c 15:40, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- Hi, I am the other party in this, and it is clear to me that fetocide is a misspelling for linguistic reasons given at Talk:feticide. It is certainly not a matter of national varieties of English. It is an exaggeration to say there are "cited instances of medical professionals" using this spelling, and it does not appear in any dictionary.. at very best it is a recent and uncommon neologism. It is much more likely to be a mistake. Zargulon 16:08, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- Well there are 11,000 google hits for 'fetocide', including extracts from this clinical study, so I think it's fair to say that 'sometimes referred to as "fetocide"' is more accurate than 'sometimes mistakenly spelt as "fetocide"'. Also, the former is less POV. Anchoress 16:14, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- That makes it a commonly misspelt word. There are 1,040,000 google hits for the misspelt "comittee". Zargulon 16:29, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- You said right above that it was an 'exaggeration' that there are 'cited instances of medical professionals' using the spelling; there are clearly numerous instances. How about we find a compromise? If you can find a legitimate reference stating that it is a mis-spelling, you can say that in the article. If Andrew finds a legitimate reference (not necessarily a dictionary) stating that it is a variant, he can say that it is. Otherwise it stays out of the article. How do you two feel about that? Anchoress 16:34, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- Even if it is a common misspelling, the fact that it is a misspelling is conclusively proved by its absence from dictionaries, and strongly supported by the strict pattern of other -cide words. Zargulon 17:16, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- I agree with that. Sometimes a misspelled word becomes so prevalent that it eventually becomes an accepted variant, at least in some parts of the world. Appendectomy, license (noun), fetus, defense ... there are thousands of them. But I wouldn't accept fetocide, not just yet anyway. The fact that a medical professional misspells a word does not of itself give the alternative spelling legitimacy. JackofOz 19:55, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- There are other problems with that article. it's at Feticide, but it uses Foeticide throughout, making one wonder which version of English should be used throughout. As in, should it be "spelt" or "spelled"? User:Zoe|(talk) 21:08, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- I know there are different views on this, but I would argue for "spelled" and "misspelled" (or "mis-spelled"). Spelt is a grain. "Spelled" is sometimes pronounced "spelt", but even that might be a mis-pronunciation depending on where you're from. JackofOz 23:41, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- To answer that concern, an editor who was drawn to the page due to my request changed the spelling in the article to 'foeticide' and proposed a move. Before today, feticide was used consistently throughout.--Andrew c 00:16, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
Somewhat widespread use doesn't automatically get you to "accepted variant." Ph.D.'s and academic journals don't automatically produce well-edited prose free of misspellings. Any word spelled feto- or foeto- (except for fetor, a rare word for "stench" related to "fetid") is a barbaric misspelling. At a certain point, of course, what started out as an ignorant misspelling may make it into the dictionary. Cultivated users of the English language (including any medical researchers, etc., who happen to have the extraneous qualification of being literate) will still look down on it. A good example of a misspelling that made it into the dictionary is parallelopiped. But this one hasn't made it into the dictionary. All that said, I don't mean this as a comment on what the Wikipedia article should say. Obviously, a neutral tone is appropriate to an encyclopedia. However, if what's written doesn't tell the reader that it ain't in dictionaries, and ain't gonna be soon, then I'd say some information is missing. Wareh 01:45, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- When I page through the Google hits for "fetocide", they seem to almost all be citations from medical journals. This is hardly a singular misspelling. I fail to understand the opposition to mentioning this spelling. Rmhermen 02:22, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- Google gives 79,000 hits for feticide, but only 11,000 for fetocide. Clearly the latter is not uncommon, but that alone doesn't make it a correct spelling. Apparently there is no lexicological reference we can use to support a claim that fetocide is an alternative spelling. Without such a reference, we'd be breaching the no original research rule. Millions of people use effect and affect interchangeably; or their, they're and there; or its and it's; or to, too and two; or your and you're - but despite the increasing incidence of such errors, they still all fall into the category of misspellings, not acceptable alternative spellings. Maybe in 20 years it will be different. Until then ... JackofOz 05:12, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- The formation "fetocide" is an illiterate abomination, suggesting a non-existent Greek origin fetos instead of Latin fetus. I also find some hits for "fetacide", and they are not about the slaying of cheese. --LambiamTalk 15:40, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- Or, it would suggest derivation from Latin fetus (2nd declension) rather than Latin fetus (4th declension). You might as well have "domocile" for "domicile." Interestingly enough, there is a 2nd declension Latin fetus, the adjective meaning "pregnant, fruitful, productive." So "fetocide" would refer rather to the killing of persons or things that are pregnant, fruitful, and productive. "Feticide," on the other hand, is the killing of the young, the brood, the fetus. Wareh 20:24, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- No, Lambiam is right and I'm wrong. -ocide is even pretty barbaric for Latin second declensions (though such barbarisms are not unexampled in the dictionary). It follows from general principles, but fungicide is a good example (not fungocide). Wareh 20:55, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- Or, it would suggest derivation from Latin fetus (2nd declension) rather than Latin fetus (4th declension). You might as well have "domocile" for "domicile." Interestingly enough, there is a 2nd declension Latin fetus, the adjective meaning "pregnant, fruitful, productive." So "fetocide" would refer rather to the killing of persons or things that are pregnant, fruitful, and productive. "Feticide," on the other hand, is the killing of the young, the brood, the fetus. Wareh 20:24, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- The formation "fetocide" is an illiterate abomination, suggesting a non-existent Greek origin fetos instead of Latin fetus. I also find some hits for "fetacide", and they are not about the slaying of cheese. --LambiamTalk 15:40, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- Google gives 79,000 hits for feticide, but only 11,000 for fetocide. Clearly the latter is not uncommon, but that alone doesn't make it a correct spelling. Apparently there is no lexicological reference we can use to support a claim that fetocide is an alternative spelling. Without such a reference, we'd be breaching the no original research rule. Millions of people use effect and affect interchangeably; or their, they're and there; or its and it's; or to, too and two; or your and you're - but despite the increasing incidence of such errors, they still all fall into the category of misspellings, not acceptable alternative spellings. Maybe in 20 years it will be different. Until then ... JackofOz 05:12, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- When I page through the Google hits for "fetocide", they seem to almost all be citations from medical journals. This is hardly a singular misspelling. I fail to understand the opposition to mentioning this spelling. Rmhermen 02:22, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
old polish words??
I am reaserching my Polish family history and my grandmother has the word 'freblanka' written as her occupation. I am told it may mean nursey teacher but cannot find a way of confirming this. Does anyone have any ideas please?
- Sure -- look it up on the Internets! Now, I don't speak Polish. However, a search led me to this: Freblówka (Europa) (naz. F. Fröbl, pedagog niem., 1782- -1852) nauk., daw. typ przedszkola prowadzonego wg metod F. Fröbla, w którym zwracano uwagę na wszechstronny i harmonijny rozwój dziecka, zgodny z jego cechami indywidualnymi.
So I then figured out this refers to Friedrich Wilhelm August Froebel, German educator ("pedagog niem."). "Przedszkola" appears to mean nursery school, so, yeah, looks like you're right. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 16:52, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- I might be mistaken, but I think "Przedszkola" is (partially through borrowing) cognate to preschool. Polish sound shifts include z's popping up a lot in unlikely places... 惑乱 分からん 13:57, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- That was my guess but I didn't want to go so far. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 17:10, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
S letter
Do you have to have an (s) after the following words: Afterward, inward, toward?
- You don't have to, but you can. dictionary.com definition Laurənwhisper 16:42, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- I'd say it depends.
- *Afterward, I was terrified.
- Afterwards, I was terrified.
- It came toward me.
- It came towards me.
- I was in the inward chamber.
- *I was in the inwards chamber.
- This is how I would "star" some sentences. The starred sentences are the ones I find awkward. --Kjoonlee 16:56, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- Check out what the Wiktionary has to say on the subject. Laurənwhisper 17:07, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- In the United States, the preferred form of these words does not have a final 's'. (That said, a final 's' is not unusual in spoken American English.) In British usage, the final 's' is preferred for these words, except for "inward" (or any compound ending in -ward) used as an adjective, as Kjoonlee's last example shows. (The adjectival exception also applies to spoken American English.) Marco polo 17:43, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- I think "afterwards" is more common in the US than "afterward", which (unlike in British English) is also quite acceptable. Note that this is typically an adverb. In contrast, "toward" is more common there than the quite acceptable "towards". A simple rule that gives an acceptable form everywhere is: Use "-ward" for adjectives; "-wards" in other cases. --LambiamTalk 18:36, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- You may be right that "afterwards" is more common in spoken American English than "afterward." However, in U.S. publications, "afterward" is the norm. In my day job, I am an editor in the United States, and every company where I have worked has preferred "-ward" without a final "s" in every case. Marco polo 16:31, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- It's a remnant of the English case system, where you'd sometiems have the genitive "s" ending, so you can correctly use it wherever you'd have a genitive preposition, such as the ones given. Usually it's the ones where you can imagine an omitted 'to' or 'of', e.g. "Afterwards (of the event), I was" and "It came towards (the ___location of) me". But you don't say "tops", you say "on top of" or "to the top". Whereas in Norwegian, "to the top" can be both "til topps" ("to tops") and "til toppen" (and also "til toppa"). And you have similar things going on in Swedish and Danish as well. So it's not specific to English, but a shared trait of all the Germanic languages that have thrown out the case system. --BluePlatypus 18:53, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Rhyme
Hi all, Can some one plz tell me a noun that rhymes with jazz? jazz here is a name not the music type. As i want to say "Jazz the ...?". Thx
196.218.50.29 19:47, 31 October 2006 (UTC)Jasmine
- Bass (fish)? 惑乱 分からん 20:00, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- Spazz? --Wooty Woot? | contribs 20:01, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- Spazz is your best bet. The only other common words that rhyme with jazz are "as" and "has". Hyenaste (tell) 20:15, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- Spazz? --Wooty Woot? | contribs 20:01, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
Thx but words that rhyme with jazz wasnt very helpful, also i found that spazz means stupid. I really dont think that my nickname should be jazz the stupid, right :) ?
Jasmine(Jazz)
- Spazz means more like "crazy". --Wooty Woot? | contribs 22:07, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- I would say more like clumsy. User:Zoe|(talk) 03:12, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- Where I come from, spazz is generally understood to mean spastic. I'd go with razz if I were you! --Auximines 10:06, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- I would say more like clumsy. User:Zoe|(talk) 03:12, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- Jazzie the razzie, Jayzie the crazy, Jazzie the juicy, Jazz the lass, Jazzy the sassy, Jazz sexy-ass? =S 惑乱 分からん 21:29, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
La Paz. :) JackofOz 23:33, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- I used to know a guy who was proud to go by "Spazz." But the question, Jazz, is this — are you a spazz? If so, Jazz the Spazz, provided you don't have a complex about it. If not, keep lookin'. Wareh 01:48, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
A little Vietnamese, please.
I was doing a bit of work on this article and I was translating some of the song titles. Most were fine, but for the Vietnamese "Búp Bê Không Tình Yêu" was difficult. What I got when looking up dictionaries was "Bud Carry Without Being in Love" which I'm sure is not that close, since Tình and Yêu both seem to mean 'love' (with the latter being a verb?). Búp was difficult as well. So can anyone help in translating the title? Thanks in advance --Bearbear 20:18, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- "Búp-bê" is actually one word meaning "doll". The word comes from French "poupée", so it's just a two-syllable wordt. In Vietnamese all syllables are written as separate words (because of the language's monosyllabic nature), so you can't just search every single syllable in a dictionary and expect to find anyting sensible. "Tình yêu" is something of the same, except that it's a compound word. Vietnamese uses duplication quite a lot, and just using two words for "love" means "love" again. So the entire title translates as "Doll without love". Greets, David
23:04, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- As a footnote, I think Chinese is similar, words often turn two-syllabic because of clarity, if you understand what I mean... 惑乱 分からん 01:04, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot, that was helpful and interesting! Vietnamese makes a lot of sense. I kind of thought it was strange that the two terms sounded so alike. --Bearbear 18:33, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
Edits
Should earth by caps, also is newscasts correct? or is news casts
This is for a publication.
- Usually words like "Earth", "Moon", "Sun", of which there is only one, are capitalized. See for example how this is done in our article Earth. "Newscast", with plural "newscasts", is spelled as one word (just like "broadcast"). See for example the use in our article News broadcasting. --LambiamTalk 21:37, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- To clarify, there are many earths, many moons, and many suns, and in a general context you should not capitalise them. But if you're talking specifically about our planet and its satellite, and the centre of our solar system, then I agree, there is only one of each and they should be capitalised. JackofOz 23:31, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- Agreed, and when I moon somebody on a sunny day then fall and get earth on my butt, that's no cause to make a capital case out of anything, either. :-) StuRat 04:23, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- Hmmm, flashing by night, mooning by day. I'm pleased that you display a well-balanced approach to this sort of thing, and that your time is fully occupied when you're not loitering around Wikipedia. At least it keeps you off the streets, and in the park where you seem to feel so much at home. :-) JackofOz 04:41, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- Agreed, and when I moon somebody on a sunny day then fall and get earth on my butt, that's no cause to make a capital case out of anything, either. :-) StuRat 04:23, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
Kangofu
Would someone please give me the Japanese character for nurse/kangofu? To be clear, this is a nurse like in a hospital, not breastfeeding. Thanks! -THB 22:53, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- Til next time, check out Jim Breen's dictionary Kanji is 看護婦 , Hiragana is かんごふ (Katakana is spelled the same as Hiragana, but I'm too lazy to write it out). 惑乱 分からん 23:54, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- I can't get that link to work right now. Thanks for translating. -THB 01:39, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
November 1
Is this saying present in other languages??
After you answered my last question so fully,I decided to ask another thing which was on my mind for some time.
I want to tell you not to get it wrong,it has nothing to do with politics,it is just a sayin which Im interested to..
In my country during 1990s there was a saying :"They dont attack Serbia because of Milosevic,but they attack Milosevic because of Serbia"
Nowdays it became a normal in the everyday speech to say this,off course changing words "Milosevic" and "Serbia" to another words to fit the context
Basicly,I wonder if this is specific to our language,because I think it might be used in another languages,off course little changed to fit another subject,but with the same meanging.
My english is not very good,so if you dont understand the question I may explain it again,its basicly "Is there a saying similiar to this one in other languages",because I think I heard it somewhere else,but Im not sure,my friends say its our invention,but I kind of doubt it... . Thank you
212.200.201.169 00:18, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- I don't completely follow, but wasn't sentences like "They don't do X because of Y, they do Y because of X" common long before Milosevic? It's hard to see anything special about that sentence... 惑乱 分からん 01:02, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- No, the OP asks if that phrase is commonly found in other languages. I don't think it's an idiom, so I see no reason for it not to exist in other languages. Syntactically, it probably can exist as well in languages that use complex grammar. Hyenaste (tell) 01:08, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- Similar sentence structures are chiasmus or antimetabole. MeltBanana 01:38, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps they are asking more about a different saying with the same meaning, than a saying with a similar sentence structure. I don't quite follow the meaning myself. Attacking Serbia because of Milosevic makes sense, because he was the leading force behind Serbia declaring war on most of it's neighbors. But why would people attack Milosevic because of Serbia ? StuRat 04:13, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- Maybe it's like the same line of thought that i hear frequently in regards to America: People will say, 'We don't have a problem with Americans, we have a problem with America.' (Meaning, of course, that their dispute is with America's government rather than individual American citizens.)
- Applying that to this situation, the statement might mean that people are not decrying Serbia for Milosevic's actions, but rather are decrying Milosevic for Serbia's actions (which presumably he had a hand in).
- I'm not an expert in the politics of that region, though, so that's pure speculation. If that is what it means, though, then the answer to the question is yes, variants of that statement are present in at least (but probably more than) one language. ~ lav-chan @ 04:59, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- Probably not what you mean, but there is an English expressions with a similar structure. To parphrase your example it would be "You can take Milosevic out of Serbia, but you can't take Serbia out of Milosevic". I don't know if that would be applicable here, but it would mean that Serbia will always be on Milosevic's mind. DirkvdM 06:04, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- I think the original saying was a way of the pro-Milošević camp to put a spin on the international criticism, using the paranoid tendency of Serbs to believe the rest of the world is against them: We are under attack, and our enemies use Milošević as a pretext. --LambiamTalk 06:16, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
I dont quite understand Serbophobia attacks seen here by Stu Rat and Lambiam.I dont know what I said or wrote to provoke such disgusting hate speech,and so many lies in just a few sentences by some of you.
My question was simply about the line "They don't do X because of Y, they do Y because of X" (i just used words "Serbia" and "Milosevic",as they are most common in this sentence,but other words are also used),it had nothing to do with the politics,but some of you are just so full of filth and hate that you just cant resist telling some lies.
Anyway,thank you to everyone who responded to my question,I guess there is no similiar saying("They don't do X because of Y, they do Y because of X") in other countries 212.200.201.174 00:07, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Are you serious? How can you have misunderstood our answer so completely? 惑乱 分からん 00:40, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- In English this sort of X/Y/Y/X construction is called chiasmus or antimetabole. --Anonymous, 00:55 UTC, November 2.
Wakran,not you,your answer was OK.I just dont think that lies(like "Serbia declared war on most of its neighbors",while in fact it didnt declare war on anyone) and insults(like "paranoid tendencies") have anything to do with my question...Wakran understood my question right,and responded to it,but insults like those I`ve just mentioned are really not necessery...
Thank you once again
212.200.201.174 01:08, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- I didn't understand what you meant by saying "no similar saying"? 惑乱 分からん 02:34, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Possibly the phrase has turned into more of a cliché in the Serbo-Croatian languages (a term I will continue to use until I get a better alternative) and perhaps it has connotations there that is difficult to transmit, but it surely doesn't sound like something corresponding so closely to the culture, that it'd be difficult to translate. 惑乱 分からん 12:17, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
I stand by my statement that Serbia waged war on many of it's neighbors, and support that assertion with the following info from our Wikipedia articles...
From our article on Slovenia:
"Present-day Slovenia was formed on 25 June 1991 upon its independence from Yugoslavia, defeating the Yugoslav Army in the Ten-Day War."
From our article on Croatia:
"Along with Slovenia, Croatia declared its independence from Yugoslavia on June 25, 1991, which triggered the Croatian War of Independence. The Serb population living in Croatia revolted, supported by the Yugoslav army and paramilitary extremist groups from Serbia."
From our article on Bosnia and Herzegovina:
"International recognition of Bosnia and Herzegovina increased diplomatic pressure for the Yugoslav People's Army (JNA) to withdraw from the republic's territory which they officially did, however, in fact, the Bosnian Serb members of JNA simply changed insignia, formed the Army of Republika Srpska, and continued fighting. Armed and equipped from JNA stockpiles in Bosnia, supported by volunteers and various paramilitary forces from Serbia, and receiving extensive humanitarian, logistical and financial support from the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Republika Srpska's offensives in 1992 managed to place much of the country under its control."
From our article on Kosovo:
"On 16 January 1999, the bodies of 45 Albanian civilians were found in the town of Racak. The victims had been executed by Serb forces."
Also, Serbia's refusal to hand over some wanted war criminals to the International Criminal Court makes me think that the Milosevic pro-genocide era hasn't yet ended. StuRat 05:09, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- You may or may not understand the differences of meanings of "Yugoslav National Army", "Serb population living in Croatia", "Bosnian Serbs", "Serb forces" and "Serbia", but the fact remains that all of those have nothing to do with the question. Zocky | picture popups 05:27, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- No, it relates to the original poster's follow up statement: [1]. StuRat 06:13, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
StuRat: 300.000. Serbs have been ethnicaly clensed from Croatia in 1995....10 precent of the returned....
As for Bosnia,type "Merkale" and search on google or anywhere else...It was the begginging of war,when Muslims shot their own market and blamed Serbs for it...Now its widly recognized that they did it.
Croatian War and Bosnian War,THOSE WERE CIVIL WARS,BEETWEN SERBS IN CROATIA AND BOSNIAN AND CROATS AND BOSNIANS....SERBIA AS A STATE WA NEVER IN WAR,AND ITS ARMY NEVER CROSSED THE LINE...IN SLOVENIA,YUGOSLAV ARMY WAS MULTIN NATIONAL,FROM ALL THE PEOPLE THAT DIED IN 10 DAYS WAR,MOST OF THEM WERE CROATS IN YUGOSLAV ARMY KILLED BY SLOVENIANS...You claimed that Serbia "Declared war on its neighbors..."I`ve just proved you wrong...
But you want to know what genocide is? More then 1000 civilians killed in criminal NATO bombing in 1999...Little 3 year old girl Milica Rakic who was killed in her own house by NATO bombs...Explain to her parents that its not a war crime...14 people killed in Serbian National Televison in belgrade...Explain to their families that they were guilty for working as camermans,jurnalists,make up staff...THATS SOME REAL GENOCIDE FOR YOU!!!
"Serbia's refusal to hand over some wanted war criminals to the International Criminal Court"
WHAT THE HELL???? DO YOU EVEN KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE WE GAVE TO THEM ALREADY...FIRST OF ALL MILOSEVIC,BACK IN 2001...(now look how they killed him,not allowing him to go to the Hospital ater he begged them to allow him to).........SLJIVANCANIN,PAVKOVIC,LAZAREVIC,SAINOVIC,STANISIC,FRENKY,PERISIC,ZELENOVIC,OJDANIC...ALL THESE PEOPLE WERE SENT IN HAGUE TRIBUNAL BY SERBIAN GOVERMENT....THERES ONLY ONE LFT,RATKO MLADIC,WHO IS AT LARGE,BUT POLICE IS LOOKING FOR HIM....YOU REALLY DONT KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT,DONT YOU.....EVERYTIME YOU POST,YOU JUST POST MORE AND MORE FILTHY Serbophobia LIES...YOU REALLY SHOULD APOLOGIZE....
212.200.202.241 16:12, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Stop the shouting and talk in a civil manner. Have you seen the film of the Srebrenica massacre by Serb forces ? Here's a video that contains some footage, although the audio is in Turkish: [2]. Both Ratko Mladić and Radovan Karadžić are still in hiding and quite likely being assisted in hiding by the people and government of Serbia. While there were certainly also massacres committed by Croats, Bosnians, Slovenes, and Albanians, and the people responsible for those massacres are also to be tried in The Hague, that does not excuse Serbia. The JNA was controlled by Serbs, and changing uniforms to those of the Army of Republika Srpska doesn't excuse their actions, either. While it is regrettable that civilians died in the NATO bombing to end the war, Serbia left no other option, that was the only way to stop the genocide. Many innocent civilians also died in the defeat of Nazi Germany. StuRat 21:08, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Srebrenica?!?! DONT MAKE ME LAUGH....Kravice,East Sarajevo,Knin,Pristina,Pec,Gorazdevac....Do I need to go on? Serbs are the greatest victims of all wars...Bombing of Serbia,MORE THEN 1000 (one thousand!!!) civilians,thats the greatest war crime in histrory of Europe after World War II.....78 days and night of bombing...Tell the parents of 3 year old Milica Rakic that she was also a Serbian killer....NATO commited war crimes and thats a fact....Its not the first time USA did such a horrible things,let us not forget Nagasaki,Hiroshima,Korea,Vietnam,Iraq....Srebrenica,the biggest estemation is around 8000(much too large number)...All of them were males,ALL OF THEM....None of them were under the age of 16....So they were basicly captured Muslim soldiers(mujahedins and other terrorists...) So now its a crime to capture and shoot the terrorist...None of them were under 16 and they were all male.... But look at Nagasaki,Hiroshima ect. How can you even compare it...
And how many Serbs were killed by Albanians since the NATO agresion in 1999??? There are almost no Serbs left in Kosovo....Alongside Croatia,the biggest ethnical cleaning since WW2....Why dont NATO stop that genocide on Serbs...Or why dont they let us go to Kosovo and stop it ourselves...How come Kosovo may get independence,while Republika Srpska cant??
Who will explain the killing of little 3 year old girl Milica Rakic to her parents...Were they also "war criminals"....Serbs extradicted more then 20 people....Everyone but General Mladic....How many people faced charges for destuction of Dresden,for Firoshima,for nagasaki,for NATO agresion back in 1999....ZERO!
http://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B0:Mladic_i_Clark.jpg
^^^^^^^
Ooop,IS THAT GENERAL CLARK ALONGSIDE RATKO MLADIC....WHOS THE REAL "WAR CRIMINAL" ON THIS PHOTO?
212.200.200.26 00:52, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- NATO isn't just the US, it's most of Europe and Canada, too. They were implementing United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244. They all agreed that Serbia needed to be stopped, as did most of your neighbors. Do you think the whole world was wrong and only you are right ? If you believe that prisoners should be massacred, I see we will never agree on anything, so there is no point in trying. StuRat 05:52, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- The Serbs also murdered children and raped women at Srebrenica, according to this UN report: [3]. StuRat 06:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Haha,funny way you Americans look at things...
Let me quote the report you mentioned:
"[W]e saw two Serb soldiers, one of them was standing guard and the other one was lying on the girl, with his pants off. And we saw a girl lying on the ground, on some kind of mattress. There was blood on the mattress, even she was covered with blood. She had bruises on her legs. There was even blood coming down her legs. She was in total shock. She went totally crazy"
What he saw was two Serbs with a Muslim hooker.They probably paid it to her,or she gave it to them for free,but from this report you can see that he enjoyed it "She went totally crazy"...So you see that she liked it,she got crazy out of joy.As for blood,maybe she was a virgin,maybe she kept herself for the Serbs soldiers,so you see that even Muslim girls can keep themselves for the right man.How can you blame those two soldiers for giving it to the woman that probably begged them to do her...
But as for kids,even this so called "UN report"(made out of testemonies by paid witnesses and so called "experts"),but even these reports dont mention the killing of the children...No children under 16 years old were killed....
But let me ask you something,if you captured Muslim soldiers that raped you mother,wife,sister,that cut of your children or parents heads,that burned your houses.what would you do? Do you even know how many people died by the hand of Naser Oric and his terrorist group...And he was sentenced to what,2 years???? More then 3000 Serbs civilians died in the area of Srebrenica during 1992-1995 period...So what Serbs did was revenge...Is it any worse then Hiroshima or Nagasaki....Or NATO agression back in 1999(AND NATO DOESNT HAVE "MOST OF THE EUROPEAN COUNTIRES IN IT",AS YOU SAID,BACK IN 1999 IT ACTUALY HAD ONLY 19 MEMBERS,AND RUSSIA,CHINA,IRAQ,CUBA,ZIMBABVE,LYBIA,EVEN SOUTH AFRICAS THEN PRESIDENT NELSON MANDELA ,THEY WERE ALL STRONGLY AGAINST THE BOMBING OF SERBIA).....
And please,dont say that Serbs killed children...How can a 16 year old person be a children...He can carry a gun,cant he? He can shoot at Serb soldiers,cant he? So,when you capture a 16 year old muslim that was drugged out of his mind,shooting at you,what would you do? Let him get away with it? Let him go so he can come back and rape and torture more Serbian civilians? Get real,it was a war,not a game.
YXYX 11:54, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- The UN report (not the "so called" report) does indeed contain reports of child murders:
44. As evening fell, the terror deepened. Screams, gunshots and other frightening noises were audible throughout the night and no one could sleep.76 Soldiers were picking people out of the crowd and taking them away: some returned ; others did not.77 Witness T recounted how three brothers – one merely a child and the others in their teens – were taken out in the night. When the boys’ mother went looking for them, she found them with their throats slit.78
158. ... One Dutch Bat witnesses summed it up in this way:
[Y]ou could see the total fear, and I never thought that it really existed, but you could even smell death there because it was total fear, what you saw on the faces of the men and the young boys.368
348 - Witness F, T. 1503 (soldiers in camouflage uniforms were looting houses); Ademovic, T. 1589 (soldiers wearing camouflage (but without insignia) threatening to slaughter the Bosnian Muslim refugees and a soldier wearing camouflage killed a baby with a knife);
448 - By the evening of 13 July 1995, the Drina Corps must have been aware of the VRS plan to execute all of the thousands of Bosnian Muslim men and boys captured in the area of the former enclave following the take-over of Srebrenica (para. 295 ).
- Your statement that girls who are brutally raped "must have wanted it" is obscene. The rules of war do not allow for ANY prisoners of war to be killed, as they can't possibly pose any threat after they become prisoners. The Serbs went beyond killing captured combatants, however, and killed men and boys of, or near, military age, whether there was any evidence they were in the military or not. They also killed and raped a few children, elderly and women. It's almost inevitable that some of this will happen in war, but the soldiers responsible should be tried and punished by their own nation. Serbia, however, as reflected by your attitudes, holds these brutal murderers up as heroes, thus the need for the International Criminal Court. StuRat 16:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
There might have been couple of civilians kids,but most of that is,excuse my french,bullshit...It is similiar to the thing that was done to Germany after WW2....They were even blamed for Katin massacre!!! Its still nothing compared to the crimes that Croats,Albanians and Muslims commited on Serbs....If you are really interested in the subject,I may find the pictures of thousands of Serbian houses that were burnt down to the ground....For example,Serbian population in Croatia at the beggining of 1990s was 15 precent...NOW ITS ABOUT 3 TO 4 PRECENT...On Kosovo pretty much the same situation since the arrival of NATO aggressiors...Look just on all the crimes commited during the March 17,2004....During the single day,about 100 Serbian churches were set on fire,and in days after in many thousands fled away...
Anyway,Serbs never commited crimes masive and disgusting such as Nagasaki or Hiroshima...Who was sentenced for that? No one....American to this day celebrate Nagasaki,Distruction of Dresden,Hiroshima and all other crime as their victories....
Then look at Guatenamo base...Horrors that are hard to imagine for someone from Serbia...But Americans not only can imagine,but they also did it....
the bottom line>>>>>>>Guatanamo=people who did it are being punished,not the General or the President.............So how can you blame President of Republika Srpska Karadzic or General Mladic for Srebrenica......Crimes are done by individuals,there is no "command responsibility".....If there is,who will be sentenced for the brutal and criminal killing of 3 year old girl Milica Rakic,who died from NATO aggressiors bomb....Who will go to International Criminal Court....
p.s.Serbs already extradited Milosevic and about 20 other....They killed Milosevic there and no one of them 20 returned....Albanians,muslims and Croats are ruturning in bunches from Hague Court........Can you please explain that???????????????????????? And now we are guilty for not extraditing our GREATEST WAR HERO GENERAL RATKO MLADIC.......Arent 20 people enough.......Now they have stopped negotiations with EU untill we arrest General Mladic too........So they are punishing the whole nation for just one man that is hiding.................
http://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B0:Mladic_i_Clark.jpg ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Neither one of these two Generals ordered the crimes himself....Some Serbs killed Muslims...Some NATO soldiers killed Serbian civilians(including 3 year old girl Milica Rakic that was killed in her house while getting ready to sleep).........Now,which one is a war criminal....Niether....Or maybe both???
YXYX 17:49, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- You seem to have absolutely no concept of what war crimes are. It does NOT include civilians accidentally killed during military operations. It DOES include civilians intentional executed while in custody. And no, you don't get to decide you've extradited enough war criminals, so are allowed to protect the ones you have left. The EU should absolutely have nothing to do with Serbia until they decide they will no longer support genocide or protect those who ordered it. Guantanamo Bay, Cuba holds a few hundred detainees, none of whom have been executed, many of whom have been released. This hardly compares to the thousands executed by Serbs. As for the atomic bombings of Japan, that ended a war, by killing thousands, that otherwise would have killed millions, had it continued. Similarly, the bombings of Serbia prevented much larger casualties, had NATO allowed the genocide to continue. StuRat 21:34, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
"It does NOT include civilians accidentally killed during military operations. It DOES include civilians intentional executed"...Right,but Nagasaki and Hiroshima were intentional...It killed tens of thousands innocent civilians.....If you think America have right to INTENTIONALY kill civilians,without it being considered as war crime,then how come other countries cant do it...If we had a nuclear bomb,maybe we would have dropped it on Sarajevo or Zagreb...But we didnt...So Srebrenica happend......Is there any difference...Besides that in Srebrenica only males over the of 16 died....Not to mention that they were mostly muslim terrorists...
"atomic bombings of Japan, that ended a war, by killing thousands"...Ok...Srebrenica also ended a war,by killing few thousands males over the age of 16....otherwise many more people would have been killed.
But lets see another fine example of western rethoric:"you don't get to decide you've extradited enough war criminals, so are allowed to protect the ones you have left."
WHAT? How can you call General Ratko Mladic or Radovan Karadzic "war criminals"...In Serbia we have a saying "innocent until proven guilty"....It seems USA is closer to "guilty until proven innocent"....They were indicted,they are not "war criminals",they were indicted for it
But lets see for the International Court...How come we extradited so many people,including President Milosevic and President Milutinovic...How come USA have a strickly policy of no extraditing its citizens to no foreign countries OR international courts...It wont even sign the treaty for the new International court that is going to take place in next few years...Lets say that an american soldier is accused of war crime....THERE IS NO WAY THAT USA WOULD EVER EXTRADITE ITS OWN CITIZEN.......Never ever happend....
And I only have one more question that I would really like you to answer: "It does NOT include civilians accidentally killed during military operations."///WHEN NATO AGGRESSORS BOMBED SERBIAN NATIONAL TELEVISION,WAS THAT A WAR CRIME....WERE THOSE PEOPLE "ACCIDENTALLY KILLED"....EVEN THOUGH THE TELEVISION ITSELF WAS A TARGET.......THEN HOW COME GENERAL MLADIC AND RADOVAN KARADZIC ARE BEING ACCUSED OF BOMBING OF SARAJEVO...BECAUSE THOSE PEOPLE ALSO DIED ACCIDENTALY.....SO IS A NATIONAL RADIO TELEVISION A LEGITIMATE TARGET???????
YXYX 22:27, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- At the time, there was no way to target the soldiers and factories of Hiroshima and Nagasaki without also hitting the civilians, whether conventional or nuclear weapons were used. So, yes, the civilians were not the targets, but were still hit. The Serbs had absolute control of Srebrenica, however, so would have had no trouble whatsoever in destroying military facilities of the enemy without killing civilians, if that was what they wanted. However, their goal was to kill civilians. As for the US not extraditing to the International Criminal Court, it isn't necessary, as those US soldiers who murder civilians will actually be tried and sentenced in the US, unlike in Serbia, where they get treated as national heroes. StuRat 02:59, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- You have an interesting circular logic going on MLADIC and KARADZIC:
- They are innocent until proven guilty by court.
- Since they are innocent, we won't provide them to the court for trial.
- Since they will be never be tried, they will always remain innocent.
Ok,then answer me this:
Vojislav Seselj arrived in Hague Tribunal at february 2003.....Now its November 2006....His trial havent even started yet!!!!! Is that justice?
And another thing...Lets sey we provide Mladic to Hague...Will USA ever provide Bill Clinton to Serbia,since he was sentenced to 20 years in jail back in 1999???????? ......Excatly.......
YXYX 03:53, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- They are slow, all right, but that's because they like to research all the evidence thoroughly. Better that than a quick, fake, show trial, like the one in Serbia for Clinton. Apparently they don't even feel the need to have the accused in the country in Serbia to try them and sentence them. I suppose this is an improvement over the usual Serbian method of just killing anyone they don't like. StuRat 06:29, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Can you do me a favour? Read what greatest living intelectual in the world Noam Chomsky think about Tribunal in Hague and about wars in ex Yugoslavija.
Also read what respected american intelectual Ramsey Clark thinks about those wars...And Clark is to be trusted....Then we`ll talk again YXYX 17:44, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
Articles on a French calendar
For my niece who is just starting to learn French, I am making a calendar of the year 2006 for her. Should the holidays identified on it have articles or not? That is, should it say, for example, Fête du Canada or La Fête du Canada? (Or is it La fête du Canada?) How about Équinoxe d’automne or L’équinoxe d’automne? If it’s one way or the other, are there any exceptions? I’m leaning toward omitting the articles, but I’m not 100% certain. In case it means anything, the months and days at the top just say janvier, février, mars, etc. and dimanche, lundi, mardi, etc. — Michael J 08:44, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- I think there might be articles on these already. On the French Wikipedia, there's fr:Fête du Canada corresponding to Canada day. Looks like equinox maps to fr:Équinoxe too. Oh, by the way, check out the French resources on Wikibooks: wikibooks:Category:French and the award winning wikibooks:French. --HappyCamper 13:29, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- I think it is a matter of taste (and how much space you have). This calendar leaves out most articles, whereas this calendar sports them. Omitting them seems a bit more "modern", but wanting to appear modern is so 20th century... --LambiamTalk 15:10, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks, Lambiam. I think it looks better without the articles, so I’m going to leave them off. ... Thanks too, HappyCamper, but I think you took the wrong meaning of “article” in my question. I was referring to grammatical articles, such as le, la and les (the), not Wikipedia articles. I appreciate the effort, though. — Michael J 20:43, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
done, through, and finished
Is there any difference when you say "Are you finished?" "Are you done?" and "Are you through?"
thank you.
- I think you have them listed from most to least formal, but it's a rather subtle difference. StuRat 17:47, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- 'Are you through?' is very rarely used in a context of finishing something. I'd say it's more likely to be said when the person being asked is crawling out of big tube or something, than in a context of asking about completeness. The other two, however, are pretty much the same. --Wooty Woot? | contribs 18:08, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- I don't know where you're from, but 'very rarely used' is not how i'd describe it. It is used fairly commonly in my experience, however it holds a connotation that 'done' and 'finished' don't have. Specifically, i think 'through' is reserved for two cases: (1) sarcasm or hostility, and (2) frustration.
- In the first case, it's usually kind of a smart-ass thing people say when they think the other person is being annoying or long-winded. You might say 'Are you through?', in a sarcastic manner, when somebody is done lecturing you. It gets across the point that you don't really care to hear their arguement.
- In the second case, it usually expresses finality in regards to a frustrating situation. For example, 'I'm through with being picked on!' (to express standing up for oneself) or 'I'm through with doing the dishes!' (to express giving up on something).
- I haven't very often heard it used to mean 'done' any other way. Like, i might say 'i'm done with my essay', but i would never say 'i'm through with my essay' (unless i meant i was giving up on it). That's my experience anyway. ~ lav-chan @ 23:54, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Well spoken English is, and always will be, 'have you finished?' in all contexts. The other forms are American-isms.
- I have to disagree with Wooty. "Are you through?" is certainly a well-known phrase for finishing. "Are you through with dinner?" "Are you through with your test?" User:Zoe|(talk) 02:54, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- I agree that all three are acceptable American English and that "finished" is more formal, though I would not go so far as to say "incorrect". The accompanying tone is important. -THB 04:37, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
German :"Darf ich Sie etwas fragen" or "Darf ich Ihnen etwas fragen"
Hello,
I am surprised to see that both of these :"Darf ich Sie etwas fragen" and "Darf ich Ihnen etwas fragen" result in many results on Google. Which one is correct? I'd say "etwas" is direct object, and the person you ask something in the indirect object, so I'd go for a dative--> Ihnen.
What do you think? Thanks! Evilbu 17:08, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, 'cos you are asking a question to them, Definitttaly Ihnen. Englishnerd 17:30, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- "Darf ich Sie etwas fragen" is correct. The person you ask something is the direct object. I don't think "etwas" is the direct object because I can't think of any constructions where you can directly replace "etwas" with the topic of your question. *"Darf ich Sie Weg fragen?" is incorrect, it's "Darf ich Sie nach dem Weg fragen", with an inserted prepositional phrase (which requires dative "dem Weg". With more elaborate questions, it's similar: "Darf ich Sie fragen, ob Sie den Weg kennen?". Again, the content of the actual question is in a different clause. I'd say "etwas" in your examples is something like a placeholder, kind of like a case-less stand-in for the indirect object. I hope I didn't confuse you anymore than was necessary. Rueckk 18:05, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- Sie and etwas are both direct objects. German is far from being the only language in which the verb "to ask" takes two direct objects, of the thing asked (internal direct object), and of the person asked (external direct object). (I link to cognate object because it is the closest equivalent covered here. There is no grammatical difference between "I talk the talk" [cognate internal d.o.] and "I strike the blow" or "I ask the question" [non-cognate internal d.o.]) Wareh 20:30, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- Then what explains the many results for 'Ihnen'? I would have used that. Is it the many bloody foreigners like me getting it wrong or aren't Germans themselves too sure either? DirkvdM 08:42, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Well, I get only 24 results for "Darf ich Ihnen etwas fragen" (with quotes), almost all of which are from Dutch sites or in a Dutch context (one site is Estonian). So, yeah, I'd say it's just you guys. Rueckk 10:36, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
But when I was watching Kundun on German television(dubbed of course), an Indian border guard walked up to the Dalai Lama and said "Darf ich Ihnen etwas fragen", well I would have sworn he said that! Oh well. I'm still surprised.. in Dutch we would have considered it an "indirect object"="meewerkend voorwerp". But Germans also say "Folgen Sie mir" and "Helfen Sie ihm"... so they use a dative while an accusative would have made more sense. I guess this is one of the downsides of languages that are spoken by so many other people. (I wouldn't call them foreigners, because German is spoken in Switzerland, Austria ... and by 70.000 people in Belgium as well.)Evilbu 15:27, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
French-English translation
What is the translation of the following French piece?
- Les mouvements satellites..., qui poursuivent leurs actions sans modifier en rien leur ancienne ligne politique, viennent confirmer cette thèse d'une "manœuvre de lifting."
Does "viennent confirmer" indicate uncertainty in the statement being made? Viennent could have been omitted as well, making the "thèse" certain in that case, not? Thanks! Los Intangibles 17:58, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- My French is bad, but my impression is that you have misunderstood completely, my rough interpretation is something like:
The satellites movements* (subclause) shall confirm this thesis as one "manoeuvre of lifting."
- *(Something seems missing from the French example)
- Note, however, that I only have two semesters of French studies behind me... 惑乱 分からん 21:56, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- "The satellite movements..., which continue their actions without modifying their ancient political line in anything at all, come to confirm their thesis of a "lifting manoeuvre"." This is as close as I can get to the original. Greets, David 22:24, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- I might be wrong, but shouldn't the first clause read "Les mouvements des satellites" or something? 惑乱 分からん 22:43, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- "The satellite movements..., which continue their actions without modifying their ancient political line in anything at all, come to confirm their thesis of a "lifting manoeuvre"." This is as close as I can get to the original. Greets, David
- I read satellites as an adjective modifying mouvements in the sense of "accompanying" and manoevre de lifting as "face lift procedure" but can't make good sense out of the sentence as a whole. -THB 04:24, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- That was my first impression, as well, but neither my old French dictionary, nor Wiktionary gave "satellite" as an adjective, so I began thinking that some word was missing... 惑乱 分からん 12:21, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Satellite is an adjective, it means non-mainstream. Like the English Satellite State, see my response below. --Cody.Pope 18:28, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- In English, satellite doesn't mean non-mainstream. A better definition would be subordinate. A satellite state is not one that's not mainstream, it's one that's under the thumb of another one.--Prosfilaes 20:18, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- True, I guess I was trying to emphasize that the phrase has nothing to do with satellites in the sky. So "satellite movements" could be the actions of a satellite state etc. Although, French may be more loose in the definition of satellite in this context. Without a source it's hard to say what exactly their talking about. I would guess that it is probably talking about an action of a French speaking African nation, but that is pure speculation. --Cody.Pope 20:36, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Oh, and a quick search of google.fr seems to confirm that the sense here is actions of a non-mainstream political party. --Cody.Pope 20:46, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- That was my first impression, as well, but neither my old French dictionary, nor Wiktionary gave "satellite" as an adjective, so I began thinking that some word was missing... 惑乱 分からん 12:21, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- I read satellites as an adjective modifying mouvements in the sense of "accompanying" and manoevre de lifting as "face lift procedure" but can't make good sense out of the sentence as a whole. -THB 04:24, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Yep, this particular phrase is a bit hard to translate out of context but the English equivalent would be: These satellite movements (which is to say non-mainstream political movements) who pursue their own actions without changing their ancient political lines at all (i.e. en rien) come to confirm this thesis of a "face-lift" (which is to say they're trying to change their appearance artificially since they are still following their ancient political lines). --Cody.Pope 04:32, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for all your replies. I could have provided a little bit more context (I thought it was already enough):
- Les mouvements satellites de ce parti tels que le ****, qui poursuivent leurs actions sans modifier en rien leur ancienne ligne politique, viennent confirmer cette thèse d'une "manœuvre de lifting."
But I'm more interested in the meaning of "viennent confirmer" here. If the "thèse d'une manœuvre de lifting" is certain, why would you want to make use "viennent" (to come)? It could have been omitted, not? Los Intangibles 21:04, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not certain, but I think it is a little stylistic. Without it the text does make sense, but with it the conclusion more clearly follows. It's functions like: "the conclusion "becomes" clear", if you will. --Cody.Pope 22:24, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- "Viennent" has no real meaning. To me "viennent confirmer" and "confiment" would generate the same meaning. There is a slight uncertainty if you add "viennent", but very slight , basically it is a bit like saying that these movements are bringing into the context confirmation of, rather than saying that they are confirming. --Lgriot 22:28, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
The meaning of names in Kurdish to English.
I am an English woman married to a Kurdish man and we are expecting our first child, and wish to name our child with a true kurdish name, but I would like to know the meaning of the name we chose, is there anyway I can find these out, apart from asking my husband all the time? Thanks in advance
195.93.21.69 18:28, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- List of Kurdish given names would be a start, although most of the name entries do not include the meaning. I hope that is some help, and congratulations to you and your husband! -Fsotrain09 18:38, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- You live in the US I believe? You could try looking for some books. I know here in NZ there were various books in the libraries about Chinese names (with English translations). Unfortunately Kurdish names are probably a bit more specialised but you could still take a look. Even if there's nothing in the libraries, you could try a bookshop. Perhaps look at Turkish and Iranian name books as well. They might have a section on Kurdish names. You could also try contacting any Kurdish associations you know of and see if they have any recommendations. Also, I don't know if this is viable in your circumstances but have you considered asking your in-laws for help too? It could way to improve relationships (of course it could be impossible or a bad idea) Nil Einne 20:36, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- After you have selected one or a couple of candidate names, you might also try asking some Kurdish-speaking 'pedians if any of them happen to know the meaning. Not all names have a well-understood meaning, but additionally they may have connotations, such as a peasant name, or suggesting an old spinster. In selecting a name, I'd also consider how badly it is likely to get mangled when rendered by an English speaker, as will inevitably happen with Helale; some names will hold up better than others. And in terms of spelling in the English 26-letter alphabet a name like Aştîxwaz may be less felicitous. --LambiamTalk 01:30, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- If you and your husband can't agree, use "Benaw". -THB 02:19, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Good luck on the birth of your child ! (Small Kurds are whey cool). StuRat 04:43, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Help a Korean-speaking wikipedian (not me)
It might be helpful if a Korean speaking wikipedian can help here. User talk:Jimbo Wales#A question about gathering in Korean wikipedia. The user appears to be asking a serious question, although I'm not sure if it's something for Jimbo to answer or even to be considered at the English wikipedia at all (as opposed to them considering it themselves). However, although I think I can guess what the question is as can Jimbo probably, it will IMHO help if we can be sure so a Korean speaking wikipedia should try and contact the user and try and provide a better translation. Nil Einne 20:27, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
- I don't speak Korean, but the link you gave isn't in Korean, in an case (with the exception of a single word, I believe). As near as I can figure, he has formed a group of 13 people who felt there was some type of systemic bias in the Korean Wikipedia, and are devoted to creating articles with an alternative viewpoint. This group has been rebuffed by the Korean Wikipedia establishment (Admins and such), and he is seeking the opinion of Jimbo on this matter. Sub-issues include his signature and a group template, both of which are apparently objectionable to the establishment. He never says just what the bias is that they are fighting against. The obvious issue would be a North Korean/South Korean schism, but somehow I doubt if enough North Koreans have access to the Internet to have much of any effect of Wikipedia. Perhaps the argument is between South Koreans who favor a policy of accommodation with North Korea and those which favor confrontation, although this is pure speculation on my part. StuRat 04:24, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- I looked at the Korean editor's User Page, and see he believes in Intelligent Design. If his group is trying to add articles which explain things using the ID perspective, as if they are "equally scientifically valid" with accepted scientific theory, then I can certainly see how this would cause conflict. StuRat 04:40, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- I sometimes go to the Korean Wikipedia, and I can tell you the group Han-O-Baek-Nyeon is against "no fair use" and "NPOV". Fair use is not allowed under Korean law. Other than that, I'm not interested in their goals. --Kjoonlee 04:44, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
November 2
Plural of häuptling?
What is the plural of the German word häuptling? Thanks! 210.239.12.93 06:35, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- The nominative and accusative plural are (die) Häuptlinge. Ein Häuptling, zwei Häuptlinge. The genitive plural is (der) Häuptlinge, the dative plural is (den) Häuptlingen. Please note that, in German, Häuptling (in every case and grammatical number) is always spelled with a capital initial letter. ---Sluzzelin 07:14, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you very much. (I was the anonymous poster.) So, for an article I'm working on, "The Germans called such individuals Häuptlinge (chiefs) . . . " should suffice? — BrianSmithson 07:37, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- You're very welcome. Your suggestion sounds good to me. Another, possibly less ambiguous, English translation is chieftains. (You would never translate chief, as in highest rank of an office, with Häuptling. Häuptling always refers to the leader of an indigenous tribe or variety thereof.) ---Sluzzelin 07:44, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Hello, just a hint : this online dictionary is pretty good and it usually gives the plural as well : [4]Evilbu 10:49, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Isn't there a standard declination for all nouns ending in -ling? 惑乱 分からん 12:23, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Most are masculine and follow the same declension, yes. Some words, however, such as das Peeling, or das Feeling, are borrowed from the English present-participle form, and are neuter. They follow slightly different rules, and are usually not used in their plural form. I couldn't think of any feminine German words ending in -ling.---Sluzzelin 12:43, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Although that ending clearly has another origin. (The cognate ending to -ing, German -ung, such as in Fühlung and Hoffnung is feminine, btw.) Theoretically, if German would borrow some English word ending in -ling, such as "underling", which declination would be likely used? 惑乱 分からん 13:40, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- In the case of der Underling, it would most likely be masculine, because it refers to a person, and the German language is sexist enough to usually give nouns for people a masculine case by default. And of course you're right, das Peeling is neuter because German speakers recognize it as a present-participle, and nounified(?!) verbs are always neuter in German (e.g. das Schälen (the peeling)).---Sluzzelin 14:03, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Maybe I'm just ranting, but in Dutch "stem of a verb"+"ing" (like "opening"="opening") is always female. The equivalent of that rule in German is for nouns ending in "ung", like "die Verteilung". However, I recently discovered that blind trust in a German-Dutch correspondence can be catastrophic.... Evilbu 15:22, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- In the case of der Underling, it would most likely be masculine, because it refers to a person, and the German language is sexist enough to usually give nouns for people a masculine case by default. And of course you're right, das Peeling is neuter because German speakers recognize it as a present-participle, and nounified(?!) verbs are always neuter in German (e.g. das Schälen (the peeling)).---Sluzzelin 14:03, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Although that ending clearly has another origin. (The cognate ending to -ing, German -ung, such as in Fühlung and Hoffnung is feminine, btw.) Theoretically, if German would borrow some English word ending in -ling, such as "underling", which declination would be likely used? 惑乱 分からん 13:40, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Just a small addendum. After a few hours of sleep I did think of a feminine German word ending in "-ling": die Reling, borrowed from nautical English (or possibly Dutch?) and meaning the railing. So we've come full circle now, regarding Wakuran and Evilbu's posts.---Sluzzelin 12:19, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- Okay! As a digression, "reling" has also been loaned into Swedish. 惑乱 分からん 16:45, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- Most are masculine and follow the same declension, yes. Some words, however, such as das Peeling, or das Feeling, are borrowed from the English present-participle form, and are neuter. They follow slightly different rules, and are usually not used in their plural form. I couldn't think of any feminine German words ending in -ling.---Sluzzelin 12:43, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Isn't there a standard declination for all nouns ending in -ling? 惑乱 分からん 12:23, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Hello, just a hint : this online dictionary is pretty good and it usually gives the plural as well : [4]Evilbu 10:49, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- You're very welcome. Your suggestion sounds good to me. Another, possibly less ambiguous, English translation is chieftains. (You would never translate chief, as in highest rank of an office, with Häuptling. Häuptling always refers to the leader of an indigenous tribe or variety thereof.) ---Sluzzelin 07:44, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Thank you very much. (I was the anonymous poster.) So, for an article I'm working on, "The Germans called such individuals Häuptlinge (chiefs) . . . " should suffice? — BrianSmithson 07:37, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Strange plurals
- 1. We often say "Mary is friends with Ben", rather than "Mary is a friend of Ben". Why?
- 2. Cigarettes usually come in packets of 20 or 30 these days. If you ask for a packet of X brand, you'll probably be asked "Do you want 20s or 30s?". Why is the plural of these numbers used? There's only one lot of 20 (or 30) in a packet, not many lots of 20 (or 30). JackofOz 12:29, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Is it possible that the first example is a variety of Mary and Ben are friends, in other words, put together they are friends, or Mary is friends (together) with Ben? In this case it wouldn't be all that illogical, after all it takes at least two for a friendship, but this doesn't help explain your second example, I'm afraid.---Sluzzelin 13:06, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Could 2 be in genitive, instead of in plural? 惑乱 分からん 13:34, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- 1 I think that "to be friends with" is an idiomatic expression derived from "X and Y are friends". It describes a relationship, like the expression "to be in love with".
- 2. I think that this is a kind of verbal shortcut used by cashiers with a long line of customers rather than "Do you want a 20 pack or a 30 pack?". It works fine to say "Do you want 20s or 30s?" when the customer is ordering multiple packs ("Give me 4 packs of Marlboros."). This then becomes the automatic quick response to any unquantified request for one or more packs of a brand.
- Marco polo 13:54, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Could 2 be in genitive, instead of in plural? 惑乱 分からん 13:34, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- I believe Wakuran is right, neither are plurals, they're in the genitive. It's another example of retained genitive "s"es in English (see above on genitive prepositions). "Mary is a friend of Ben", becomes "friends with". "A packet of 20" becomes "A packet of 20s". --BluePlatypus 14:38, 2 November 2006 (UTC)u
- I find this really doubtful, at least for the second example. The retained genitive "s" is a historical vestige and not a productive feature of the language. The second example is clearly a recent development that can only be as old as cigarette packs, which long postdate the productive use of a genitive in English.
- The first example is less clear. To my ear, it has a modern feel. Blue Platypus gives "Mary is a friend of Ben" as the modern equivalent of "Mary is friends with Ben." But in this example, it is Ben that is in the genitive. If there were a retained genitive, the expression would be "*Mary is a friend Bens", which doesn't make sense, though you can say "Mary is a friend of Ben's", but this is not related to "Mary is friends with Ben", and the two sentences have different focuses (the first one on Ben's friendships, of which the friendship with Mary is one; the second on the relationship between Mary and Ben). If "Mary is friends with Ben" involved a retained genitive, then the meaning of the sentence should be close to "Mary is of friend with Ben". This is not implausible, if the genitive carried an attributive sense, so that "of friend" could mean "friendly". But for this to be a retained genitive, the expression "friends with" would have to be quite old. There would need to be a citation from the 15th century or earlier, when the genitive was productive in English, for this to be convincing.
- Would BluePlatypus's suggestion mean that the possessive 's' can be added to the possessor noun (20s) as well as to the possessed noun (friends)?---Sluzzelin 15:08, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, and this is certainly not true for English. Furthermore, to a native speaker, "20s or 30s?" with reference to packs of cigarettes does not make sense as a "retained genitive" purely on grounds of anachronism. (This use of the genitive died out long before there were packs of cigarettes.) However, I have taken a look at OED, and there are examples of "to be friends with" as well as "to make friends with" in Shakespeare. Shakespeare is much closer to the time when the genitive was productive. Also, the expression "to make friends with" looks likely to be a retained genitive, especially considering that the expression already existed in Shakespeare's time. So, I think that the suggestion of a retained genitive is plausible after all for the first example. The original meaning could have been "Mary is of friend (friendly) with Ben". "Make friends with" would have meant originally "make of friend (friendly) with". Marco polo 15:26, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the thoughts so far. Interesting, but I welcome further debate. (PS. I'm retiring from my job today (Friday here), and am taking an enforced 3-day wikibreak while I move to the country.) JackofOz 22:45, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- It's been a while since I looked at this, but don't cigarettes normally come in 10s and 20s?
- In my part of the world, the most popular sizes are 20 and 30. They also come in packs of 50, but I can't remember the last time I saw a pack of 10 being sold. It may be different where you are. The sizes are not the important issue, though, it's the pluralisation of the number that I'm curious about. It occurs to me it's probably just a marketing thing - even though the pack says, eg. "20" and not "20s", it's common to pluralise names of certain products, so people just do it without thinking.
- I think that the whole genitive thing here is a red herring. "being friends with" is an idiom, and friends is clearly plural "Sue is friends with Bob" simply means "Sue and Bob are friends". The other example, 20s and 30s is also normal plural of a word which has been converted to a noun, exactly like 1980s and 1990s, or other examples like reds and blues. In the example of 20s and 30s, the plural is used by analogy to "cigarettes". Zocky | picture popups 19:04, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- I agree it's idiomatic, and the genitive explanation doesn't wash with me either. Does anyone know where and when the idiom originated? JackofOz 02:23, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
1) "Friends" is plural. Its easier to see once the sentence is broken down, thusly:
- Mary is the subject of the sentence.
- is is the copula.
- "friends", is the object of the verb and is most defiantly plural.
- "with" is the preposition of accompaniment.
- "Ben" is also the object of the sentence, albeit modified by "with".
So why is "friends" plural? In this case, it is a state of being that includes two beings.
Personally, I feel that "Mary is a friend of Ben" has a different meaning, but that could just be me.
As for why we use it more, its an idiomatic phrase, and they are more "natural" to a native speaker than the formal way of saying something.
2) Breaking "20s and 30s" down helps as well, this time into their actual spelling (i.e. "twenties and thirties"). The suffix -ies is the plural of the suffix -y, which is the diminutive. The diminutive in this case is used to break a longer expression down into simpler one.
The diminutive is very common in English, so much so that it is easy to miss. The word cookie, for example, imported from the Dutch koekje, only occurs in the diminutive form in English. --Limetom 08:51, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- changing subject slightly, why do we not make plurals of 'hundred', 'thousand' etc?
I never noticed this until I started learning Italian, where you say, for example:
mille (one thousand)
but due mila (two thousands)
which actually seems more logical than the English. Does anybody know the reason why we don't have a plural in English (nor in French nor in German for that matter) - or did we have them once and they've just been dropped over time?
--Wren-3talk 18:59, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
Dangherous sadly died in 2080?
In Wikipedia, would I be right to assume we don't say "she sadly died". I've had a look on the Style Guide, but couldn't see if there was a bit on saying "sadly". Without getting into a philosophical discussion about how sad or happy death may be, am I right to remove the adverb "sadly" wherever I see it describing a death in a Wikipedia article? --Dangherous 13:46, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- It would be more correct to say "sadly, she died", as it is presumably the fact that "she died" that is sad, rather than that she died in a sad mood. However, given that the vast majority of deaths are, to some people, sad, "sadly" is somewhat otiose. I wouldn't necessarily always remove "sadly" in relation to deaths. Some deaths can reasonably be said to be more tragic than others.--Shantavira 14:09, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- I'd remove them, period. We don't need to think or feel for the reader. For almost a year now, an otherwise pretty useful editor has been tweaking Eleanor Roosevelt by adding such language (for example, changing "...died at the age of 78" to "...tragically died at the age of just 78"). --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 15:08, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, apart from the split infinative, this is an encyclopaedia; we should be non-biased, and thus not have such an emotional adverb. Englishnerd 16:27, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- Well with over 7000 Google hits for "sadly" in Wikipedia, someone is going to be kept quite busy. I hope the editing doesn't depress anyone, especially with such moving statements as "Walter was, sadly, unable to control his bladder,".... (I see no split infinitive, though). --Shantavira 16:58, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- I can think of one case where "sadly" might be appropriate; where describing an uncompleted great work. For instance "...planned to complete her revolutionary thingamaflip on return from Tahiti. Sadly, she died in a yodelling accident before this was possible." Flows better with the sadly connecting the sentences. Notinasnaid 17:03, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- I don't think it's even appropriate then. You're still editorializing by saying a) the work is great and b) it would be better if finished. Let the reader decide. Also, death is not always sad or tragic. It's a natural part of life. --Charlene 08:16, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- I'd guess that "tragically" can also be snipped out the article. I've seen the likes of "Sadly, Firstname McGeneric-Surname tragically lost his life due to a terrible illness. His kids and pet dog will miss him dearly. "--Dangherous 20:35, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- I want to underline what everyone else said: Please, please remove adverbs like these whenever you see them. This is one of my pet hates on Wikipedia ("ironically" is particularly irksome). You can even read about it on my user page. --Grace 14:14, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- An event is not "sad", "happy", or any other kind of feeling. Sadness is a feeling that can be only experienced by people. I might be sad to hear about the passing of a particular person, but others may be dancing in the streets. Wikipedia does not know how everyone feels about the deaths of notable people, and we cannot speak for everyone, nor should we pretend to. Get rid of them. JackofOz 02:32, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Is this term a noun, a verb, or an adjective? I'm trying to figure out how to describe a vichyssoise I made with potatoes and a chiffonade of bitter greens. Is that correct, how I just wrote it? Could I say 'chiffonaded' bitter greens? Anchoress 20:45, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- "Chiffonade" is a noun. In analogy to how des verts amers sautés becomes "sauteed bitter greens", you could go with des verts amers chiffonnés becoming "chiffoneed bitter greens". In analogy with "marinaded" you get indeed "chiffonaded". Either would be a neologism, though, although the latter form has some 429 unique Google hits. What is the problem with using "a chiffonade of bitter greens"?
- Thanks for the detailed reply! I don't like 'chiffonade of bitter greens' because it's waaay too formal when I'm describing it to my mom and my friends. Sounds like something The Galloping Gourmet would say, or Batman's butler. That's all, lol. Anchoress 05:34, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
English pronunciation of Kant
I've been wondering about this for a while now. Do English speakers pronounce Kant's last name like can't, or do they approximate the original pronunciation? Rueckk 21:31, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- In my experience, English speakers usually pronounce the philosopher's name roughly as a German would pronounce "*Kahnt" (except that English speakers may end the word with a glottal stop rather than a "t"). To my ear, this is similar to the pronunciation of "can't" for speakers of British English, but for Americans, this pronunciation is very distinct from the pronunciation of "can't". Marco polo 22:25, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- In the early 1970's, the English comedy group Monty Python crafted The Philosophers' Song (which attempted to discount all philosophy to the rambling of drunkards). It opens with the words "Immanuel Kant was a real pissant." You can hear it here. It clearly rhymes with "can't". dpotter 00:28, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- No, it doesn't. They pronounce Kant as /kænt/. "Can't" is /kɑnt/ in British English, as Marco polo said. --Ptcamn 04:55, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
word search
what are the three words in english finishing in ...gry. Angry, Hungry and ????
- I've come across this before, and I needed to look at the way the original question was phrased. Perhaps this link will help you. sʟυмɢυм • т • c 23:57, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. It explains everything. now i must try and confuse others as I feel it has been answered.:-)
- There is actually a Wikipedia article on this: Gry Wareh 01:27, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- P.S. ARTFL allows you to search an unabridged dictionary with all kinds of operators, so you can search for word-endings, alternate word-middles, etc. (example). And the Regex dictionary is very similar. Wareh 01:31, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- [5] may be relevant. --Ptcamn 13:22, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
November 3
Translation meaning
What is the direct translation of Veniete Adoremus Dominum? It is Latin and I need it to know what it means in English.
- Heh, found it in Wikipedia no less! At Adeste Fideles#Latin lyric it says it means Come, let us adore the Lord. Hyenaste (tell) 03:28, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, and it is venite, not veniete. Lesgles (talk) 21:25, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Meanings of alternate conjugations of Anochecer (spanish)
The Spanish word Anochecer confuses me a bit and I have yet to find a good online explanation... so here goes the question: I know that it means 'nightfall/to get dark' but when it becomes conjugated to something like the future tense, el form to 'el anochecera', does this mean that it means "He/it will grow dark"? Or does the meaning change when it is applied to people instead of dusk? --69.255.250.201 05:14, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- According to WordReference, the verb anochecer can have two meanings. One is to get dark, the other is to be somewhere at nightfall. So your example, él anochecerá, presumably could also mean he will be (at a certain place) at nightfall. ---Sluzzelin 08:19, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
The profession of neurology
I was wondering if there was a professional term for one who is a neurologist. (What would be written in a medical degree?) For example, one can be a secretary, but the professional term is an "administrative assistant." Are people that are neurologists just neurologists? Thanks. --Proficient 07:49, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- I think neurologists are considered professionals enough in themselves, so nobody has bothered having the term rephrased in fancy mumbo-jumbo... 惑乱 分からん 11:03, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- Agreed. The reason for fancy titles is when the actual job name isn't very impressive:
- Secretary -> Administrative Assistant
- Garbage Man -> Sanitation Engineer
- Janitor -> Custodian
- Walmart Stock Boy -> Associate
- Thus, since neurologist already sounds professional, there's no need to come up with a fancy name, such a name would only get on people's nerves. StuRat 21:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Words beginning with 'C' in German
I've noticed that there are very few words in German that begin with the letter C, and those that do seem to be borrowed from another language, e.g. der Computer, das Curry. Is there any reason for this, and are there any 'real' German words beginning with C? --Richardrj talk email 13:52, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- I couldn't come up with any, though some borrowings, such as Christentum (from Greek), are much older than Computer and Curry. If you count proper names, there's Calw, Hermann Hesse's hometown, the spelling of which dates back to the 11th century. German orthography wasn't codified until relatively recently, and back in the 19th century words such as Zentrum and zivil (both with Latin roots, of course) where often spelled Centrum and civil.---Sluzzelin 14:41, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- A lot of place names also changed since the 19th century; Köln (Cologne) used to be Cölln, Kassel used to be Cassel, just to name those I can immedially recall. I assume this was to mirror the general replacement of c by k. Most of what remained unchanged at the time must be words starting with ch. All examples I can come up with are of Greek origin, I think: Charisma, chronisch, Chronik, Chimäre, Chirurgie, etc.
- I think it's a bit like the most recent orthography reform. ph can be replaced by f in most cases, except when words of Greek origin are affected: Physik and Philosoph, for example. —da Pete (ばか) 15:57, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- The answer to the question about "the reason for this," as Sluzzelin implies, is that Germany orthography has been reformed since the 19th century to move toward a one-to-one correspondence between phonemes and graphemes. In German, the letter 'c' does not correspond to a unique phoneme, and so it has been removed from the orthography except in borrowed words. (Before 'e', 'ä', 'i', and 'y', it is pronounced like 'z' and has generally been replaced by this letter in orthographic reforms. Reforms have similarly changed 'c' to 'k' before other letters.) The one exception is the combination 'ch', which does correspond almost uniquely to a phoneme (albeit with two allophones). However, the 'ch' phoneme does not occur initially in standard German (Hochdeutsch), except in a few Greek borrowings. Marco polo 16:20, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- That's still not quite the full story: we still need to explain why the 'ch' phoneme does not occur initially, when most other phonemes do. (Actually, you could argue that the 'ch' phoneme does occur initially, and that 'h' is its allophone in that position.)
- There are two sources for modern standard German 'ch'. One is from Proto-Germanic *x (from PIE *k via Grimm's Law), as in acht (=Latin octo). At the start of words, however, this became h: Herz (=Latin cord-). English did the same thing, only we write 'ch' as gh and have largely stopped pronouncing it: eight, heart.
- The other source is Proto-Germanic *k via the High German consonant shift: English make = machen. However, the fricative-producing part of that shift only took affect after vowels, so never produced any word-initial 'ch'. --Ptcamn 06:35, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
My favorite is de:Chuchichäschtli ([ˈχʊχːiˌχæʃtli]), though it is only dialectal. --Janneman 00:32, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Paragraph alignment
Can somebody tell me which the most widely used format for aligning paragraphs is? Does the first sentence of a new paragraph always begin a few centimetres from the margin? If so, what exactly is that system of punctuation called? Thanks for your time.--202.164.137.73 14:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, the first sentence is usually indented by half a centimetre or so. (Another method I've seen is to skip a line.) The main reason for this seems to be to signal the start of a new paragraph clearly when the previous line finishes at the right hand side of the page. Thus, the first paragraph of a new page or section doesn't need to be indented. I don't think it has a name, it's just a convention. --Richardrj talk email 14:24, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- Hard return may be of some use. As may Indentation. Hope these help.--Andrew c 17:04, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- Per a 1960's typesetters' textbook, the first line of a paragraph should be indented so that the whitespace formed by the indentation is square. Zocky | picture popups 18:58, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- "Indented paragraphs" is a reasonable name for this style, and "block paragraphs" for the other style where there is no indent but the next paragraph is spaced down a bit. Of course web pages are normally rendered with block paragraphs, and this style is also common in business writing and some kinds of reports. In printed books, magazines, and newspapers I expect to see indented paragraphs, but block paragraphs are used sometimes, especially in the kind of nonfiction where text is frequently interrupted by things like equations and computer programs. This subject happened to come up at my office a few days ago, and I looked over about 20 computer-related books. Several were published by O'Reilly and these all used block paragraphs, but most of the others used indented ones. So in short, the answer to the original question probably depends on what kind of material you're thinking about. --Anonymous, 04:15 UTC, November 4.
- Oh, really? JackofOz 02:37, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- "Indented paragraphs" is a reasonable name for this style, and "block paragraphs" for the other style where there is no indent but the next paragraph is spaced down a bit. Of course web pages are normally rendered with block paragraphs, and this style is also common in business writing and some kinds of reports. In printed books, magazines, and newspapers I expect to see indented paragraphs, but block paragraphs are used sometimes, especially in the kind of nonfiction where text is frequently interrupted by things like equations and computer programs. This subject happened to come up at my office a few days ago, and I looked over about 20 computer-related books. Several were published by O'Reilly and these all used block paragraphs, but most of the others used indented ones. So in short, the answer to the original question probably depends on what kind of material you're thinking about. --Anonymous, 04:15 UTC, November 4.
Phonemic disctinction between /r/ and /ɹ/
What languages distinguish between /ɹ/ and /r/, /ʁ/, or any of the other "r sounds"? Mo-Al 17:43, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- Spanish distrinugishes between the flap /ɾ/ and a trill /r/ (minimal pair pero, "but", and perro, "dog"). Same for Portuguese, caro, "expensive", and carro, "car". Some more are listed at Alveolar_approximant#In_other_languages, and the other articles covering the specific IPA sounds.--Andrew c 18:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- In addition to the languages listed in Alveolar_approximant#In_other_languages, I am aware of such a distinction in Tamil and Malayalam. Marco polo 19:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- Armenian has all three that you've listed as phonemes. I don't think speakers consider the uvular sound an "r" sound but that could be sort of an arbitrary literatist distinction. Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 22:48, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
November 4
"Do you have . . . ?" in Japanese
What is the proper way to ask the question Do you have . . . ? in Japanese? I thought it was Nani-nani ga arimasu ka?, but a (non-Japanese) friend insists that for animate objects (do you have a dog, children, etc.), it should be Nani-nani ga imasu ka? I understand there's a difference between aru and iru when used in the sense of existence. But does this hold true even in the sense of possession? Thanks, — BrianSmithson 04:33, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Strictly speaking, aru and iru here are still being used in the sense of existence. It's only when translated into English that it seems like possession. Literally, you're saying Is there a . . . ?. So I think your friend is right. --Ptcamn 04:51, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Ah, that makes sense. Thanks. — BrianSmithson 05:36, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- -iru should always be used when describing living things! Else you're sort of implying your dog, for example, is an object. --Wooty Woot? | contribs 05:51, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- When I learnt Japanese, I mostly replaced them all with "desu", anyway... Kinda sloppy... 惑乱 分からん 06:46, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- In general, if you would like to know if something belongs to someone,
- （あなたは）XX を持っていますか？ (Anata wa) XX wo motte imasu ka? // Do you have XX?
- is a general way. You can safely omit (Anata wa), you know. Then, let's think about the dog's case:
- （あなたは）犬を飼っていますか？ (Anata wa) Inu wo katte imasu ka? // Do you have a dog/dogs?
- For pets, verb 飼う kau (have an aminal/animals) is much more natual than 持つ motsu (have, in general). What about children then? For simplicity, consider asking one's brother(s):
- （あなたには）兄弟はいますか？ (Anata ni wa) kyoudai wa imasu ka? // Do you have a brother/brothers?
- Now it's better use いる iru (exist, be). I don't think you possess your brother, children, parents, etc. Rather, they are related to us (and yes, they are relatives, right?). It's also okay to use this いる for animals so long as used with some place, like
- (casual) お前んち（に）は犬いるの？ Omae n chi (ni) wa inu iru no? // Do you have a dog at home? (literally) Is there any dog at your home? -- Here, お前 is casual (and rather rude) form of あなた (you); ん is casual form of の; ち is casual form of 家(home); は(wa) after 犬(inu) is omitted. This kind of いる(iru) usage is rather casual in nature, thus "あなたの家に犬はいますか？ Anata no ie ni inu wa imasu ka?" is grammatically perfect but a bit unnatural. Try 飼っていますか if you'd like to use formal question.
- Note we don't say "(incorrect) あなたには犬はいますか？ Anata ni wa inu wa imasu ka?" nor "(incorrect) あなたは犬がいますか -- perhaps Japanese people thought pets and and livestock belong to place, and are possessed by humans... I don't know for sure (I'm basically engineering major).
- Yet another scene: if you'd like to buy something, then ask:
- （ここに/そこに）XX はありますか？ (Kokoni/Sokoni) XX wa arimasu ka? // Do you sell XX (here/there)?
- XX は置いて（い）ますか？ XX wa oite (i)masu ka? // Do you sell XX?
- XX は扱って（い）ますか？ XX wa atsukatte (i)masu ka? // Do you treat XX?
- HTH, marsian 14:19, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- You're a native Japanese speaker, so I hate to argue with you, but XXを持っている to me sounds like "Are you holding XX", not "Do you have a XX" (as in "do you own a XX"). howcheng {chat} 23:21, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- There's nothing wrong with Marsian's explanation. There is no perfect translation for the verb "have" in Japanese (I usually teach "have" as a spatial relation chart), so most occurences of "Do you have... ?" will translate into literal structures along the lines of "Do you hold (持つ)... ?" or "Is there a (有る・居る) ... for you/of yours?" as he said. Don't burden yourself with literal translations. freshofftheufoΓΛĿЌ 01:20, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- You're a native Japanese speaker, so I hate to argue with you, but XXを持っている to me sounds like "Are you holding XX", not "Do you have a XX" (as in "do you own a XX"). howcheng {chat} 23:21, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- In general, if you would like to know if something belongs to someone,
- When I learnt Japanese, I mostly replaced them all with "desu", anyway... Kinda sloppy... 惑乱 分からん 06:46, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- -iru should always be used when describing living things! Else you're sort of implying your dog, for example, is an object. --Wooty Woot? | contribs 05:51, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Ah, that makes sense. Thanks. — BrianSmithson 05:36, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Italian slang
What's that slang word they always use in The Sopranos? It sounds like "marón" or "madón", but I can't come up with any results in Google since I don't know the spelling. A similar word (?) appears in Will Eisner's A Contract with God, but spelled differently: "Mahdoan, Jacob, it's a good deal." What's the correct spelling and what does it mean? Thanks! --Grace 09:14, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Perhaps this is a Sicilian pronunciation of "Madonna"? Marco polo 15:06, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- It is indeed a short form of Madonna. Here is HBO's guide to Sopranos lingo. (BTW I think they're from the Neapolitan area, not Sicily). --Cam 15:52, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Perplexing Plaque
This photo was taken by Vmenkov in Florence. He asked me to attempt a translation; I failed pitifully. I am quite sure that the Hebrew is a biblical quotation, beginning something like "In the name of God show mercy". I wondered if any of you people could attempt it. If you do, please put the translation up on the photo's description page at Commons.
Thanks! —Daniel (‽) 16:34, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- I can't help you with the Hebrew, but here's my shot at the Latin:
- Fernandino II, Grand Duke of Etruria, and [his] mother Maria Magdalena the
august ArchdeaconArchduchess of Austria, have completed the work of this building in pious copper/bronze/brass, so that the guardian of chastity may evade the golden stranger with modesty.
- (Second Latin part to follow.) —Keenan Pepper 01:12, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- That is, the Grand Duke of Tuscany. Google seems to show that the Hebrew (or the rest of the inscr. for that matter) is not online (except for one image & transcription, spam-blacklisted from Wikipedia, that ignorantly labels it "Arabic"). Surely someone will come along whose Hebrew is not as rusty as mine. (Bottom Latin runs "Set on fire by Divine Love, the Most Serene Princes Nori have offered an example of great honorableness against the greatest dishonor." Perhaps the same family as Francesco Nori who died to save the life of Lorenzo il Magnifico.) Wareh 04:04, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- "ARCHID. AUST." would be Archduchess of Austria. It refers to this lady, the mother of Ferdinand II. --Cam 18:49, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Oh, Nori is a name! I kept trying to interpret it as "I know", so no wonder it didn't make sense to me. —Keenan Pepper 22:38, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- That is, the Grand Duke of Tuscany. Google seems to show that the Hebrew (or the rest of the inscr. for that matter) is not online (except for one image & transcription, spam-blacklisted from Wikipedia, that ignorantly labels it "Arabic"). Surely someone will come along whose Hebrew is not as rusty as mine. (Bottom Latin runs "Set on fire by Divine Love, the Most Serene Princes Nori have offered an example of great honorableness against the greatest dishonor." Perhaps the same family as Francesco Nori who died to save the life of Lorenzo il Magnifico.) Wareh 04:04, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- The Hebrew says something like: "They acted in kindness for the love of God, the ascension of supremacy of our rulers against kindness." Mo-Al 00:47, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- So it looks like the Latin on the bottom says something similar to the Hebrew. I have a hunch in that case that "NORI" with a stroke over the O is an abbreviation for "nostri." --Cam 06:32, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- The Hebrew says something like: "They acted in kindness for the love of God, the ascension of supremacy of our rulers against kindness." Mo-Al 00:47, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Thanks everyone (and also Wictionary)! So I take it that Ferdinando II de' Medici, Grand Duke of Tuscany and his Mom the regent praise themselves for building a charitable institution of some sort (currently, the name of the institution housed in the building is Istituto San Salvatore, but I don't know if it was the same in 1627). I have now modified the description of the image in Wiki Commons with what I feel is the most likely translation, but of course any experts on Florentine history and/or Latin and Hebrew are welcome to improve it - it would be cool if somebody could use it as an illustration in an artivcle that has to do with the historic context for the event that the plaque commemorates. Vmenkov 08:00, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- Um, none of the latin ones are very likely, in my opinion. (There used to be some people with much better latin than mine around here, where'd they go?) Anyway, what I make of it is:
- "Ferdinand II, Archduke of Tuscany and his mother Maria Magdalena, archduchess of Austria, erected this building as a bronze atonement to recompense in gold the guardian of chasity, exhalting virtue." and the bottom "May divine love inspire the serene principalities of Austria, who offer an example of great honor against the greatest dishonor."
- "Nori" isn't a name, it's an abbreviation (there are several others), for Noricum. The latter part is probably a reference to the 30 Years War, or maybe the Turks. Note you shouldn't follow Enlish cognates too closely. :) Anyway, let it wait a bit, because there are people here who know better Latin than me :). --BluePlatypus 20:18, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Wow, a punctuated Latin inscription, that was very thoughtful of them! We should probably also decide what the Latin says, because I think some of the abbreviations have been missed...how about "Dominus (assuming the Dom is part of it) Ferdinandus II Magnus Dux Aetruriae, et Maria Magdalena mater Archiducissa Austriae huius aedificii opus pio aere perfecerunt, ut aurum hostis castitatis custos evaderet pudicitiae. (Hebrew) Amore divino inflammati serenissimi principes nostri praebuere exemplum magnae honestatis contra maximam inhonestatem."
So that would mean, "Lord Ferdinand II, Grand Duke of Tuscany, and his mother Maria Magdalena, Archduchess of Austria, built this piously [or literally, "completed the work of this building with a pious air"], so that the guard of modesty might avoid the gold of the enemy of chastity. Inflammed by divine love, our most serene princes have produced an example of great honesty against the greatest dishonesty."
"Nori" is not a name or a place, it's just an abbreviation for "nostri". Adam Bishop 21:28, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- Right, that would explain the mark of abbreviation over the o! Wareh 21:53, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- Right. And BluePlatypus, there are lots of other abbreviation marks...they often replace an N or an M. So it doesn't actually say "perfecerut", there is a line above the U. It's very common to see that. Endings of words are also dropped often, especially when the case and gender are obvious from context. Adam Bishop 22:14, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- Right, but why "perfecerunt" and not "perfecerat"? Since the marks seem to be where the problem is? I'd expect it to be on the end then? As for "Nori", it's probably wrong here, but I don't make things up - it's is an existing abbreviation of "Noricum" on Latin inscriptions. But the other interpretation makes more sense now that I see how the marks line up. I still think "inspired" is a better translation for this usage than "inflamed", though. Nice to a correct version, it fits now :) Turns out I was a lot closer at my first guess, and then I got confused by the word order starting at "ut" and did crazy reintepretations. I couldn't figure out why "enemy" should be there, but the verb interpretation didn't seem much better, being in the second-person. --BluePlatypus 22:50, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- Right. And BluePlatypus, there are lots of other abbreviation marks...they often replace an N or an M. So it doesn't actually say "perfecerut", there is a line above the U. It's very common to see that. Endings of words are also dropped often, especially when the case and gender are obvious from context. Adam Bishop 22:14, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- Oh, my translation is pretty quick, so it's not necessarily the best. But I'm sure about the abbreviation marks. It's perfecerunt because they both Ferdinand and Maria built it...perfecerat would be singular, but more importantly pluperfect, which wouldn't be necessary. And where is the last A? Why would they make a note to correct a botched inscription? Adam Bishop 23:05, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- Ah, I see. Hmm, but wouldn't you make a note to correct a botched inscription? While I "see" the the abbreviation marks now, the Hebrew Niqqud still look a bit like they were added in afterwards. --BluePlatypus 23:34, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- Wouldn't they just make a new plaque, rather than use a botched one in public? They're just abbreviations, they're very common. Adam Bishop 01:26, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
First of all you have to reconstruct the entire latin text beyond abbreviations and omissis. There are three words with missing letters, which in all three cases are signed by a mark, a kind of "accent" as you see on the foto: "perfeceru^t", "auru^" and "no^ri". These omissions appear often in plaques because marble was expensive, errors occured and anyways saving space through abbreviations was common. Correct would be "perfecerunt", "aurum" and "nostri". The whole text becomes:
"Ferdinandus II magnus dux Aetruriae et Maria Magdalena mater Archiductrix Austriae huius aedificii opus pio aere perfecerunt, ut aurum hostis castitatis custos evaderet pudicitiae. Amore divino inflammati serenissimi principes nostri praebuerunt exemplum magnae honestatis contra maximam inhonestatem.
Translation: "Ferdinand II, the Greatduke of Tuscany, and his mother Mary Magdalena, the Archduchess of Austria, have completed the construction of this building with honest money (aere pio), so that the custodian of decency may avoid the gold of chastity's enemy. The Serene Highnesses of our lordships/princes, inflamed by divine love thus gave an example of great honesty against greatest dishonesty". The good deed was to give prostitutes the possibility to abbandon their activity. I once read this in a florentine book on local stories off the beaten track of the Great History, but unfortunatly I do not have this book any more and cannot tell you its title. The plaque hasn't anything to do with the today institution of the building. The hebrew inscription was added because the areal of the ghetto (established in 1571) was just adjacent to the building (the plaque is from 1627) between Piazza della Repubblica, Via Roma, Piazza dell'Olio and Via Brunelleschi (as described in [1], see also https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comunit%C3%A0_ebraica_di_Firenze#Sotto_il_Granducato) and part of the prostitutes were obviously jewish women. DOM means - according to [2] and depending on the context - Deo Optimo Maximo (for/dedicated to: God the Best and Greatest) or in more antique texts before the christian age Diis Omnibus Manibus (for all the Manes), see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manes. Here obviously only the first option is possible.
See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdinando_II_de%27_Medici,_Grand_Duke_of_Tuscany
Wikiname (talk) 16:04, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Enough Danish to get by
I've been using this page:(a Danish phrase guide) but I haven't even mastered the pronunciation of "Jeg taler ikke dansk" or "Taler du engelsk?" Nevertheless, I'd like help with a couple more phrases, with pronunciation if possible: "I don't eat meat" and "Do you have anything vegetarian?". Also, how is "Lyngby" pronounced, so I can at least know where to get off the train, and if I get lost can go around repeating one word to people until someone takes pity on me and points me in the right direction? Thanks. moink 17:51, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- My knowledge of Danish pronunciation is not perfect, but I think "Lingbee" should be an approximation close enough to be understood... 惑乱 分からん 18:04, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- I was under the impression that "by" (for town) was pronounced more like the French "bu" which I would assume would then be a part of "Lyngby." moink 18:13, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Well, yeah, if you manage the sound, then it's a better choice. If I'm not mistaken, I think the first y is short and the second long... 惑乱 分からん 19:53, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Btw, I think Danes generally know enough 2nd language English, for you to bother with Danish on a short tourist trip... 惑乱 分からん 18:07, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- I know. I just don't like to be the stereotypical North American who just starts babbling in English without making even an attempt at the local language. And if I stray from my hotel or from tourist areas, I might end up at a restaurant without English-speaking waitstaff and have to communicate my dietary preferences. moink 18:13, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- When I asked a question about pronunciation here, I was directed to this link, which seems very helpful. It's a program with computer voices able to pronounce words in various languages, including Danish. Probably much easier to listen (even to computer voices) than try to approximate the sounds based on written instructions. Good luck! --Grace 22:47, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks Grace. That has helped some with pronunciation, especially the "very slow" option. But I still can't for the life of me pronounce "engelsk" or figure out whether "ikke" is one or two syllables (1.5? is that possible?). I think I can get "Lyngby" down though. 18.252.6.168 07:19, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- The BBC language pages are really good too. (Yes, they have Danish). But that computer-voice thing does actually sound a lot better than I thought it would. (Failing on stød, as would be expected) Anyway, "ikke" is definitely two syllables, but the second one is not stressed. But one can't really screw up Danish pronunciation more than the Danes themselves have - some of the dialects are almost entirely unintelligible even to natives. :) --BluePlatypus 08:31, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks Grace. That has helped some with pronunciation, especially the "very slow" option. But I still can't for the life of me pronounce "engelsk" or figure out whether "ikke" is one or two syllables (1.5? is that possible?). I think I can get "Lyngby" down though. 18.252.6.168 07:19, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
List of events
How would you create a list of events in an essay? Would you seperate them by commas or periods?
For example,
I woke up. I got some coffee. I went to class.
or would you do it by commas?
I woke up, got some coffee, and then I went to class. --Agester 20:40, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Well, if you were James Frey, it'd be the former, but at least with the example you gave, the latter is more appropriate. I can't think of any examples where periods would be better, but I can think of examples where semicolons would be. Anchoress 20:49, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
Well I'm a little unsure because i thought maybe you can separate them by transition words too. Like:
First, I woke up. Second, I got some coffee. Lastly, I went to class.
Because in this form i can kind of put them all in their own sentences and it'd still be the list of events i took. The transition words i guess binds them is what i thought of. --Agester 21:00, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- If you want to leave the sentences exactly as they are, you should use semicolons: "I woke up; I got some coffee; I went to class.". If you use commas you have to add either one or more conjuctions: "I woke up, got some coffee and went to class." or some prepositions "First I woke up, then got some coffee, and afterwards I went to class.". That about covers it. —Daniel (‽) 21:46, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- This is a matter of style. There is nothing incorrect about very short sentences. They just look very elementary. Very short sentences, like the ones in your first example, appear in English mainly in books teaching reading to very small children or to English-language learners. When you have very short, related clauses like these, it is normal, and more refined, to combine them into a single sentence. The simplest way to do this would be "I woke up, got some coffee, and then went to class." Marco polo 23:01, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Or "I woke up, got some coffee, and went to class." "Then" isn't absolutely necessary. --203.206.80.233 04:41, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- "Woke up, got out of bed, dragged a comb across my head..." StuRat 02:47, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
November 5
Greek motto
On a wall inside one of the buildings here at FSU there's a crest of some society with the motto ALETHES CHERESTOS ANACKAIOS. ALETHES is obviously the Greek word αληθής ("truth"), but I can't find the other two words anywhere, and I can't think of any reason why the letter combination CK would appear in the transliteration of a Greek word. What does this motto mean and why does it have a CK in it? —Keenan Pepper 00:30, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- The last word could be a lousy spelling of anakaious, a singular active participle of a verb meaning "kindling, lighting up (a fire)", and the middle word could be intended to have some connection with the name of Christ, but the motto does not appear to be correct ancient Greek... AnonMoos 01:35, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
C was at one point used for Σ (sigma). Is ανασκαιος a valid word?--Siva 02:35, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- It's not in my Liddell & Scott. —Keenan Pepper 03:11, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- I'm going to assume the C is a gamma (Roman C is the cognate of Greek gamma after all). Thus alethes chrestos anankaios (Template:Polytonic, "true, good/useful, connected-by-family-ties" (referring to a person - prob. the motto of a fraternal organization?). Wareh 04:17, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- That sounds plausible. I guess it's just a bad transliteration, or a misspelling. —Keenan Pepper 22:33, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- I've certainly seen all kinds of Greek blunders in fraternity crests (for example cursive phis and thetas changing places). Unfortunately, not enough of those frat boys are learning Greek, so their traditions are getting garbled. Just to be clear, then, you're saying that it's clearly written in ordinary Roman letters, and that you're certain the transcription you gave above is correct? Yikes, I hope it's not carved in stone! Wareh 01:48, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- If carved in stone all that is needed is carving one more horizontal stroke turning the C into a G. --LambiamTalk 06:17, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- I've certainly seen all kinds of Greek blunders in fraternity crests (for example cursive phis and thetas changing places). Unfortunately, not enough of those frat boys are learning Greek, so their traditions are getting garbled. Just to be clear, then, you're saying that it's clearly written in ordinary Roman letters, and that you're certain the transcription you gave above is correct? Yikes, I hope it's not carved in stone! Wareh 01:48, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
what is the differance between mass and weight?
I am a english student,but doing both math and physics, I have heard people saying my weight is 140 pounds,but they never say my mass is 140 kg, therefore in physics it is wrong to say my weight is 140 pounds.meanwhile mass is the amount of matter in an object, as a human we should be saying my mass is instate of my weight, becuse weight is only describing the force of gravity on us. so can any one explain why we can say my mass is, but we can say my weight is?
- This is a science question. Mass is constant everywhere, while weight is your mass times the acceleration due to gravity, g. On Earth, g is 9.8 meters/sec^2 or 32 feet/sec^2. Oddly, the metric system uses a measure of mass (kg) by default, while the English system uses a measure of weight (pounds), by default. Weight, in the metric system, is measured in Newtons. So, if your mass is 100 kg, then you weigh 980 N on Earth. StuRat 10:09, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- [after edit conflict - don't know if I'm saying anything new, but anyways...] Your mass is your volume × your density. It has to do with how much actual matter is contained within your body (as opposed to empty space; think different atoms at different levels of energy: the same volume of heavier atoms like gold or uranium, or the same volume of lighter atoms like hydrogen tightly packed, would be more massive). Your weight is the measurement of the Earth's gravitational force on your body at whatever altitude you happen to be (your proximity to earth). Hence, when you go into space, your mass remains constant, but your weight decreases. Anchoress 10:12, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- I was always taught that the imperial (N.B. NOT english- england use the metric system!) measure for mass was stones, and pounds, and that the imperial weight measurement was pounds weight, equall to pounds times 9.8. Is that right? MHDIV Englishnerd 13:42, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- I thought that stones weren't used outside UK (possibly Ireland). 2nd, 140 pounds doesn't equal 140 kg, it's closer to 80, I think... Oh, well... 惑乱 分からん 15:21, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, it's actually more like 65kg. 1 kilo = 2.205 lbs. Anchoress 15:31, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- I thought that stones weren't used outside UK (possibly Ireland). 2nd, 140 pounds doesn't equal 140 kg, it's closer to 80, I think... Oh, well... 惑乱 分からん 15:21, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- In reply to "N.B. NOT english- england use the metric system!", England does officially use the metric system, but in daily life, body weight is expressed in stones, so it is still an "English" measure. In the past, "pound" could refer to both mass and weight; see Pound (mass) and Pound-force. But since the distinction between mass and weight is not important in popular measurements and because scientists use SI units, pound nowadays refers almost exclusively to mass. Lesgles (talk) 16:42, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- In response to the original question: The word "mass" is older than the scientific definitions, and never caught on in everyday speech as a measurable physical quantity, just like "luminous intensity" did not gain household currency. In any case, if you step on a scale you're weighing yourself, and from the point of view of a physicist purist there's nothing wrong then with saying that your weight is 140 pounds, or 10 stone. If you were to weigh yourself on the Moon, your weight would only be one sixth of that, about 23 pounds. When a continental now says: My weight is 63.503 kilogram, they are using what officially is a measure of mass to indicate a measure of weight. They ought to say: 63.503 kilogram-force. I don't see that as an issue. Even the international body working on an absolute definition of the kilogram is called (in English translation) the International Committee for Weights and Measures.
- --LambiamTalk 20:25, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Some scales measure weight, like a spring scale or a strain-gauge scale, while others measure mass, like a balance scale. That is, your mass would still measure the same on any planet, while your weight would vary. StuRat 21:47, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- So let me summarize. In physics, mass is how much stuff is in you; weight is how strongly the Earth's gravity attracts you (a force). Gravity is pretty much the same everywhere on the Earth's surface, and that means the two are proportional. Therefore the custom has arisen to use units of the same name for both. This is convenient as long as we stay on the Earth and don't get confused.
- By their official modern definitions, both the pound and the kilogram are mass units. However, some of us (like StuRat and I) were taught in school that the pound is a force unit, and this is still common usage in the US when pressures are expressed in pounds (force) per square inch. Similarly in some metric countries it was common to use the kilogram as a force unit and pressures were given in kg/cm². Scientists avoid these force units today. In SI metric, forces are expressed in newtons.
- Further confusing the situation is that although physicists consider it an error, the word "weight" is often used to mean "mass", and this usage has some official standing in law. If I say my weight is... well, never mind how many kilograms, I may be thinking of kilograms of force a implied above, but I may also be thinking of weight as meaning mass. In particular, a product labeled as being "sold by weight" is actually being sold by mass.
- --Anonymous, 20:43 UTC, November 5.
Bibliography of Wikipedia
Do I include Wikipedia as an online source, or an Encyclopedia? I am using Chicago Cytation Style, on the article about the Egyptian deity, Anubis. Thank you, Hannah
- Hi Hannah. Fortunately, Wikipedia has a nifty tool that will help you cite your source. Go to the article you want and click the link marked "Cite this article" under the heading "Toolbox" on the left side of the page. A page should appear with citations in the most commonly used styles, including Chicago. Lesgles (talk) 16:47, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Rather than cite Wikipedia directly, I would cite sources listed in the article of interest. The same is true of any encyclopedia, it's better to go to the actual source of knowledge, as the encyclopedia is just "hearsay". StuRat 21:39, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
momism or real phrase
ĶĶĨ My mother was a legal secratary 60 years ago and used the phrase " how some ever" in talking. I think it was in continuing a conversation when she had been interupted and thought that and felt the interuption had no merit to what ever she was saying. Then again I was raised in Canada so maybe this was something she just did on her own. I used the phrase and now I need to it back up as my co-worker likes to rib me about it all the time. Is it real or is it mom-erex?67.168.136.85 18:37, 5 November 2006 (UTC)ĴÁĆ
- Just because it is a momism doesn't mean it isn't a real phrase. It is no accident that the first language we learn is known as the mother tounge. [And my mother obviously couldn't spell, I blame wikipedia for perpetuating my mother's errors.] Maybe the momism comes from saying it as three separate words, it is more often written howsomever. For luminaries other than your mom who have used the word try: Shakespeare "How somere their hearts are seuer'd in Religion, their heads are both one." (although this is a slightly different usage) or Walter Scott "Howsomdever, I object nothing to Captain Cleveland." Nowadays though it is more usually confined to toe-curlingly bad representations of dialect speech: J. M. Barrie "How-some-ever, I daur say we could arrange to fling the grounds open to the public once a week on condition ‘at they didna speak to the geniuses." MeltBanana 19:46, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Nope, not a momism but a germanicism. It's a variant of "howsoever" and ultimately "however". It originally means, roughly, "anyway". So your usage would be consistent with that. But "howsoever" has become a more formal way of saying "to any extent" (which, if you think about it, does mean the same thing as "anyway"). The reason is it's not a conjunction of how-so-ever but rather how-soever, "soever" meaning "in any way", and is in turn of course a compound of so-ever. These "-soever" and -"ever" endings are very old and a shared Germanic thing, for instance the German it corresponds to "-auch immer" and the Swedish "-somhelst". So for: "How(so)ever", "what(so)ever", "whoever" you have "wie auch immer", "was auch immer", "wer auch immer" in German (usually written seperately) and "hursomhelst", "vadsomhelst", "vemsomhelst" in Swedish (usually written as a compound). So it's probably very old kind of construction, older than the word "ever". --BluePlatypus 15:36, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- I'd say "whatever" and "whatsoever" have slightly different meanings, though. "Whatsoever" would correspond to "at all", "He doesn't have any common sense, whatsoever." 惑乱 分からん 19:58, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- Oh yes, definitely. The same historic origin naturally doesn't require they have the same meaning today. --BluePlatypus 20:23, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- I'd say "whatever" and "whatsoever" have slightly different meanings, though. "Whatsoever" would correspond to "at all", "He doesn't have any common sense, whatsoever." 惑乱 分からん 19:58, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Titular versus Eponymous
I'm not sure why titular is used for the title character of a literary work. In most instances (besides for Princeton's site), titular is about the title of a person, such as Lord, King, etc. (see Cambridge dictionary and Dictionary.com). Order also matters as far as the title got it's name from the character, or vice versa. However, eponymous (see Cambridge and Dictionary.com) seems like a much better term for the title character than titular, and it's a literary term, which fits title characters much better than titular. So my question is, why is titular used on WP over eponymous, and should eponymous be the standard since it's more accurate than titular? --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 20:38, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Eponymous is the correct word, and people are using titular incorrectly. Titular really means "holding a title without responsibility". By the way, the most common correct use of "titular" by far is not with respect to lords or kings but with respect to Roman Catholic bishops. A titular bishop is one who's been raised to a diocese (or see) that no longer has any Roman Catholics living in it. There are hundreds of titular sees in North Africa, for instance; before Islam came along that area was almost totally Catholic. --Charlene 00:35, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- I agree. The character of Hamlet in Hamlet is eponymous, not titular. Michael I is the titular king of Romania, because he still uses that title even though he does not perform the office of king (because the Romanian monarchy has been abolished). JackofOz 02:53, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
November 6
"Davka" in Hebrew
How would the word "davka" be used in Hebrew? Examples would be particularly useful. Mo-Al 05:17, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Mock English?
In English, there are things such as mock German, where English speakers make fun of what they perceive to be the nuances of other languages. Does this phenomenon exist in relation to other languages, though? Is there mock English in German? In French? In Japanese? —DO'Neil 06:46, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- Good question. I once saw a Venezuelan soap opera with a character who was supposed to be a stereotypical non-Spanish-speaking American. I remember him saying "I...necesito..." ("I...need..." something or other) and I found this amusing because an English speaker would probably learn the word for "I" ("yo") quite early, and if he hadn't gotten that far, he certainly wouldn't be able to conjugate "necesitar" ("to need"). But I suppose to a Spanish speaker, "I" is one of the most recognizable English words, whereas "need" isn't.
- One more anecdote - I once overheard some Asian exchange students talking and laughing on the bus. They were obviously sharing a joke at the expense of an English speaker, because the only phrase in English was "Credit card for coffee!" which they repeated over and over.
- Sorry this wasn't quite on topic, I look forward to seeing any other answers to this question. --Grace 10:07, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- Yes it exists, probably in every language, and probably has existed as long as there's been different languages. The oldest example I know is the origin of barbarian, the proto-Indo-European "*barbar-" which is most likely an onomatopoeic for some foreign and/or unintelligble speech. --BluePlatypus 11:49, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- Similarly, there are several indigenous languages of Mexico named Popoloca, which is the Aztec word for "gibberish".
- I think both barbar- and popol- are based on children's babbling (there's another very similar onomatopoeic word, babble), rather than any particular kind of foreign speech. --Ptcamn 12:33, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- I thought "babble" was named after the biblical Tower of Babel, where God was supposedly so angered that He caused everyone to speak different languages, and hence sound like babbling to each other. StuRat 17:44, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- The original French version of Asterix in Britain has some fun examples of this sort of thing: one that comes to mind is a character saying "Il est, n'est-il pas?" (It is, isn't it?) which is incorrect French and obtained by simply translating word-for-word. All before Altavista had ever been thought of! ;) Loganberry (Talk) 15:11, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- Many years ago, a Hispanic actor in the U.S. (perhaps Ricardo Montalban) said that as a youth, he would see U.S. tourists walking around in his native Mexico. They were pale skinned, and wore shorts, and said things that had "midwestern "R" sounds" which to him (speaking no English) sounded like "Horse dorf garb farg." I see car names created by Asian companies for sale in the U.S and they seem like the same thing, as if non-English speakers were sitting around making up English-sounding names.Edison 16:19, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- There's mock English in English, it consist of speaking very loudly and over-stressing syllables. RJFJR 16:32, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
'Named for' vs. 'named after'
I've noticed an increasing use of 'named for' in sentences such as "X [building] is named for Y [person]". Is this an Americanism? As a Brit, I would always use 'named after'. --Richardrj talk email 09:10, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- "Named for" is fairly common in North American English, and in the US possibly more common than "named after". --LambiamTalk 10:34, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, as an English person I would only ever use named after. Which ever way I look at it named for just feels wrong. Englishnerd 18:26, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
William Wordworth Daffodills.
Was william wordsword's daffodils a imaginative piece or did he really experience it?
- Apparently, this is based on an actual experience, recorded in a journal entry by Dorothy, William Wordsworth's sister, describing the occasion. See for example this page. --LambiamTalk 18:18, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
serbian..cyrillic alphabet help.. please, i'm confused enough as it is...
I have tried to find a way but I am confused. The english words are roughly " my sweet little male cat" which I belive in serbian translates to "moje malo mačak" I know the mačak is correct because it is my cat's name. I am having trouble reading handwritten cyrillic.... and matching up some of the letters. So if anyone could be of help, great.
I think Моје мало Мацαк is correct I know it doesn't mention sweet... but any help??
17:52, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- I would think it should be "moje dragi mali mačak", but the word "little" in English in a phrase like this is often better translated with a diminutive ending, which would be "moje dragi mačakić". Marco polo 18:31, 6 November 2006 (UTC)