Revision as of 23:40, 25 May 2008

• Computing
• Entertainment
• Humanities
• Language
• Mathematics
• Science
• Miscellaneous
• Archives

• WP:RD/L

Main page: Help searching Misplaced Pages

How can I get my question answered?

• Select the section of the desk that best fits the general topic of your question (see the navigation column to the right).
• Post your question to only one section, providing a short header that gives the topic of your question.
• Type '~~~~' (that is, four tilde characters) at the end – this signs and dates your contribution so we know who wrote what and when.
• Don't post personal contact information – it will be removed. Any answers will be provided here.
• Please be as specific as possible, and include all relevant context – the usefulness of answers may depend on the context.
• Note:
  • We don't answer (and may remove) questions that require medical diagnosis or legal advice.
  • We don't answer requests for opinions, predictions or debate.
  • We don't do your homework for you, though we'll help you past the stuck point.
  • We don't conduct original research or provide a free source of ideas, but we'll help you find information you need.

How do I answer a question?

Main page: Misplaced Pages:Reference desk/Guidelines

• The best answers address the question directly, and back up facts with wikilinks and links to sources. Do not edit others' comments and do not give any medical or legal advice.

• Teahouse
• Help desk
• Village pump
• Help manual

May 19

fart monkey's were here :-P

what is the origin of the phrase:"easy as tit"? being used in a sentence might sound like this, "i know how to build that, it's easy as tit." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.181.48.155 (talk) 00:50, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I've never seen that before. I remember the British Army, Royal Navy and Royal Air Force used to say "press the tit" for 'press the button', and you used to hear it a lot in service families, but it's old-fashioned now. (I seem to remember it's in the Camillagate tapes.) No doubt "easy as tit" could stand for 'easy as pressing the tit', or even 'easy as breast-feeding'? Xn4 19:02, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

The word "professional" as accolade in products

We all have seen it: in many products there is the "home" version and the "professional" version. It still makes some sense in the case of tools or similar objects. However, shortly I found the word in a sunscreen lotion. What the hell does "professional" sunscreen mean? 217.168.4.241 (talk) 01:28, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

It could mean:

(a) it can only be applied by professionals

(b) it can only be applied on professionals

(c) it must only be applied by professionals on professionals

(d) they can charge more Clarityfiend (talk) 03:58, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

(d) is the reason, usually. Neıl 龱 10:16, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't have a ref, merely OR observation. The term migrated out of the home improvement market where "contractor grade" indicated a better quality product than their usual DIY fare. The better grade of course meant they'd charge a higher price. The marketers expanded the idea and then ran into products for which "contractor" didn't quite fit. They went to "professional grade". The "grade" fell by the wayside and whether products labeled "professional" these days merit that label under any definition is debatable. It certainly serves to differentiate the product. --Lisa4edit (talk) 22:50, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

And puffery. OR here too, but as differentiation, it's used in hair salons for products only available from them as opposed to supermarkets. The buzz in this case is to imply access to goods endorsed by an inner circle of trained people. No idea if there's a way of checking, though. And yes, they are much more expensive. So maybe an (e) previously only available to professionals (*wink*).Julia Rossi (talk) 23:24, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

But a product for professional suntanning? I've only ever heard of one professional tanner, and that was a cartoon character. — Michael J 11:55, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Professional suntanning probably goes on in commercial tanning salons, so for professional you could read "commercial", but if they put commercial then it's got dodgy inferences, so professional is the promo tag of choice. Advertising lies, as you know, it's lies all lies, mwahaha.... Julia Rossi (talk) 23:49, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Btw, you're quite right Michael J, many professionally tanned persons look like Zonker Harris. Julia Rossi (talk) 23:53, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Somali lectures

A Somali friend of mine give me a list of Somali topics to watch on youtube.com but the problem is I don't speak Somali nor do I understand Somali. Please, if you are a Somali, tell me what are titles mean in Somali? That way, I can have a little understand what is the speaker talking about.

These are the titles: 1. haweenta Saalixada 2. Awoodaha Ilaah Na Siiyey Ee Aan Dayacney 3. Shirqoolka Gaalada 4. Xiriirka Aduunyada Aakhiro La Leedahay 5. Fahamka Siyaasadda Sharciga 6. Quraanka iyo Seyniska 7. Taarikhdii Andulus 8. Hamiga Qofka Muslimka 9. Awoodaha Aynu Dayacnay 10. Fahamka Nolosha

Please take your time to answer this question. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.14.119.204 (talk) 03:01, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

How do you pronounce this?

I need help with a report I'm giving in a few days and I don't know how to pronounce the word "androstenedione". If anyone could please give me the idiot's version of the pronunciation, I would be deeply grateful. Nolarboot (talk) 13:10, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

The sportscasters on TV all seem to pronounce it "an-droh-STEEN-dy-ohn." Deor (talk) 13:14, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

The OED gives /ˌændrɒstiːnˈdaɪəʊn/, which (if I understand your pronunciation-respelling) agrees with you except for stress and the second vowel. Mirriam-Webster gives \ˌan-drə-ˌstēn-ˈdī-ōn\ or \ˌan-drə-ˈstēn-dē-ˌōn\, which has the same stress as yours, but different second and fourth vowels. Algebraist 14:11, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

If Nolarboot is in the United States, going with the first Merriam-Webster pronunciation seems the best bet ("idiot's version": AN-druh-STEEN-DY-ohn). I'm pretty sure that sportscasters say it the way I specified, though. As a Cardinals fan, I rather closely followed the Mark McGwire business a few years ago. Deor (talk) 16:20, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

By the way, the form in which I gave the pronunciation follows the system used in The World Book Encyclopedia—not intended for idiots, perhaps, but for youngsters and other folk who are not familiar with IPA or with the various diacritics used in other systems of representing pronunciations. The guy who came up with what appears below, however … well, I don't know what to say. Deor (talk) 03:48, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

it's and-drunk // stem-enter // dean-lawn.70.7.54.99 (talk) 01:42, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Using an apostrophe to indicate possesion

What if the person's name ends in "S"? For example, is it User:Strawless' information or User:Strawless's information? I remember learning that it's the former but is this correct? Zain Ebrahim (talk) 15:03, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Either one is acceptable - just pick one and stick to it. --Richardrj 15:33, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Different answer, equally valid: If you would pronounce the extra "s" in speech, use it, otherwise no. So, Mr. Hollis's car ran over Moses' cat. --Milkbreath (talk) 20:00, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

The Chicago Manual of Style and all of the publishers for which I have worked (all in the United States) call for an apostrophe and an s for the possessive of nouns (including proper nouns) ending in s, except for classical and biblical names. So Mr. Hollis's, but Moses'. Marco polo (talk) 20:56, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

For goodness's sake, Marco, it's not that simple. What about Descartes' politics and the Ganges' aroma? We're trying to give a pat answer to a complicated question. Zain, buy a stylebook and cleave to it. --Milkbreath (talk) 21:16, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, guys - quite interesting. What's a classical name and why would biblical and classical names be treated differently? Zain Ebrahim (talk) 21:01, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Sometimes, if you don't sound another s: for instance, we say "Jesus' name". By the way, I also noticed that Zain Ebrahim wrote "Strawless' information" and like Milkbreath and Marco polo I prefer Strawless's, but Zain was on my side and I bit my tongue. Strawless (talk) 21:07, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry - it's corrected. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 21:13, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

It's complicated, but Marco polo's rule of thumb is good. The default option is to add the 's, such as Dickens's, James's. Classical names (and Latinate) (such as Caesar Augustus') often do not take the apostrophe, although in some cases it is appropriate, because that it how it is said (such as Zeus's, although Zeus' is also accepted). And when talking about the planets (ie classical names in a non-classical context), then Mars's atmosphere is preferred. Biblical names are less standard, you will see both Jesus' and Jesus's, and St. James's is standard. The Oxford guide recommends apostrophe-s after silent s and z, eg Descartes's. Since there is no easy answer, Milkbreath's advice to get a style guide is good, but if you haven't got one to hand, then think about how you say it. Also read Apostrophe#Singular nouns ending with an "s" or "z" sound and the following section on Nouns ending with silent "s", "x", or "z". (As to why Classical and Biblical being exceptions? Tradition, and because they follow classical formats. It'll probably change, in time, much as the standard forms have. I was taught at school that James' was correct, and that's not all that long ago.) Gwinva (talk) 22:39, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

In truth, there is no single "right" answer to this. To make it worse, the usual fallback of pluralising apostrophising consistently in the same text doesn't always apply, because I'd write "King James' attitude to the Court of St James's was <whatever>". -- JackofOz (talk) 23:57, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

'Pluralising'? I thought we were talking about genitive here? Or was that a reference to a court specifically for a number of people all called St.James, like the John Smith Society?ChokinBako (talk) 04:20, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Oops. My brain went to sleep. Fixed. -- JackofOz (talk) 07:10, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Does that reflect how you say it? i.e. "King James attitude to the Court of Saint Jameses"? Gwinva (talk) 01:33, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes. -- JackofOz (talk) 07:10, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I think in this case, it is the addition of the 'of' that makes us add the extra 's', in the same way that we say 'a friend of mine' and not 'a friend of my'. However, I have seen place names like St. James's Square and so on. I'd stick with the no 's' thing when final 's' is pronounced, as that is what I was taught in school.ChokinBako (talk) 04:14, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

red fruits

Several times in the book describing wines I met the term "red fruits" flavor. In Misplaced Pages there is description of some exotic tropical "red fruit" that, I presume,is consumed very rarely in the Old and New Worlds. Hardly the author used such term to describe the wine to the readers, who never ate such fruit. Then what is considered to be "red fruits"? We never use such term in Russia. Thank you.--88.84.200.1 (talk) 15:12, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Finewine's glossary defines red fruit as a "Broad catchall term for red wines with mixed flavors of apples, raspberries, strawberries, etc., and quite typical of Languedoc reds, among others" and black fruit as "A catchall term for mixed black-cherry, blackberry, plum and similar fruit aromas, commonplace in many good red wines." ---Sluzzelin talk 16:05, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

English spelling of "Masters thesis"

I'd like to know to spell the word "Masters" in "Masters degree", "Masters thesis", or "Master of Sciences" in English. Do you always need to capitalize it like wikt:Masters, wikt:masters, Master's degree in Europe seems to imply, or can it be lower case like masters degree uses it? (wikt:master's degree was created recently, but it used to have two redlinks from translations.) Does it need an apostrophe before or after the s? If it depends on the phrase or context it's used in, how? Thanks in advance for any help. – b_jonas 15:41, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

The apostrophe before the "s" is required: master's degree. Both words will almost always be lowercase. It is possible but odd to write "John Jones, Master of Arts" where it would be usual to write "John Jones, MA", in which case both words would be capitalized, but I can't think of any other case where they would be. Note that the Misplaced Pages software automatically capitalizes the first word in a search string, so that when you type "masters" it turns that into "Masters" before it looks for it; you can tell that that happened by looking at the redirect. --Milkbreath (talk) 20:13, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your answer. I know about the software capitalizing the titles, but I've looked at how these words are spelled inside the article, and also in en.wiktionary there's a separate article for Masters and masters. – b_jonas 20:49, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Use is a bit inconsistent e.g. and , or and vs. .71.236.23.111 (talk) 05:01, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

"Say this!", or "Say that!"

What's the difference between "please say this!" and "please say that!" ? HOOTmag (talk) 20:59, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Easy, one points to this and the other to that. Strawless (talk) 21:12, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Let me explain:

How should I say: "Good evening! Now, after I said that to you, it's your turn to say that to me", or: "Good evening! Now, after I said this to you, it's your turn to say this to me".

Is there any difference bewteen the meanings of both sentences?

HOOTmag (talk) 21:23, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

When words are not used in their literal meaning things can get confusing. We used to chuckle as kids about where "up the road" and "down the road" lead depending on who was giving directions. As a demonstrative pronoun the rule of thumb is that "this" is close to the speaker and "that" is remote from the speaker. If you'd apply that to your phrase you might say: "Good evening! Now, after I said this to you, it's your turn to say that to me". The reason would be that what I say is "closer to me" than what you say. Our linguists might come up with a perfectly logical reason for any of the 3 options. In everyday use I don't think it matters that much. To avoid any awkwardness you could use "Good evening! Now, after I said this to you, it's your turn to respond with ... (this may get you into a vocab level that's above your students' head, though.) --Lisa4edit (talk) 22:26, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Your rule works very well with: I, you, and we. However, I suspect it can't be applied with he/she: According to Google, "He said this, but..." (22,200 times) is much more frequent than "He said that, but..." (9,860 times only). "She said this, but..." (5,110 times) is much more frequent than "She said that, but..." (935 times only). By the way, I searched it with "but" coming after the "this/that" - in order to avoid the ambiguity of "that" (e.g. in "He said that he was happy"). HOOTmag (talk) 08:07, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

The difference is whether the phrase is hanging in the air, so to speak, and still current ("this"), or said and done away with ("that"). Also, the second demonstrative would be replaced with "it". kwami (talk) 03:47, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

1. Look at the following sentences: "We're in a hurry, and you should understand that", versus: "We're in a hurry, and you should understand this"; What's better? Should our hurriness be considered as a declaration "still current and hanging in the air"? Would you like to give an example for a phrase which is "still current and hanging in the air", and an opposite example?

2. why just the second demonstrative should be replaced by "it" and not the first one? Is there any rule here? and how about "we're in a hurry, and you should understand it" ?

HOOTmag (talk) 08:07, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I didn't look at the example closely enough. In the case of a response with the same phrase, what kwami said would apply. However, watch out if your example is something like "Thank you" and "You're welcome." Then "it" wouldn't work. --71.236.23.111 (talk) 05:52, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Kwami referred to the case of a response with the same phrase. HOOTmag (talk) 08:07, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

May 20

How to say it?

I've noticed that newsreaders for example seem to over-enunciate so that instead of saying (aloud) "the person meant to" as this: "the person men-to" they say it so that it sounds the end letter in the word and the first letter of the next word when they are the same. The effect is it sounds like tuh-tuh is happening: the person mentuh to – whereas in normal speech, one letter is elided. It sounds strange and kind of forced in a native English speaker. Can't think of other examples off hand, but why is this? Julia Rossi (talk) 05:09, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Don't know if this is the reason, but this would help with several things: poor radio/TV reception, older viewers whose hearing is going, and non-native English speakers. I tend to talk like that when I come back from over seas. kwami (talk) 07:26, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Maybe because they are reading an autoscript. So unlike normal speach. Bed-Head-HairUser:BedHeadHairGirl13:46, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

One reason is that they're catering to a diverse audience, some of whom are hard of hearing and some of whom are not native speakers, and so they need to speak as clearly as possible in order not to be misunderstood. Really good newsreaders master the art of enunciating clearly without sounding unnatural. Maybe you're watching the wrong TV stations or listening to the wrong radio stations, Julia. -- JackofOz (talk) 14:55, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Maybe they think the natural version is somehow incorrect. See also: unreleased stop; hypercorrection --tcsetattr (talk / contribs) 22:16, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Maybe it does help the specific hearing audience as you've suggested (I'm sure they get enough lobbying from viewers) -- though for the speaker, autoscript and hypercorrection seem to fit (even the on-camera reporter does it). It's funny because the Australian "swallowed" accent still applies. Maybe they're trying for a home-grown version of RP. Appreciate all your input guys, thanks so much Julia Rossi (talk) 23:28, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

PS to Jack, haha, TV news (but is there a right one?) -- oddly I haven't noticed it on voice-overs. Different speech coaches maybe, and I'm curious to now what speech coaches might call it.  ; ) Julia Rossi (talk) 23:32, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Is "manslaughter" politically correct?

Why don't we say "womanslaughter"? 217.168.1.150 (talk) 09:08, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

It's a generally understood legal term. The legal profession is not going to go around changing terms that have been in common use for many years just because of political correctness. Besides, if there was a neutral term, it would have to be "personslaughter". --Richardrj 09:27, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. 'Person', too, is politically incorrect, as it contains the word 'son'. Best just call it murder and have done with it.--ChokinBako (talk) 09:33, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

You do realise that manslaughter is legally distinct from murder, don't you? --Richardrj 10:34, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I do. It was just a quip.--ChokinBako (talk) 13:13, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

As a female I'm always saddened that, while there is still so much inequality between male and female humans, so much effort is spent on things like cleaning up the dictionary. Let's start worrying about that once we get paid the same as the "other persons".--71.236.23.111 (talk) 10:04, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

In many, many contexts, "man" means "male or female human". I don't see why so many people have difficulty with that. Paul Davidson (talk) 10:44, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Even if it does, what is a woman if she is not a woman? What is a man if he is not a man? If we degenderised all our words we'd have to work on the pronouns, too. Also, what would be a male ballerina? A ballerino? Pointless! Pointless waste of time and verging on Orwellian prophecy.--ChokinBako (talk) 13:13, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Wiktionary says you're correct about "ballerino" being the word for a male ballet dancer. But anyway, why do we even need words like ballerina/-o? What's wrong with "ballet dancer"? --72.94.50.27 (talk) 01:07, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Here's an example of PC taken to ridiculous levels: Controversies about the word "niggardly"#David Howard incident. Zain Ebrahim (talk) 13:29, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Nice one. Just like a person who works with dogs and thinks constantly about dogs, and a person who works with metals and thinks constantly about metals, would, on first sight, read the word 'lead' in two different ways, as a person who is constantly thinking about racial problems would take a word that only sounds similar to a racial slur but is in fact unrelated, as a racial slur. Some people are far too sensitive.--ChokinBako (talk) 13:41, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

You do realise that the "son" in "person" has nothing to do with male children, don't you? "Person" is derived from "persona", a Greek word meaning "mask". -- JackofOz (talk) 14:49, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

A small quibble Jack: persona is Latin, not Greek. By the way, this is Maid Marian, but I've bought a new computer and I can't for the life of me remember what the exact form of my username was, so I can't log on. Any more than I can remember the Greek word for an actor's mask - my memory gets worse and worse. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.146.14.136 (talk) 16:14, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Of course, I do Jack. And it is indeed Latin, but ultimately a loan word from Etruscan.--ChokinBako (talk) 23:43, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Me again: probably prosopon is Greek for mask, but I don't have a dictionary to confirm. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.146.14.136 (talk) 16:19, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Are you perhaps Maid Marion? Algebraist 16:35, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes I am, thank you so much Algebraist.Maid Marion (talk) 07:28, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

This is by now a little off-topic, but prosôpeion or prosôpon is indeed the Greek for mask. The Latin persona, according to Lewis and Short, comes from the verb persono but the Online Etymology Dictionary, in tracing person back to persona, suggests that it is a borrowing from Etruscan phersu . Unfortunately I don't have my usual access to the OED. СПУТНИК 18:57, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

The OED says s.v. 'person' "of unknown origin; perh. a loanword (cf. Etruscan φersu, app. denoting a mask". The Greek prosôpon ws indeed used for 'mask', but its basic meaning is 'face' I believe. --ColinFine (talk) 20:29, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't think that's quite as absurd as Roman Abramovich finding something anti-semitic in the term "bunch of shysters from Sibera". Algebraist 15:10, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

The whole pc thing is deeply cultural. But maybe even more so is the whole issue about "N word", "F word", etc. While I think every majority should be considerate of minorities' sensitivities, the very idea of banning words seems so strange to me that I can't quite stop thinking that in racial contexts. Words get banned because they're deemed offensive, with the only result that they're getting even more offensive (because now only more extreme fellows keep saying them). I can't help wondering what would happen if we went in the opposite direction and just used "nigger", "fuck", and all the other words excessively in really neutral or even positive contexts, so that they'd get less offensive. After all, they're just random sounds, and they only have the meaning we give them. We can indeed refuse to have any word that has an intensity of offensiveness as "nigger", "fuck", "cunt", etc. Consequently I still hope that the excessive use of "nigger" by some Blacks and of "fuck" by many younger people gets more wide-spread. Ever wondered why other languages (or cultures?) seem to have no equivalent in intensity to these American English words? --Ibn Battuta (talk) 22:07, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Not sure why you would think other languages don't have an equivalent. They just don't have the same ones. Excessive and casual use of swearwords by young colleagues from Britain and South Africa has as yet failed to make me cringe less when hearing them. As far as change in meaning goes, that can go the other way, too. Just ask my friend. Her name is Gay. (As in "don ye all the gay apparel") --71.236.23.111 (talk) 02:02, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I recall a news item that an east coast state was modifying its constitution to remove the word "idiot" in place of a more PC term. — Ƶ§œš¹ 03:54, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Let's face it, folks. 'Blackboard' can't be called that anymore, even though it is obviously black, as opposed to a whiteboard, which can be called a whiteboard, because it's obviously white. It has to be called a 'chalkboard'. But, wasn't 'chalky' once a slur word for a black person? Where do people get these silly ideas from? It's OK to respect other people's sensitivities, but, seriously, some people are way too over-sensitive and we can't change the language by replacing words with others just to please them because we'll be either using another offensive word, or a word that is offensive to another person. As a side note, I don't get offended by 'honk if your horny', even if I am a honky.--ChokinBako (talk) 04:18, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Where do you live? I've never heard of anyone complaining about blackboards being called blackboards. I've always thought that "chalkboard" was about descriptiveness -- a board that you write on with chalk. It feels a little weird to call something a "blackboard" when it's green. --72.78.102.134 (talk) 13:32, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

The girl is cute as a freaking button

What does this mean? Ugly? 217.168.1.150 (talk) 11:30, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't mean ugly, it's just a weird expression. --WikiSlasher (talk) 11:35, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

I would think it meant 'very cute'. 'Cute' doesn't usually come with a negative simile. You wouldn't say 'She is as cute as a bulldog chewing a wasp'. You could say, on the other hand, 'as beautiful as a bulldog chewing a wasp', which lays more emphasis on her lack of beauty.--ChokinBako (talk) 13:06, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

"Cute as a button" is a well-established phrase.

CUTE AS A BUTTON - "cute, charming, attractive, almost always with the connotation of being small, 1868 (from the original 1731 English meaning of 'acute' or clever). Cute as a bug's ear, 1930; cute as a bug in a rug, 1942; cute as a button, 1946. Cute and keen were two of the most overused slang words of the late 1920s and 1930s." From "Listening to America" by Stuart Berg Flexner (Simon and Schuster, New York, 1992.)

"Freaking" is an tmesis that has little impact on the meaning. — Lomn 15:15, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

No, it isn't. If you read the article on tmesis properly you will see that a 'tmesis' is a shortening and combining of two or more words. 'Freaking', as used in the example in the article is a mere part of the word in the example. 'Freaking' is a less vulgar way of saying frigging, which is an intensifier, therefore emphasising the following expression.--ChokinBako (talk) 03:46, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Between which lines did you read that tmesis involves "shortening"? Are you thinking of portmanteau or some such? —Tamfang (talk) 03:44, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Bamburgh

How is the name of the English village of Bamburgh pronounced? Thanks. Marco polo (talk) 16:15, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

. —Angr 16:23, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

BDSM support group?

Something that I recently wrote in the article about the Smurfs made me puzzled:

Members of the Finnish BDSM support group SMFR are called "Smurfs" not because of the colour, but because of the similarity of the names.

Well, I suppose that under certain choking or bruising conditions blue would not be an entirely unfamiliar color.

What exactly does "BDSM support group" mean? English is not my first language so therefore I cannot fully grasp the meaning. Does it mean that a BDSM support group supports BDSM itself, or it supports its members? If it's the latter, it could be understood as something similar to "alcoholism support group", meaning supporting its members to come over something. But SMFR members don't want to come over BDSM, rather, they embrace it. Am I being overly cautious and paranoid here, and is it just my failure to grasp the nuances of a foreign language, or am I right? JIP | Talk 18:53, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

This page would indicate that they are not a self help group like AA (alcoholism) but rather that your second definition applies The organization would like to support the practice of SM or their members who engage in this practice. Just like e.g. this group would like to help the environment rather than help members get over it. --71.236.23.111 (talk) 19:45, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

That's definitely not the standard meaning of "support group." It should probably be reworded. -Elmer Clark (talk) 08:07, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I know what SMFR is, and what it does. I was asking if this was using the term "support group" correctly. JIP | Talk 15:37, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Five cats and 32 dogs

According to Misplaced Pages:Manual_of_Style_(dates_and_numbers)#Numbers: "Within a context or a list, style should be consistent (either 5 cats and 32 dogs or five cats and thirty-two dogs, not five cats and 32 dogs).". I've always mixed (I would have said five cats and 32 dogs). While this might be the rule at Misplaced Pages, what about other literary works such as newspapers? What's their policy? Any idea? ----Seans Potato Business 21:32, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

You probably also grew up with "write numbers up to ten in letters." That's why you'd mix. (I would have sworn I don't do any such thing, but I do. I just wasn't aware of it. :-)--71.236.23.111 (talk) 21:37, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

APA style requires to spell out numbers until 9, and use the arabic numberals for 10 and higher. Off the top of my head I don't think they've a rule against combining the two (one experimental and 194,203 control groups...), but I may be wrong (it does look a bit odd). Similarly, there used to be an orthography rule in German to spell out numbers until twelve, but again I'm not sure about the combination. --Ibn Battuta (talk) 21:40, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Both The Chicago Manual of Style and Words into Type, widely used in the U.S. book-publishing trade, say to maintain consistency within a particular context: "If according to rule you must use numerals for one of the numbers in a given category, use them for all in that category" (CMS). (Both, by the way recommend spelling out numbers up to one hundred, though they also recognize that in some types of works—scientific, financial—the "spell out only up to ten" rule may apply.) When, however, numbers referring to different categories of things occur in a passage, the numbers in each category may be treated differently. An example in CMS is "A mixture of buildings—one of 103 stories, five of more than 50, and a dozen of only 3 or 4—has been suggested for the area." Deor (talk) 22:03, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Most encyclopaedias seem to use words to express numbers up to and including one hundred; and many also seem to use them for numbers above one hundred which don't call for too many words, such as eight hundred or two thousand. For what it's worth, my instinct in writing for Misplaced Pages is to use words for all numbers unless the result looks silly, but I suspect this is old-fashioned. Xn4 01:53, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I trust the rule against starting a sentence with a numeral still holds, even if it does look silly. "Nineteen sixty-eight was a very fashionable year to be born in." —Angr 18:00, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree with that rule. In mathematical texts I write, I strictly aviod starting a sentence with a formula. If that would happen, I rephrase the sentence, possibly using display formulas. I can't always follow this when I take notes in a class by hand. – b_jonas 20:22, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

One of my quirks is to use digits only if all the digits I write are significant. —Tamfang (talk) 03:49, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

May 21

Learning to write properly: how long does it take?

Considering the case of all those people who don't differenciate between "its" and "it's" or write sentences like "UR l8 " instead of "you are late": how long would it take until they can write at least at an acceptable level? 217.168.1.150 (talk) 00:21, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

It would depend very much on a person's aptitude and motivation. With writing assignments and an instructor or tutor who can correct them, I would think that a motivated person with reasonably strong language skills and rudimentary literacy could learn to write his or her native language more or less correctly in a semester (four to five months) or so. Marco polo (talk) 01:28, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Not to mention that I have the necessary skill to comprehend the difference between "its" and "it's" and use abbreviations of the form "UR l8" (i.e. use of the latter doesn't preclude basic grammatical knowledge). Beside which, if the UK government wanted to teach students grammar, they'd have to sacrifice some of the time currently wasted spent studying poetry. ----Seans Potato Business 06:23, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

First, the amount of time would depend to some degree on the age of the person attempting to learn. Second, the two examples given do not necessarily mean that the person does not know how to write better. Thomprod (talk) 16:52, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Weird Spanish Grammar

why is it that in the spanish vocabular the letter "J" sounds like an "h" and the letter "ll" makes the "y" sound? and why is it that cato is cat in spanish(obvious) and dog isn't dogo its perro. i would have thought that meant a pear or something. why is spanish language so complicated?

Well, as far as sounds of letters go, that's just how the language evolved. There's not really a reason except that. Furthermore, cat is gato not "cato". For your last question, English is much more complicated than Spanish. Spanish is much more phonetically correct. It also follows the rules more of the time than English and has far fewer irregular verbs. Cheers, Zrs 12 (talk) 01:37, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

English and Spanish are two different languages with different histories. A Spanish-speaking person could just as well ask why in English "J" sounds like a "Ch" in Spanish and why "pear" in English doesn't mean dog. The answer is that each language developed on its own. Some words in Latin began with the letter j (or its predecessor i). This sound was pronounced like the English consonant y as in yellow. This sound came to be pronounced something like an English h in Spanish and like the j in just in English, even though it was still spelled with a j in both languages. Neither language is weird, they just developed differently. Oddly enough, no one knows the origins of the English word dog or the Spanish word perro. But it is not surprising that two different languages would develop unrelated words for the same thing. Even within English, the British use the word petrol for the substance known in American English as gasoline. Neither is wrong, neither is weird; they just developed differently. Spanish is no more or less complicated than English or any other language. It will seem harder than your native language because you did not learn it as a child. Marco polo (talk) 01:46, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Spanish is no less complicated than English? How now? Zrs 12 (talk) 01:49, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

"Lonnie Ritter" in Little Big League: "Kids today are amazing. I played winter ball down in Venezuela—they had kids half his age, every one of them speaking Spanish. That's a hard language." Deor (talk) 04:28, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

According to the Online Etymology Dictionary, both dog and perro are "mystery words of unknown origin." No one knows how the two languages wound up with oddball words for the common animal. In contrast, both cat and gato come from the Ancient Latin word catta, which is of African or Asian origin. Similar words were adopted by many European languages. -- Mwalcoff (talk) 04:34, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

In broader terms, let's look at the question as to why some Spanish words sound like English words and some don't. Think of languages as being on like a family tree. Both Spanish and English are part of the Indo-European family of languages, which all may have descended from a single language spoken in Eastern Europe thousands of years ago. By about 3,000 years ago, Indo-European had divided into several languages or types of languages, including Proto-Germanic and Italic. Latin developed from Italic. During the Roman Empire, Latin spread to the parts of Europe occupied by the Romans, including Spain. Latin developed into the several Romance languages, including Spanish, French, Italian and Portuguese, which is why those languages are so similar. But the Romans never occupied most of Germany, so the Germanic languages remained widely spoken. Starting in the 5th century, Germanic-speakers took over what's now England. Their languages became Old English. In 1066, the Normans, who spoke a form of French, invaded Britain and became the dominant class. Many words of Latin origin were added to the English vocabulary. Some Romance words, like market, replaced their Old English counterparts, which is why the English and Spanish terms are so similar. Other Old English words, like mus, stuck around, in this case becoming mouse. That's why the word is so different from the Spanish one (ratón). -- Mwalcoff (talk) 04:58, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Main reasons why Spanish is easy:

1. Only five vowel sounds are used, ever : a (as in cat) - e (as in bet) - i (as in hit) - o (as in hot) - and u (as in put). The way a word is written is exactly the way it's pronounced (99.9% of the time) thanks to this (so no variations as in pear and heard etc.)
2. All (present tense) verbs end in either ar er or ir so they're easy to identify and use
3. These are the rules I came up with in three minutes so I'm sure there are other rules that make it even easier. Kreachure (talk) 14:42, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Why would you think "dog" in Spanish would be "dogo"? Did you originally think Spanish is English with "-o" after every noun? Your original message makes it look like you think English is easy and Spanish is difficult just because you grew up with English and speak it natively, but you had to pick up Spanish at a later age with no previous experience. As said, a Spanish person would think just the same about English. JIP | Talk 15:39, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

To address your question about the relative complexity of English and Spanish, Zrs, it is kind of a maxim among linguists that all languages are about equally complex, but in different ways. Granted, the non-phonetic spellings of English give the written language an added and unnecessary complexity, but the two spoken languages are really similar in complexity. Some ways in which Spanish is more complex than English are gender, verb conjugations, formal and informal address, two different forms of the verbs "to be" and "to have", and so on. Marco polo (talk) 15:52, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Good points. Zrs_12 (talk) 23:27, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Cato? Dogo? This reminds me of a sketch by the Comic Strip Presents team, where these guys from England are in a restaurant in Spain, and one of them is repeatedly asking the bartender, "Where's the bog?". The bartender can't understand so he resorts to 'el bogo'. Classic!ChokinBako (talk) 00:43, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Musical Instrument in Japanese

I and a Japanese friend of mine where talking about musical instruments today, and he said his 5 year old daughter has the instrument I am trying to ask about in this post. I know exactly what it is, because I worked in a kindergarten in Japan for two years and all kids have one each. Neither of us could remember what the thing is called. It's a wind instrument, but looks like a small piano. You blow into it and change the note by pressing the keys. I called it 'air piano' because I remember a Japanese guy I used to know who had had a stroke saying in his English that he was trying to build himself a 'left-handed air piano' and at the time I had no idea what he was talking about. I thought he meant an actual piano that you blow into to get it to work. But, when I was at the kindergarten some years later I found there was such an instrument and a specific word for it in Japanese. Does anyone know? Also, what is the English for this (if any - I've never seen them in the UK)? I find 'air piano' sounds too much like 'air guitar'.--ChokinBako (talk) 02:45, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Was it a melodica? Reminds me of the recorder, which was handed out to every elementary school kid where I grew up. — jwillbur 03:44, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

YES! That's the one! That's what it was in Japanese, too! I KNEW it sounded like the word 'harmonica'. Thanks! I'll email him tomorrow! We spent ages trying to remember that! --ChokinBako (talk) 03:53, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

It is known as "kenban harmonica" (lit. "keyboard harmonica") in Japan. It is also commonly known as Pianica, by Tokai and Yamaha's brand name. Melodica is not a common name in Japan. --Kusunose 08:16, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

As a side note, the thing is called "mellodion" in South Korea. --Kjoonlee 17:02, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I remember it being called 'pianika' by the teachers, but he didn't understand that, so I was looking for another word for it, not sure whether I had remembered 'pianika' correctly. Thanks all!--ChokinBako (talk) 18:47, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Jaber Elbaneh, the al-Qaeda operative ...

This is the beginning of a news item in washingtonpost.com email dispatch of May 18, 2008. I'm wondering why the same Arabic article appears differently in the two nouns, Elbaneh and al-Qaeda. Any rule in English for that? --Omidinist (talk) 04:32, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

No rule, just usage. Someone, possibly Elbaneh himself, transliterated his name like that first, and everyone else accepted it as the standard way of transliterating it. "al-Qaeda" has the more "proper" transliteration "al-", combined with "qaeda" which could be transliterated a number of different ways. It's not the only English spelling I've seen, but whatever the spelling the usual pronunciation in English is totally wrong (it would be al-Qaa`idat if it were up to me!). With Arabic we should keep in mind Lawrence of Arabia's opinion: "There are some 'scientific systems' of transliteration, helpful to people who know enough Arabic not to need helping, but a wash-out for the world. I spell my names anyhow, to show what rot the systems are." Adam Bishop (talk) 11:53, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

While we're on the topic, would you mind giving us an IPA transcription of al-Qaeda (the standard Arabic pronunciation, if there is such a thing)? Algebraist 12:17, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I guess /ælˈqɑːʕɪdə/ or /ɛlˈqɑːʕɪdə/ (I'm not really sure how to transcribe an ayin plus a short vowel, since I have so much trouble pronouncing it properly to begin with). Adam Bishop (talk) 13:09, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Algebraist 13:27, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I mistakenly copied the K out of the al-Qaeda article, it should be a q, phonetically. Adam Bishop (talk) 18:31, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Inspired by this question I looked at how Al-Qaeda is spelled on Misplaced Pages. Currently, at the least, the following spellings are in use in articles:

Al-Qaeda, Al Qaida, Al Qaeda, Al Quaeda, Al-Quaida, Al-Queda, Al qaeda, Al Quida, Al Quida, Al-Quida, Al Quida, Al Quada, Al-Quada, Al-Qa'ida, Al Quaida, Al-Qa'eda, Al-Qaida, Al-Qaida, Al Queda, Al-Quaeda, Al-Quaeda, Al queda

Redirects also exists for the following spellings:

El Qaida, El-Qaida, El-Qaeda, El Qaeda, El Quiada, El-Quiada, El-Kaida, El Kaida, Al-Kaida, Al Kaida, Al Kaeda, Al-Kaeda, El-Kaeda, El Kaeda, El Queda, El-Queda, Al-Qaïda, Al Qaïda, Alqaeda, Al Qæda, Al Qæda, Al Qa’ida, Al-Qa'idah, Al-Qa’ida, Qaeda, Al Qa'idah, Al Qaidah, Al-Qaidah, Äl-Qaida, Äl Qaida, Al-Qa'eda, Al- Qaeda, Al-qaida, Al qida, Alqaida, Al-Qaid, Al-Qaid, Al queada, Al-Qa'edah, Al Qaeeda, Al qada, Al-qida, Al-Qa‘ida, Al quada, Al-Qida, Al Qida, Al-qā‘idah, Al-Qaida Al-Jihad, Qaida Al-Jihad, Qaida al-Jihad, Qaeda al-Jihad, Qaeda Al-Jihad, Qa'edat Al-Jihad

Adam's suggested spelling is not among them; in fact, only one spelling uses a final t. Rmhermen (talk) 13:47, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, the -t is usually silent...I would spell it that way so I know it's a ta' marbuta rather than an A or an H or something, but I know it's not useful for a general transcription. (When it is the first word, like in Qa'edat Al-Jihad, it would be pronounced.) Adam Bishop (talk) 14:14, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

It's only my opinion, but while a transcription like Adam's — mirroring the orthographical structure of the word in its original script — could be useful for those who already know Arabic, the normal purpose of a transcription is simply to provide a phonetic "translation" that makes the word pronounceable in the target language. In other words, spell it in such a way that someone, unfamiliar with the term, will pronounce it in a way that is reasonably similar to the original, given the phonetic rules of transcription's target language (English or whatever). If there are many spellings that make sense, picking one and sticking to it is a good idea. There's not really any "wrong" way. Paul Davidson (talk) 05:14, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Part of the problem is that divergent varieties of Arabic are spoken over a very wide area; to call it a single language may be about as legitimate as calling Cantonese a "dialect". Naturally there are differences in pronunciation, leading to differences in transliteration. —Tamfang (talk) 03:38, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Pronunciation

I am a seventh - grade student. I have been learning French for the past year. Our French teacher changed three times. This is confusing as each pronounced certain words differently. How do I pronounce "Il est trés intelligent?" Any other standard rules for pronunciation? Cyberina 11 11:16, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

''''UPDATE': Forgot to mention this, but I already know that 'J' is pronounced like S/Z, H is generally silent and a vowel has a different inflection when is has an accent. All I really want to ask is, are there any other sutle laws governing this issue? Merci beaucoup pour votre aide. Cyberina 11 11:34, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Do you know IPA (or something similar)? If you do, a good dictionary should help you with pronunciations; Wiktionary, for example, has pronunciations for all the words in your example sentence. Otherwise it'll be hard for us to help you with only text to work with, but if you tell us what your own accent is, it might make it easier to provide illustrations. My own French is too rusty to give general pronunciation tips, but note that j is not exactly s/z: it usually represents /ʒ/, the sound represented by the s in 'treasure', 'vision' and 'asia'. In French g often represents this sound too. Algebraist 12:13, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

One of the difficult things about French for an English speaker is that French uses a lot of sounds that don't occur in English or that aren't used very often, like the s in treasure. Really, the best way to learn those sounds is from a speaker who has mastered them (for example, a native speaker of French). It isn't encouraging that your different French teachers did not have the same pronunciation. This suggests that at least two of them did not know the correct pronunciation. Listening to recordings like the ones on Wiktionary can help. Another tricky thing about French is all of the silent letters, typically at the ends of words, and the rules for when and when not to pronounce letters at the ends of words. Sometimes, a consonant that is usually silent, like the s in très, is actually pronounced when the next word in a phrase begins with a vowel. For example, très is usually pronounced something like "treh" in English. (Actually, the vowel is not quite the same as any English vowel.) However, in the phrase très intelligent, the s is pronounced like an English z to sound something like "treh zaN tel ee zhawN" (with the capital Ns representing nasal sounds rather than an English n and the zh representing the sound of the s in treasure). This process, where a silent vowel is pronounced before a vowel at the beginning of the next word, is called liaison. You can learn more about it at this website, where you should also take a look at the links under the heading "Learn more..." Marco polo (talk) 15:29, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

So your phrase is pronounced something like "eel ay treh zaN tel ee zhawN" or il e trɛ zɛ~ te li ʒɑ~ in basic IPA (the tildes should appear above the vowels instead of after them, but my browser won't display them that way). Marco polo (talk) 15:44, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

If you're going to write this way, I suggest that you transcribe as "ee-lay treh zaN-teh-lee-zhawN" so that the English does not insert glottal stops and velarize the (seemingly) syllable-final "L". Another suggestion may be to transcribe (s) intelligent with a "D" like "zaN-deh-lee-zhawN" because if they stress the "teh" they may produce an unfrench aspirated "t". But, you would need to monitor the student's pronunciation for this. (Or, you could just leave this alone as aspiration is so automatic for english speakers. Depends on the student's motivation...) – ishwar  (speak) 23:12, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Another thing you might look into for pronunciation help are the several online Text-to-Speech demos available - many of them have French. The pronunciation is usually pretty good, and you don't even have to download any software. Indeterminate (talk) 21:31, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. 06:33, 23 May 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyberina 11 (talk • contribs)

Ancient One-Liner

There's a joke format that goes, "_____ just called, they want their _____ back." Anybody know the history of this? Where it came from, when it showed up, etc? Black Carrot (talk) 12:12, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

The "List of snowclones" page used to say that it was from a 1992 SNL episode. The skit is supposed to have been called "Sidewalk Insults".

"1985 called; they want their hair back." --Kjoonlee 16:59, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

But I have no idea whether that's true or not. --Kjoonlee 17:01, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

country/ ies of origin

When talking about a group of, say, refugees from various countries, is it better to say "They returned to their country of origin" or "...to their countries of origin"? The second seems technically correct, but sounds stilted, because it adds unnecessary detail. I would have thought the first a little better, because "country of origin" can simply be read as saying that each one has a single country of origin. Is this correct, or is the first a little sloppy? thanks in advance, 203.221.127.102 (talk) 17:04, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I would prefer the second option, but I can't point to a specific rule. Fribbler (talk) 17:55, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I'd prefer "They returned to their respective countries of origin" to make it clearer that each has only one. —Angr 17:55, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

That has a better flow, alright. Fribbler (talk) 18:00, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

This desk sees every one of the lumps in this cream of wheat we call English. "They returned to their country of origin" is right. Yes, yes, there is more than one country, or there are more than one country. There are more countries than one. This isn't arithmetic, it's language, and it's absurd to say they returned to their countries of origin for the same reason it would be to say that they're pulling our legs. That said, whenever you sense something is wrong with a sentence, you are right, there is. But as bad as the frying pan may be, the fire is usually worse. We, with high hopes and the best of intentions, set about correcting it: "They each returned to *urk*...." Pesky sex thing. "His or her"? Well, what else is there, for Christ's sake? It would have to be a him or a her, so how can I not feel like an idiot writing that? I can't. Me, I don't like the whole feminist thing—they got all they're going to get out of me when my first love broke my heart, so it's "Each refugee returned to his country of origin." Copyeditor's note: Recast. --Milkbreath (talk) 19:22, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

So use singular they. -- BenRG (talk) 20:09, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Alternately, if you're in the mood to needle a stuffy grammarian, you could use the Spivak pronouns. On topic, however, I think it's a matter of taste, like the serial comma. It depends on how particular (heh, a little grammatical joke) you are about the mutability of phrases or idioms such as "country of origin" or "pulling my leg". Personally, I prefer "country" for formal situations, and "countries" for casual ones. Indeterminate (talk) 22:28, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Is it just that you're considering "country/ies of origin" rather than "country"? In a slightly more complex set-up, it might resolve itself:

• "They came from many different countries, and they returned to their country of origin" - this sounds quite, quite wrong to me.
• "They came from many different countries, and they returned to their countries of origin" - that sounds about right. It's still not an ideal sentence. I'd more naturally write "They came from many different countries and they returned to those countries". But the point is that if you'd use the plural in this sentence, why would you use the singular in a different one, assuming we're still talking about people from different countries. -- JackofOz (talk) 22:45, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

"They returned to their country of origin" sounds like a lot of people from one single country going back there, or one person of unknown gender returning to 'their' country. "Countries" is correct for me.--ChokinBako (talk) 00:35, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

"They each returned to their own country of origin" is also a valid way to phrase it. Then again, "They came from many different countries, and they returned to their country of origin" doesn't sound too bad to me. I automatically understand that they return to different countries, because of the context, and "their own country" is implied. Steewi (talk) 04:20, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but I think the OP was asking about technical correctness, not implication.--ChokinBako (talk) 04:52, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for these answers. btw, I think implication is a part of correctness, as suggested by the question: if you say "country," that looks technically incorrect, but it may be rescued by the implication of the context. Perhaps the safest suggestion is to say "they each went back to their country of origin," in spite of the (apparent) problem with mismatching plurals (they) and singulars (each). Also, "They came from many different countries, and they returned to their country of origin" doesn't sound terminal to me, but I don't think it's the ultimate test case for correctness anyway. I would avoid such a sentence, but English is like that: there are so many ways to get a grammatical log-jam going, if you contrive a sentence badly enough. I wouldn't take them as safe reference points. 203.221.126.247 (talk) 11:41, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Multiple Apostrophes

When dealing with nouns that have integral apostrophes—"Macy's", for example—how does one indicate a possessive form? Jouster  (whisper) 20:31, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

There is no one right answer to any such question when it comes to English. A good rule of thumb is to cause the least disruption to the flow of reading, and I'd say that in the case of "Macy's" it would be best to leave it unchanged in the possessive: "Macy's first sale took place on a Friday." (The issue does not seem to be addressed in the Chicago Manual of Style 15.)--Milkbreath (talk) 21:34, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Milkbreath, but if you feel awkward with this approach it's nearly always possible to turn the words around to avoid the risk that someone might try to say you've got it wrong. So "The coffee shop at Macy's..." instead of "Macy's coffee shop..." Xn4 21:43, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

In very informal writing I'd boldly write "Macy's's", or perhaps Macy's's, but practically nobody does that. In any other situation I'd recast. ("The Macy's store's coffee shop" in another option for that.) Leaving it unchanged looks like an error to me. --Anonymous, 22:11 UTC, May 21, 2008.

It's something I can't say I've ever come across, so I'd paraphrase it, too, by using 'of', for example. "The reputation of Macy's", for example, would be better than "Macy's reputation'". Of course, this would depend on the phrase and the paraphrasing.--ChokinBako (talk) 00:30, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

The text includes "... which carries Macy's famous shopping bag sign ..." and "The former South division was formed following Macy's acquisition of Bullock's ...". If it were Wal-Mart, it would be "Wal-Mart's famous shopping bag sign" and "Wal-Mart's acquisition". But double apostrophes are so unusual that they're contraindicated in the Macy's and similar cases. It looks like bad spelling, even if it could be argued as being technically correct. -- JackofOz (talk) 03:55, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I think it's the multiple apostrophes and S's that look odd. I wonder if Macy's' would be okay. And on the topic of multiple apostrophes, fo'c'sle has two of them, and making it possessive would add a third. "The fo'c'sle's surface was drenched in seawater." Paul Davidson (talk) 05:20, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

"Can't" is a contraction of "cannot", "shan't" of "shall not" and "won't" of "will not". Lewis Carroll, as a mathematician of logical mind, used "ca'n't", "sha'n't" and "wo'n't", but they did not catch on.

Macy's's website itself has a page "Macy's Milestones", which I can only interpret as "The Milestones of Macy's" (rather than "A Macy's Milestone and then Some More"). We find, likewise, "Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade", "Macy's Passport", "Macy's Puppet Theatre", "Macy's Creative Director", "Macy's gift to the city of San Francisco", "Macy's 4th of July Fireworks", and "Macy's Flower Show".  --Lambiam 19:00, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

How can i get my first car trick my ride

Question moved to the Miscellaneous Reference Desk.

May 22

Feminine counties

I just came across the following sentence:

Northumberland's county flower is the Bloody Cranesbill (Geranium sanguineum) and her affiliated Royal Navy ship is her namesake, HMS Northumberland.

Is it customary to attribute the feminine gender to English counties, or is this a Latin/Northumbria thing? Is it customary to do so in encyclopedia articles? It's been there for over a year, but otherwise the article talks about its flag, its landscape, its scenic beauty, its historical significance, and its kilt and tartan. I really stumbled over the her, which is why I'm asking. Thanks. ---Sluzzelin talk 01:51, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

It's just a matter of personal taste. 'Her' is used for countries, counties, and ships, and all sorts, but equally 'its' is also used. There is no convention here. I, personally, would prefer 'its', but some people may say otherwise.--ChokinBako (talk) 03:33, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I think consistency of usage within the article is the paramount consideration. Deor (talk) 04:35, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

That is not actually the question, though, Deor.--ChokinBako (talk) 04:50, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

The OP said that "otherwise the article talks about its flag, its landscape," etc., so I took it that part of the question was whether "her" in the quoted sentence should be changed to "its". Deor (talk) 05:35, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your answers, Givnan and Deor. Apart from consistency, I'm still not sure I understand this usage of her in an encyclopedia. Does feminising a county (or country, where I've certainly seen it more often) suggest an emotional relationship with the referent? ---Sluzzelin talk 09:48, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

"She" is traditionally used instead of "it" for many objects, including ships, cannon, carriages, tools, boats, some cars, and also more abstract things such as the church, cities, countries and so forth. I believe some sources, such as OED, suggest it's come from the French genders. But it's usually applied to things men become passionate about or attached to, so perhaps it's a personification or emotional attachment. Similar concepts are seen in motherland, alma mater, etc. Not encyclopaediac? Check out a few ships, (eg RMS Titanic) Gwinva (talk) 10:18, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I have never come across a British county being referred to as 'she', though. That looks mighty odd and I personally would have no problem with its being struck out. --Richardrj 10:21, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

(after e.c., and Richard makes me pause again, still this is what I originally intended to post:) Yeah, I even followed the debates on feminising ships on WP. Coming from a German speaker who uses pronouns in three genders, my irritation might not make that much sense either. The ships already made me pause, but when referring to a political and territorial entitity, "her" just made me think "uh oh" and look for peacock words and POV in that sentence (which of course I didn't find). I'll let it go now - I thank the native speakers for their answers and if this doesn't bother anyone else, then I definitely need to recalibrate my false sensitivities. ---Sluzzelin talk 10:32, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I promised, but just to expand slightly: I gather that nautical experts do refer to ships in the feminine form (I admit I have almost no knowledge on this), but do geographers or political scientists refer to Northumberland as "she"? Historians might, though I could interpret this usage as either emotional or ironic. ---Sluzzelin talk 10:40, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I would say it was very unlikely that they do, but then again I don't belong to either of those groups. Here's the diff, by the way, should you want to take it up with the editor concerned. --Richardrj 11:03, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Like I said, I would prefer 'its' for counties. 'Her' (or 'she') is not just used for ships, though. I've heard it used for all manner of vehicles that people depend on for a living, even cars.ChokinBako (talk) 13:24, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

It is correct for ships, cannon, cars and so forth to use the feminine pronoun in all contexts. In the case of countries (and counties, presumably?) the choice of pronoun differs depending on the context. For example, when speaking of England physically, the preferred choice is "it" (eg "It contains a number of counties"); but speaking abstractly of the nation, one might say "During England's war with France, her people rallied to the cause". (Thus, there is justification for pronoun use to differ within one article.) A similar abstract use is seen in Northumbria example; it refers to the abstract entity, rather than the physical composition. I would suggest it is uncommon usage for counties, but not incorrect. There may be some historical basis; Northumbria was once a kingdom. Gwinva (talk) 02:38, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Footnote formatting

Suppose we have a multi-page article with superscript numbers in it that refer the reader to footnotes at the bottom of each page that provide additional information. Now suppose that there is, say, a quotation at the bottom of page 1 that must be sourced, so we add a superscript number after the quotation and indicate the source at the bottom of the page. However, when we do this, the quotation itself is bumped on to page 2 because of the space taken up by the footnote. But this means that the footnote must be moved from page 1 to page 2 (since it must be on the same page as the quote). But the space left behind by moving the footnote cannot be filled with text, since to do so would move the quotation back on to page 1, returning us to the initial situation. Does this mean that we must leave a large blank space at the bottom of page 1? How is this handled in professional publishing? --BrainInAVat (talk) 03:07, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

This is not really a language question. Best ask it on the Computer Help Desk.--ChokinBako (talk) 03:43, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Publishers handle the problem in various ways. The easiest, if it's practicable, is to get the author to add to or make cuts in the text so that the quotation and the footnote both fit on one of the pages. (This is also a good way of dealing with a "widow"—an unfilled last line of a paragraph at the top of a page.) A footnote can also be run over from one page to the next—that is, the beginning of the note can be set on the first page and the rest, separated from the bottom of the text by a thin rule extending the width of the typeblock, on the next page. Or, if the superscript occurs in the last two lines of a recto page, those two lines (and the note) can be moved to the next page and each page of the spread from which they were taken be set one line short. There's always some way to deal with such things. Deor (talk) 04:32, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Also, thanks to the wonders of desktop publishing, when justification is being used (and it usually is), the spaces between the wordscharacters (Think one thing, type another. I swear by it.) in the paragraphs can easily be manipulated with a few simple mouse clicks. If you make the spaces wider, the paragraphs get longer; if you tighten them, they get shorter. There are limits to how far you can push this, of course, and if you're not careful, you get some pretty ugly paragraphs, but when you're smart about it, you can adjust the length of paragraphs surprisingly efficiently, which often helps a lot in situations like this. -- Captain Disdain (talk) 12:48, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Swearing

Why are swear words considered taboos? It's not like they hurt anyone. For example, if someone were to say "poop" (e.g. in the context "I've gotta take a poop"), there is no reason for that person to be punished. However, if they were to say "shit" (e.g. in the context "I've gotta take a shit"), they are much more likely to be punished, even though the words mean exactly the same thing. It just makes no sence to me, and I have yet to get a good explanation. You're dreaming eh? 03:25, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Human nature, perhaps? Or Human convention? Acceptability (linguistics) is often more complex than grammaticality. --Kjoonlee 03:31, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Some words develop a taboo during the course of their use, and are replaced by newer words. The older words then either die out or continue to be used with this taboo and vulgar connotation, while the newer words are acceptible. These new words, in turn, develop a taboo during the course of their use, and they are replaced. Thus the cycle continues. This is linguistic evolution.--ChokinBako (talk) 03:38, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Zounds! This is a crosspost from the Miscellaneous Desk. There's a good answer there. Paragon12321 (talk) 04:18, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

It's here and I'd move it but they've used "fuck" instead, but it's still a crosspost. Cheers, Julia Rossi (talk) 23:48, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

British Accent and indian pronunciation

I am an Indian trying to understand British Accent for a u.k process call center in India . Even though we are following an English language , ours is non phonetic in aspirated sounds and counting of diphthongs.So in the areas of counting syllable my knowledge is limited to differentiate in to phonetic codes for pronunciation.As far as i have approached Indian teachers their pronunciation is somewhat similar to mine even though they learned English phonetics.They said it to be impossible for an Indian to master english in Oxford sense.So i request to get a link on internet to get the components such as

1.combined sounds in phonetics

2.classification of words based on how to count syllables for oxford pronunciation.

3.How the diphthongs are combined to get the complex sounds produced.

4.How can be the articulation end up for Indians —Preceding unsigned comment added by Twinkle.leelabhai (talk • contribs) 03:56, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't have a link for you, but I will say it's not impossible for an Indian to master the "Oxford pronunciation" (usually called Received Pronunciation or RP), though it is difficult once you're a teenager or older. It's also unnecessary to completely replace your Indian accent with RP; as long as you understand everything that's said to you in English, and your interlocutor understands everything you say to him, that's surely sufficient. —Angr 04:13, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I imagine that acquiring the accent is a part of job training so that clients do not notice that s/he is calling from India. Although there are lots of people in the UK who speak Indian English, the marketing ploy asks that they try to mimic a more 'native' English accent. Perhaps the article on Indian English and Received Pronunciation will give you something to compare. Otherwise, the best practice you can have is through immersing yourself in UK English, by watching BBC, listening to BBC world, and talking to English people. Short of paying for a dialect coach, that is your best bet. Steewi (talk) 04:29, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

You can train a bit at home. Look for BBC podcasts or other British native speaker audio sources. Listen carefully to when they breathe. Then play a sentence. Don't say the words, but hum at the same pitch and rhythm as the speaker and try to breathe at the same places as they did. Record your humming and train till you can match the phrase. Then say the words. You'll improve with training regularly. 71.236.23.111 (talk) 05:38, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

(Slightly off topic) You might find our Call centre article useful. Astronaut (talk) 09:17, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

One of the distinctive qualities of Indian accents to English ears (probably to other British ears too, but I haven't asked any Scots or Welshmen about this) is not the vowels, but the dental and retroflex consonants. Many Indian languages have two distinct series, the dentals such as t̪ ('त' in devanagari) and the retroflex or cerebral consonants such as ('ट'). European languages generally have only a dental series, but in most British varieties of English we use not dentals but alveolar consonants such as , which lie in between the two series of Indian languages. All the Indian varieties of English I have heard use the retroflexes to render these sounds, rather than the dentals - and it is this above all that makes the accent sound Indian. If you were to speak English using 'त' rather than 'ट' in all contexts, it would still tend to sound 'foreign' to English ears (depending also on other features), but it would not sound nearly so distinctively 'Indian'. --ColinFine (talk) 12:11, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Lead me to the truth

When I asked a question at the Science desk, I was referred to this article at The Independent whose heading is "My killer dinner: How a vegetable diet lead to organ malfunction". Is this a Britishism? Clarityfiend (talk) 04:25, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I assume you're talking about the use of 'lead'. My first thought was that the lead was a pun, but I think it was just a typo for 'led'. Steewi (talk) 04:32, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I see this error all the time. I've never quite decided whether people make it by analogy with "read" (present tense) and "read" (past tense) or by thinking "/lɛd/" and then spelling it the way the name of the metal that is so pronounced is spelled. Deor (talk) 04:43, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, the spelling is a typo, as the article has nothing to do with lead. Well done, The Independant The Independent, for making sure the world knows that even us Brits can't spell (or hire people who can!). Anyway, I never read The Independant, because the only thing it is independant of is reality. Better reading The Guardian.--ChokinBako (talk) 04:45, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Two comments: 1. It's the Independent. 2. The Portuguese government is deciding to simplify Portuguese spelling to remove double letters and silent consonants. There is an article on the subject by Marcel Berlins in the Guardian this week. Both lead/led and Independe/ant are evidence for the need of simplification of British spelling! SaundersW (talk) 08:52, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

My error duly noted and fixed. And I told you The Guardian was better!--ChokinBako (talk) 13:15, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I prefer the Grauniad too, although it's hardly in a position to assert its superiority on the basis of typographical accuracy. --Richardrj 13:20, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

A number of years ago, I once read (in The Guardian) that The Guardian had started using a new auto-correct for typos. In the old days when PC was in its infancy and the world had gone ballistic on it, the auto-correct had been programmed to change 'black' to 'Afro-Carribean', and in one article it referred to Nelson Mandela as been the 'Afro-Carribean leader of South Africa', which was hilarious! So, I guess you're right.--ChokinBako (talk) 14:08, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

That's obviously an apocryphal story, though. There are countless perfectly innocent uses of the word black (although the number may be slowly reducing), and no spell-checker in the world is going to want to catch all of them. --Richardrj 14:15, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Also, the Guardian style guide (which admittedly might have changed since then) allows 'black' and bans 'Afro-Caribbean'. Algebraist 14:39, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Reminds me of the (non-apocryphal, I saw it myself) story in the Yale student newspaper back in the early 1990s discussing the relations between whites and "African Americans" in South Africa. —Angr 16:46, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Which only goes to show that my story could have been true, too. And I did see it with my own eyes. 1994, it was. I remember because I remember exactly where I was when I read it. --ChokinBako (talk) 19:45, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I think the only part of your story that anyone really doubted was that the replacement of "black" with "Afro-Caribbean" was done automatically by computer, rather than manually by a well-meaning but ignorant human being. Otherwise you would also have seen stories about women wearing little Afro-Caribbean dresses to social functions or people listening to the Rolling Stones singing "Paint It, Afro-Caribbean". —Angr 07:56, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Voicing in English phonetics

Hi,

1. Voicing is a distinctive feature in English
   1. Aspiration is not, since "spin" can have an aspirated P
2. Pin and bin are distinguished by voicing

Do people all agree on the above? But then,

• I scream (not apsirated)
• Ice cream (aspirated)
  • Can these be distinguished by a native speaker?

And also,

• Initial Bs are devoiced
  • But the chorus of "Beat It" sounds seems to use a fully devoiced stop

So how do people distinguish "beat it" from "Pete it"? --Kjoonlee 06:28, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

"spin" can have an aspirated P Do you mean if it's physically possible? Otherwise English does not have an aspirated stop in spin. Beat it and Pete it are fully distinguishable for me, since /p/ in Pete *is* aspirated. Less confident about I scream ~ ice cream but scream has a longer vowel for me. Ladefoged argues that there is no clear opposition between voiced and voiceless stops in English. They are distinguished rather by aspiration word-initially, and by vowel length elsewhere so that the real difference between words like cap and cab is that the former has a shorter vowel. — Zerida ☥ 06:47, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree that p in Pete is aspirated, but not b in beat. It is true that aspiration is a more reliable distinguishing characteristic in this opposition than is voicing.

The k sound in ice cream is aspirated, whereas it is unaspirated in I scream. This is beacuse p, t and k are unaspirated following an s in the same syllable, as in spar, star and scar. Also, the i sounds may differ slightly in the speech of many Canadians and some Americans, because of Canadian raising in ice cream. Joeldl (talk) 06:54, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, as a Canadian speaker, "ice cream" and "I scream" are definitely distinct, both because of raising and aspiration. But there seems to be more to it than that...like in "ice cream" both words are emphasized, and in "I scream", "scream" has the emphasis. Does that make sense? Adam Bishop (talk) 07:36, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Most, if not all of the answer doesn't depend on "native speaker" but on "form where"? I've been to places where there are no significant differences between b and p and all sort of other local oddities. Pronunciation can be limited to a certain ethnic background or distinct location. Our movers and my "significant other" are both native Atlantans (US, Georgia), but had a lot of trouble understanding each other. I personally would distinguish between "I scream" and "ice cream" not by the "k" sound, but by the stress (on the EAm or I). 71.236.23.111 (talk) 21:30, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

More info on English voicing contrasts. In utterance-initial position, stops have (1) short voice onset time (typically with no phonetic voicing during closure), (2) lower 1st formant transition, (3) weaker stop burst, (4) lower fundamental frequency while have (1) long VOT, (2) higher F1, (3) stronger burst, (4) higher f0. In intervocalic position, stops have (1) closure voicing, (2) shorter closure duration, (3) longer preceding vowel, (4) lower f0 & F1 while have (1) no closure voicing, (2) longer closure duration, (3) shorter preceding vowel, (4) higher f0 & F1. In utterance-final position, has (1) longer preceding vowel, (2) variable closure voicing, (3) shorter closure duration, (4) lower f0 while has (1) shorter preceding vowel, (2) no closure voicing, (3) longer closure duration, (4) higher f0. These some of the main acoustic cues, but there are more. For example, Leigh Lisker identified 16 different acoustic differences between English intervocalic and stops (eg. rabid vs. rapid).

The perceptual contrast between and stops is probably (that is, from what we know now) signaled mostly by the difference between the time of the voicing event with respect to the closure release event, the difference between low frequency energy during or near the closure, and the duration of the stop. In English, the low frequency energy is the lower f0 and F1 in utterance-initial position. In French in this position, the low frequency energy comes from lower f0 (and probably F1 too) as well as voicing during the stop closure.

I dont know how I should interpret the "no significant differences between b and p" comment above. Maybe it means that some dialects have VOT differences?

The comments about stress are, of course, right. The acoustic correlates of stress are different vowel durations and pitch contours. – ishwar  (speak) 19:57, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the answers. Yes, I meant that an aspirated "spin" was physically possible. I'm not 100% sure, but aspiration/non-aspiration (when the other is expected) does occur. (A song by Jewel comes to mind, but I can't remember the song or its lyrics...) I do agree that "I scream" and "ice cream" can have different stress, but I'd like to point out that they can also have identical stress if you say "I scream." --Kjoonlee 21:44, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Society for the Restoration of Lost Positives

What happened to the Society for the Restoration of Lost Positives? NeonMerlin 06:56, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Since it was never official, I guess whether it exists or not is whether those "proclaimed" to be "members" still say that they are. Fribbler (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 11:49, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

There's a lostpositives.com, so I guess someone remembers. We have an article unpaired word. -- BenRG (talk) 21:31, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Japanese translation

Hello, I would like a translation of the second sentence of this Japanese line. The writer, Shinji Orito, is commenting on a song he wrote, and I would like to use it in the song's entry on the article linked. 'Ayu' noted at the beginning is for the character Ayu Tsukimiya, and this song is her theme, as the first sentence states:

あゆのテーマ曲です。テーマ曲の中では一番気に入ってるかな・・・パーカスがいい感じに入ったと思います。

And, almost forgot, Orito strangely uses the word パーカス for "percussion", noting the percussion parts of the song.--十八 09:00, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

My take on it: "This is Ayu's theme song. My favourite part of the theme song… I think the percussion is really good." Paul Davidson (talk) 12:10, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

It means "This is Ayu's theme song. This is probably the song I like most out of all the theme songs....I think the percussion is really good."--ChokinBako (talk) 13:11, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

english language

hera are greek and latin roots. find out at least four words formed from them? psych-mind hydr-water man-hand urb-city audi-hear auto-self bio-life graph-writting phon-sound bi-two —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.223.66.42 (talk) 13:24, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I hate to be rude, but you could have found them in a dictionary in the time it took to type all that. Adam Bishop (talk) 13:50, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Just look in the dictionary and write down everything that begins with 'psych-', 'hydr-', and so on. Don't write 'big', though, for 'bi-', as you might get in trouble.--ChokinBako (talk) 14:01, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

And I presume they can be in the middle of words too, if necessary. So hydr- could be found in the middle of a word meaning dried up for example. Or urb- might crop up in a small town on the edge of a city? Fribbler (talk) 14:37, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

When using the dictionary, just check in the part of the entry where it describes the origin of the word to make sure that it is really from your Greek or Latin root. Marco polo (talk) 18:50, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

And for the really lazy student just type your word roots into the "search" window in the side bar and click on "search". Scan through the pages our trusty search engine will offer up. (After all you are studying to become master of a robot slave later in life. ;-)--71.236.23.111 (talk) 21:17, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh yeah, and next time you want to ask us something like this, make an effort first. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyberina 11 (talk • contribs) 06:43, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Romanisation of Chinese names

Hi,

I've scoured the many pages on Chinese language, and transliteration of Chinese characters and cannot find a definitive answer to the following.

Is it possible to consistently and accurately transliterate (using Wade Giles or Pinyin) the Chinese characters that represent a Chinese name (both family and given names)?

I understand that names are "romanised" on passports etc - but don't understand how this is achieved. And can the Pinyin transliteration be accurately and consistently "translated" back into Chinese characters?

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks Juantaniom (talk) 14:59, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Romanization of Chinese is done phonetically. Because of homophones, transliteration from Chinese into Roman letters is a "lossy" process, even if diacritical marks indicating the tones are used. It is not possible to reliably map a transliterated Chinese name back to its Chinese characters. --72.78.102.134 (talk) 15:19, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks - I suspected this was the case but appreciate your speedy responseJuantaniom (talk) 15:53, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

If you were to use General Chinese it wouldn't be nearly as lossy, and it being proper name would narrow things down, so you often would be able to revert to characters. In fact, the principal reason for GC was to demonstrate that characters are not necessary for Chinese, and that Chinese can be written in a syllabic or alphabetic form that's just as accessible to the various dialects as characters. But no one uses it. kwami (talk) 20:17, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, narrowing it down isn't a 1-to-1 mapping still, and while educated guesses can be used for reverting names in many cases, there are still going to be lots of errors due to homophones. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 20:29, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Japanese! (From a song)

Hi, I've always wanted to know what's being said in Japanese in this song (Fragment from "Floppy Disk", by Pitchshifter, from their "Genius" maxi-single EP). Could someone translate it, pretty please? ^_^ Thanks in advance, Kreachure (talk) 20:38, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

I can't find the lyrics anywhere online, but this page says the ninja vocals are by Makiko Takizowa. SaundersW (talk) 16:00, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

What's wrong? Why won't you reply? It's only a 500k mp3, and the site I put it on checks for viruses! Should I put it somewhere else, or in another format? Lyrics for this part of the song don't exist at all, so this is the only way I have to know what's being said in the song! If you won't help me, then could you please point me to someplace that will? Again, please help me out. Kreachure (talk) 14:41, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

This is what the girl says. Ask someone to translate. フロッピー・ディスクとはさみ、マッチ、除光液を用意します。次にフロッピー・ディスクを注意深く二つに開けて、中にあるコットン・カバーを取り外します。そして、木製のナイフなどで、マッチ棒の先をけずって、それをすり鉢などに入れ、粉にします。そのあとにその粉を先ほどのフロッピー・ディスクのうえに均等にばらまきます。そして、フロッピー・ディスクの縁に除光液を塗って、二つをくっつけて、元のように戻します。最後にそのフロッピー・ディスクをコンピューターの本体に入れます。コンピューターがフロッピー・ディスクを読みとったとき、コンピューターは破壊されます。Oda Mari (talk) 15:44, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Oda Mari. But I thought a translation was what I had already asked for to you and others here? I hope I'm not misunderstanding something here...? Kreachure (talk) 17:20, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

It's instructions on how to destroy a computer with a modified floppy disk, and how to modify a floppy disk to do so. This is a song!??! Here are the words: "Prepare a floppy disk, scissors, matches, and glue. Carefully open the floppy disk into two. Take out the inside cotton cover. Then, with a wooden knife, shave the end of the match, put it into a bowl, and grind it down. Then sprinkle it on the aforementioned floppy disk. Then, cover the sides of the floppy disk with glue and put the two halves back together. Finally, put the floppy disk into the computer. When the computer tries to read the disk, the computer will break." Not very well written lyrics, as it doesn't say what to do with the scissors and doesn't mention the 'wooden knife' in the 'items to prepare' bit. (In fact, the word I have translated as 'glue' here, is 'nail varnish remover', but this seems totally implausible to me as an agent for sticking plastic together, unless it melts the plastic, in which case the floppy disk case would be warped and unable to work in the machine, for for the sake of logic I changed it to 'glue', but even so it would not work, as the heat generated in a disk drive is not enough to make phosphorous ignite, and if the singer is relying on friction (i.e. the disk is spinning around with bits of phosphorous scraping on the inside of the floppy disk case, that is still a no-no, as the disk itself would not spin if there was an obstruction like that. Bit silly, but anyway, I did the translation as asked.))--ChokinBako (talk) 19:09, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot ChokinBako. I really didn't know what to expect from the message (it's not lyrics per se; it's more of a hidden message of sorts) so I'm as baffled as you are. Thank you for your plausibility analysis, too! :) Either way, knowing what it says, however silly it may have turned out to be, is very gratifying. Thanks again. Kreachure (talk) 22:42, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

PS. I did a little snooping around and found out that this describes a pretty unusual but known way to damage your computer; the method indeed mentions nail polish remover, not as glue, but as flammable material (I presume:). Kreachure (talk) 22:53, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

May 23

Irish orthography

What's the difference between Eoin and Eóin (with the fada). I can't find/understand the difference on Irish orthography. I noticed without the fada is used much more. Is it proper usage with the fada? I'm hoping some Irish speakers can clarify this for me. 216.160.55.34 (talk) 03:39, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I'll have a shot at this, but my Irish is elementary, so someone may need to correct me. Eoin is pronounced more or less as the English say "Owen". The purpose of the fada is to mark the -o- as long. But when you get three vowels together, usually only the one with a fada on it is pronounced. There's no difficulty about pronouncing Eoin, so we can live without the fada. Is that it? Xn4 11:02, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

You're right. The fada is superfluous here and completely incorrect as far as I'm aware. Fribbler (talk) 11:15, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

A search of Vicipéid (the Irish Misplaced Pages) gives hundreds of instances of Eoin, none of Eóin. Xn4 14:02, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Eóin is the older spelling. Long used to be spelled "ó" after broad consonants and "eó" after slender consonants, but because it was largely redundant, the accent got dropped (even Patrick S. Dinneen's 1927 dictionary doesn't use it). There are very few words where "eo" represents a short vowel: seo "this", anseo "here", deoch "a drink", and eochair "a key" may be the only common words where "eo" is short. —Angr 16:42, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

In line with what Angr says, see Eóin.com - "Eóin is the oldest and most consistently-used Gaelic form of John in both Irish and Scottish Gaelic". So the fada clearly isn't 'improper', it's old-fashioned. Xn4 18:44, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I suspect, though, they're comparing Eóin to other equivalents of John, like Iain in Scottish Gaelic and Seán in Irish, rather than to the fadaless spelling Eoin. —Angr 18:47, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Exdent: True it was the older spelling, though anseo was also spelled anso in pre-1960s Irish (Ulster and Connaght). The massive changes instituted by the caighdean reforms of the niineteen-sixties changed an awful lot of spellings. I prefer the new spellings :-) Though I accept the historical, of course. Is Mise le meas, an Fribleair . Fribbler (talk) 00:15, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

So is this guy's name correct with the fada? 216.160.55.34 (talk) 21:41, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes; as far as I know, Scottish Gaelic (as opposed Irish) still puts an accent mark over the o in the "eo" digraph. However, a recent spelling reform abolished the acute accent in Scottish Gaelic and replaced it everywhere with the grave accent. So "Eóin" is an outdated spelling in both languages, but in Irish the newer spelling is "Eoin" and in Scottish Gaelic it's "Eòin". —Angr 21:48, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Fucking bitch vs. fucked bitch

Why do we say the first more often than the second? Mr.K. (talk) 14:18, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Because 'fucking' is a standard English intensifier that can be applied to more or less anything, especially insults, while 'fucked' is a word with a fairly narrow range of meanings. In addition, 'fucked' is normally used predicatively ('that bitch is fucked'); for attributive use, 'fucked-up' is more natural with roughly the same range of meanings. Algebraist 14:26, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

"F###ing" is not in intensifier in this context—it is an adjective indicating that the person/object it applies to is despised by the speaker. "F###ed" means something different and is ambiguous. It may mean that something is very wrong with the person/thing the word applies to. It may also mean that the person/thing was victimized, abused, or betrayed. It may also be literal, meaning that the person/thing is the object/patient of a sexual act. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.78.237.229 (talk) 14:55, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

'Bitch' already indicates despisal, which is intensified by 'fucking', hence my claim. Algebraist 14:59, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

As I understand it, intensifiers are adverbs modifying adjectives making the latter stronger or weaker. Here "f###ing" is an adjective modifying a noun—not in the right category to be an intensifier. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.78.237.229 (talk) 15:30, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Usages may differ here, but the OED lists 'fucking' as an intensifier under both adjective and adverb. Indeed, the first quote under 2a. Used as an intensifier is 'fucking bitch' (well, '******* b—h' actually, but the inference seems sound). Algebraist

It is most definitely an intensifier. No two ways about it. If it was an adjective it would mean 'a bitch (who is in the act of) fucking'. Quite simple.--ChokinBako (talk) 19:39, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I dont think that 72.78.237.229 is wrong. You can say He's a fucking student. Theres nothing in the word student thats particularly negative, but you do get the impression that whoever said this doesnt like students. The word intensifier is a vague grammatical term (defined notionally). Words like very have also been termed intensifiers (as in He's very nice). What is being "intensified" by these words are different. fucking is expressive (it tells you about the speaker's attitude) while very is not.

I dont think that fucked and fucked up are equivalent. He's fucked and He's fucked up mean different things. – ishwar  (speak) 20:08, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

The neat thing about fucking is that it can be spliced in the middle of words: in-fucking-credible, unbe-fucking-lievable, tre-fucking-mendous, etc. — Ƶ§œš¹ 04:41, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

See tmesis (and there's a word that looks like it needs something thrust inside it to complete it)! --Anonymous, 05:57 UTC, May 24, 2008.

In my linguistics classes, this was actually called "infixing." — Ƶ§œš¹ 07:50, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

An infix is normally an affix, not an independent word. kwami (talk) 10:07, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

t-fucking-mesis t-fucking-schmesis! This is not the point of the question! :) --ChokinBako (talk) 19:05, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Back to the question, probably because "bitch" implies the person in question is already efft (ruined, despised and probably rooted). Efft isn't usually an adjective, but effing is and can be attached and repeated ad infinitim in many dialects. Rucked if I know, though...  ; ) Julia Rossi (talk) 23:39, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Commented editions of English literature

What is the most prominent edition of commented English literature? (Something equivalent to the "Letras Hispánicas" of "Editorial Cátedra" in Spanish. Mr.K. (talk) 18:28, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Or like the Bibliothèque de la Pléiade for 'classic' French literature? We don't really have an equivalent in English, but for many important books of the kind you mean a good critical edition is published by the Oxford University Press, including a series called the Oxford World's Classics. I wouldn't suggest that the OUP has a general pre-eminence, but it shouldn't let you down. For early texts, there's the wonderful Early English Text Society. Xn4 19:01, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

The texts in Norton Critical Editions are accompanied by good annotations, along with related criticism. For American literature, the Library of America volumes are similar to what you're looking for. Deor (talk) 19:40, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

May 24

Peer Reviewed?

(Removed question cross-posted at the more adequate Science Desk where it received at least one detailed reply).

Plastic artist

What is a plastic artist? See List of Chileans. -- SGBailey (talk) 15:19, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Someone who creates plastic art, visual art in three dimensions. Since the list features more painters than sculptors, I changed it to "Artists". ---Sluzzelin talk 15:56, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Reading quotations

When reading a formal speech or oral presentation, how does one speak the following:

John had "...eaten a lot of honey...when he woke up."

Does one say "quote" and "end quote" at its respective locations? Does one say "dot dot dot" at the ellipses? Thanks. Acceptable (talk) 19:31, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

You'd probably have to to be understood. That or phonetic punctuation. But I think it'd be better to reword. -- BenRG (talk) 02:25, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

The quotation marks you could say as "I quote" (no unquote at the end) or "quote" eaten.... "unquote". The ellipses you would indicate by pausing briefly. --Lisa4edit (talk) 05:33, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

May 25

Double acronyms

How many acronyms are there that have two official expansions at the same time to refer to the same thing? (The only example I know of is ATWA.) NeonMerlin 00:17, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

If you're willing to go for fictitious entries, the Marvel comic-book based espionage group SHIELD has gone through at least three names. Originally, it stood for Supreme Headquarters, International Espionage, Law-Enforcement Division, which then became Strategic Hazard Intervention, Espionage Logistics Directorate. In the excellent Iron Man movie, they changed it to Strategic Homeland Intervention, Enforcement, and Logistics Division and made a bit of a joke about how clumsy the name was. Matt Deres (talk) 02:33, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

ESL is English Sign Language and English as a Second Language for one, there are lots more. This site has long lists --Lisa4edit (talk) 05:23, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

But the question was about acronyms with two official expansions referring to the same thing. English sign language and English a second language aren't the same thing. "PTL" in the PTL Club can stand for either "Praise The Lord" or "People That Love". —Angr 07:48, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

WWF was both wrestling and wildlife until Vince McMahon changed his.hotclaws 07:58, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but again, the World Wrestling Federation and the World Wildlife Fund are not the same thing. The question was about acronyms with multiple expansions that refer to the same thing. —Angr 08:01, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

The NT in 'Windows NT' has at times stood for N10, New Technology, and nothing at all. Paul Davidson (talk) 08:41, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

As in Nothing aT all? :-) —Angr 08:44, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

I've seen several acronyms for organizations which changed one of the words somewhere along the line, either because the scope of the group changed, the image they wanted to project changed, or one of the words took on negative connotations. However, nothing as radical as ATWA. kwami (talk) 10:05, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Lots, especially in context of computers. What comes into my mind is "GCC": it has changed from "GNU C compiler" to "GNU compiler collection" when they unified it with G++ and all the other backends for non-C languages. – b_jonas 11:13, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

There's also this joke about the expansion of "GNU" itself. – b_jonas 11:18, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Nice question by the way. I wonder if there's a name for such acronyms. – b_jonas 11:21, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

We could try to coin one (dualternyms, hehe) but I think that "constant rebranding disorder" is the real answer doktorb _words 11:34, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

DVD was originally "digital video disk" but is now "digital versatile disk". But then the OP specified "two official expansions at the same time", and I think with DVD the official expansion changed from one to the other, rather than the two being official at the same time. —Angr 11:59, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

If you're willing to accept backronyms then sic could be (from the article):

"spelling is correct", "same in copy", "spelling intentionally conserved", "said in context", or "sans intention comique" (French: without comic intent).

Zain Ebrahim (talk) 13:15, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

The expansion of snafu is rendered differently, depending on how profane one chooses to be. Deor (talk) 13:20, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Somali and Arabic

Is there a website where I can compare Somali letters with Arabic letters? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Don Mustafa (talk • contribs) 02:08, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Take a look at http://www.omniglot.com/writing/somali.htm and the pages it links to. Maybe you'll find something there. Misplaced Pages has articles on the Latin Somali alphabet and Wadaad's writing (i.e. the Arabic alphabet for Somali), as well as on Osmanya script and Borama script, but no direct comparison. —Angr 07:44, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

How can I learn to write better?

Besides doing the obvious (like reading a lot), and considering that I have no access to a private teacher, where is the way to go? 217.168.4.191 (talk) 03:28, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Write as in creative writing or write as in spelling, grammar etc. ? I think is pretty amazing, but sort of hard to navigate, although they have a search window. You might also read some literary criticism. --Lisa4edit (talk) 05:13, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the Purdue link. I'll take a look. 217.168.4.191 (talk) 12:55, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Signs on artwork

Hello. There is an art display in our local courthouse that changes every month or so. This month there are some Japanese chigiri-e works featuring landscapes and buildings. Two of the works are of small shops or businesses, I believe, because they have signs on them. I just wonder what the signs say. Here are details of them from the artwork:

(1) File:Art sign 1.jpg (2) File:Art sign 2.jpg.

Thank you. — Michael J 11:48, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

They're not anything I recognise. I would take them as a non-Japanese artist's impression of katakana - which would be unlikely to be used in that context anyway, unless the businesses had foreign names. --ColinFine (talk) 12:22, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Not Japanese. They look like old Semitic graffiti to me, but with such simple shapes they could be just about anything. kwami (talk) 12:46, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for trying. I wasn't sure. (If they are katakana, maybe they are personal names on homes. Images of the entire artworks are here and here.) — Michael J 13:24, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Having seen the pictures, I'm even more convinced that they are an artist's impression of a script he or she doesn't read - but they don't look the slightest bit authentic, because their simplicity is reminiscent of katakana, which as I said would not be normal in that sort of context. --ColinFine (talk) 13:33, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Modern artists can be quite devious. It's quite likely it means nothing and its purpose it to make you wonder what it means.--Shantavira| 18:42, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

It is definitely not authentic katakana. As everyone says, it is either a non-native artist's impression of it, or something else. It is unreadable as katakana, and nobody in their right minds in Japan would put an unreadable name plate outside their house. How else is the postman going to deliver the post, considering houses don't have house numbers and most streets don't have names?--ChokinBako (talk) 19:57, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you all. I will give up trying to understand them, then, and just enjoy the pretty pictures. — Michael J 20:16, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Considering they're on shop fronts, if they were modeled after anything it was probably an impressionistic recollection of hiragana or perhaps grass-style kanji. kwami (talk) 23:11, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Untitled

"We can see who the richest person is".

"We can see who is the richest person".

Are there grammatical rules to assert whether either of these is incorrect? ----Seans Potato Business 13:56, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes. In indirect questions like these, the verb doesn't move to the front to follow the fronted interrogative pronoun "who", as it does in direct questions. So "We can see who the richest person is" is correct, and "*We can see who is the richest person" is incorrect. In a direct question, it would be the other way around: "Who is the richest person?" is correct, and "*Who the richest person is?" is incorrect. —Angr 14:07, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. ----Seans Potato Business 15:22, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Placebo effect

I was just watching an episode of House, where a woman was touch by a spiritual healer and no longer needed a zimmer frame to walk. Assuming that this was not an act of God, is there a word/phrase for it? I know what the Placebo effect is but that doesn't seem quite right for my needs. Thanks 92.2.194.36 (talk) 14:46, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Autosuggestion? ---Sluzzelin talk 15:09, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

I can come up with several more: Psychosomatic healing, Pygmalion effect, Post hoc ergo propter hoc subconscious effects, or any other by-product of strong optimism. I don't know if there are any more adequate (and less cynical) expressions for what you refer to... Kreachure (talk) 17:29, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Observer-expectancy effect, Therapeutic effect or Expectation? Think outside the box 19:28, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Fiction? --Nicknack009 (talk) 23:09, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

You might be looking for spontaneous remission. The confluence or merging of elements making up the circumstances is usually said to be serendipitous. Julia Rossi (talk) 23:23, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Um, yeah, what she said. Thanks for making me feel irrelevant, Julia! :P Kreachure (talk) 23:36, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

IPA for Oier Olazábal

Hi, can someone transcribe the Spanish pronunciation of Oier Olazábal for me? Thank you. --Kjoonlee 21:41, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

/ɒiɛr ɒlæ'θæbæl/ (the á represents stress vowel in that case). I'm a native Spanish speaker, but I'm not too familiarized with IPA; still, I think it's very accurate. Kreachure (talk) 23:26, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

grammar

Is this literary piece 'as good as I could write', 'as well as I could write', both or neither? (the question is not about literary pieces but English grammar) ----Seans Potato Business 21:54, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

I assume "right" is a typo for "write." I'd say "as good as" in such cases. --Kjoonlee 21:59, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

That's right, I meant 'write'! ----Seans Potato Business 22:56, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

If the literary piece is as good as I could have written it, the author must have done it as well as I could have done it. --Kjoonlee 22:00, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you both! ----Seans Potato Business 22:57, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

If Seans gives a **** about my opinion, you can say both and get away with it. Ericthebrainiac (talk) 23:40, 25 May 2008 (UTC)